Donald Trump Should Avoid Hindering Port Automation Just to Gain Favor with Big Labor

President-elect Donald Trump is venturing into risky territory by endorsing the aggressive demands of the International Longshoremen’s Association regarding automation at U.S. ports.

To summarize: This fall, the ILA briefly struck in pursuit of a colossal wage increase — nearly 80% — over six years, along with a complete halt to port automation.

The management, represented by the U.S. Maritime Alliance, countered with a “mere” 50% raise and some concessions regarding automation, an area where American ports lag significantly behind other industrialized nations.

President Biden intervened, pressuring the ports to reach an agreement on wages, with further negotiations on other matters set to continue until January 15 — when a strike could potentially resurface.

Currently, negotiations have once again stumbled, and Trump has shown considerable support for the ILA on the automation issue.

“I’ve studied automation and know just about everything there is to know about it,” the president-elect declared on Truth Social. “The savings from automation aren’t worth the distress, hurt, and harm it inflicts on American Workers, particularly our Longshoremen.”

It’s true: Trump has never claimed to be an establishment, Chamber of Commerce Republican — in fact, this is a significant reason for his appeal among working-class voters.

However, a potential strike that halts port operations just five days before his inauguration could cause serious disruptions, leading to shortages and price increases across the eastern U.S.

Yet, the ILA does not merit his unwavering support: This union resembles more of a protection racket than a champion of labor rights.

To begin with, it counts 50,000 members earning wages for just 25,000 available jobs. Due to previous labor agreements that permitted some modernization, half of the dockworkers at East and Gulf coast ports remain at home, receiving “container royalties.”

Moreover, Harold Daggett — the union leader who threatened to “cripple” the U.S. economy if further automation is permitted — resides in a luxurious 7,000-square-foot home in affluent Sparta, NJ, with a Bentley convertible among the cars in his five-car garage.

Consider that the union’s opposition to automation hinders U.S. ports, none of which rank among the world’s top 50.

For instance, Europe’s largest port, Rotterdam, is also highly automated, demonstrating that significant advancements in automation can coexist with worker dignity, even within the labor-friendly confines of the European Union.

Additionally, the West Coast union has consented to ongoing automation, meaning if the ILA prevails, shippers are likely to redirect their cargoes there, resulting in further losses for Daggett’s members.

Crucially, most people are not longshoremen, and acquiescing to the ILA’s extreme demands comes at a cost to everyone else, including the authentic working-class individuals who supported Trump’s re-election.

This concern is compounded by the ILA’s murky reputation, marked by a history of organized crime affiliations and the union elites’ provision of no-show and preferential jobs to select members.

In other words, appeasing the ILA represents the same type of distasteful transactional politics aimed at favored groups that has disillusioned voters under Biden.

Trump is risking a serious backlash if he continues down this path of accommodating the ILA.