Recommended Links

Top 5 Reasons to End the US Department of Education
2025-03-20 CATO
Hawley’s bill speeds up union elections by removing guardrails
2025-03-26 CEI
Biden's Record-Breaking Regulatory Run
2025-01-31 Reason
A Skeptical View of the National Science Foundation’s Role in Economic Research
2025-03-11 Journal of Economic Perspectives
Social Security: Flawed from the Start and Ponzi versus Stocks
2025-03-14 Econlib

Blog

Wednesday, October 9, 2024

FTC, Break Up the Longshoreman

Background

The recent strike of the Longshoreman's union (ILA), according to news reports, centered around wages and automation. The wages issue has been tentatively resolved, but the automation issue is still alive. According to the union itself, "[We] just [want] to tighten the language that no automation means no automation." (Emphasis added)

A major complaint from the union was that there was an automated gate system at one port and possibly more. An automated gate system for trucks to pass through without needing a union representative to open and close it. This is akin to a union demanding elevator operators continue to open and close the doors for passengers like they did seventy years ago instead of it happening automatically.

Because of this union intransigence, US ports lag behind the rest of the world in terms of efficiency. The Port of New York and New Jersey has zero automation.

The FTC is charged with promoting competition in the US economy. On their logo, claim to be "protecting America's consumers." Every day, the FTC fights against anticompetitive business practices. It surely is their duty to make sure that the ports are competing with each other to provide the best services to consumers--both the ultimate American producers and consumers who benefit from the goods that are conveyed through the ports and the immediate ones like shipping companies.

Why This Case Demands Additional Attention

In a normally functioning, competitive port economy, ports would be competing with each other to provide the most efficient service to shipping companies and producers, which would include making improvements in automation at its facilities so it could move the maximum amount of goods, as fast as possible, all day every day. This competition would benefit American consumers because it would reduce the costs of shipping and allow for even more and better goods to be available.

If one port fell behind, then shippers would use other ports and encourage laggards to keep up. This is exactly how competition works in every other industry, and as long as the costs of switching, i.e. shipping items through North Carolina instead of South Carolina, or Jacksonville instead of Miami, are low, then competition can be really effective. In fact, we can be pretty confident this would happen because it is happening throughout the world. The US ports, particularly on the East coast, are falling behind because the rest of the world operates much more competitively.

US ports are falling behind because the rest of the world operates much more competitively.

The reason the East coast is falling behind is that competition is not allowed to take place because there is a monopoly. Not a conventional monopoly of firms or the ports, but of labor. Even though the ports are independent and compete with each other, one union's workers control more than 90% of East coast shipping.1 The unions are allowed to have a monopoly of employees which is being used to produce anti-competitive and anti-consumer outcomes.

One union controls more than 90% of East coast shipping.

Imagine if Amazon Web Services, which provides cloud data for companies, controlled 90% of the cloud market, meaning it hosted company websites and data, and it was the only one that did (instead of competing with Microsoft and Google among others). What if Amazon told its customers that they won't provide compression for data for any customer, so every customer has to store its data at full size and take up more space and pay Amazon more. Further, if any customer tries to go elsewhere or host their own site, Amazon will stop hosting their data altogether, badger them, conduct a national marketing campaign calling them "scab" companies and urging everyone to boycott them. Do you think the government would get involved?

Imagine if there was one cloud data provider and it told its customers that it refused to store compressed data, forcing customers to pay more, and there was nowhere else they could go.

Every union holds some level of monopoly. Some unions control labor at a single firm, and some unions hold large manufacturers such as car companies. However, the Longshoreman's union controls practically every port on the Eastern seaboard that provides international container shipping. Domestic automobile companies still compete with non-unionized foreign automobile companies, or plants in right-to-work states with no unions. This competition keeps pressure on the car companies to keep up with technology even if it hurts union members' job prospects. There is no such competitive pressure for the ports.

Because the anti-consumer, anti-competitive group is a union, the FTC doesn't do anything, but given their new approach, where they expand their areas of concern beyond just prices to effects on labor, perhaps they should also expand the focus beyond corporations to labor so they can break up this union that is holding American shipping back.

1Author's calculations based on data from Bureau of Transportation Statistics.

Recent Posts

Cutting Medicaid is Possible
March 24, 2025
Making Up for DOGE
March 21, 2025
Making Up for DOGE II
March 20, 2025
Economic Fear-Mongering
March 19, 2025
Trump’s Tariffs and the Major Questions Doctrine
March 13, 2025
Social Cost of Carbon
March 12, 2025
The Argument Against Extending ACA Subsidies
January 7, 2025
Administrative Costs Aren't Waste
January 3, 2025
Social Security and the End of the Age of Responsibility
December 30, 2024
Democrats' Deal with the Devil
December 10, 2024

Tags

ACA | Biden | Trump | media | Supreme Court | election | healthcare | Social Cost of Carbon | IRA | insurance | Social Security | spending | Harris | budget | bias | environment | 2024 | IRS | climate | Musk | Medicaid | EPA | DOGE | politics | taxes | student loan | competition | regulation | AI | discretionary spending | covid | inflation | FTC | exchanges | rcp | USAID | journalism | policy | CO2 | mid-term | foreign aid | ARPA | Major Questions | precedent | Vance | American Rescue Plan | economics | loans | population | union | administrative costs | laboratories of democracy | 538 | discount | Japan | PEPFAR | 2020 | CTC | interview | Obamacare | Inflation Reduction Act | non-compete | CMS | Necessary and Proper Clause | social media | Child Tax Credit | moderation | Silver | CBO | governance | Medicare Advantage | Romney | federalism | median voter | Yglesias | market | projections | waste | ARP | ehrlich | MA | poverty | vaccines | double standard | loan forgiveness | polls | Twitter | laboratories | political differences | tariffs | Democrats | overpopulation | supply | Interstate Commerce | Obama | Strict Constructionism | COLA | NIH | sowell | health insurance | charity | Granholm | model | shortage | carbon | Medicare | retirement | Bidenomics | WEP | artificial intelligence | elections | mandate | primary | vote | anti-trust | economy | luxury | ports | Affordable Care Act | Donor advised funds | law | polling | abortion | discretionary | Swalwell | 2022 | deficit | Omar | subsidies | Congress | nuance | standing | income taxes | NetChoice | Citizens United | Hayek | moral hazard | SNAP | central planning | government | Schiff | buybacks | Republicans | McCarthy | provider taxes | welfare |

Archive

Site Tools:Add Post | Site Statistics \ Update