Could someone fill me in? I must have missed the earlier posts about this. What is the URL for COSIPA's web site? What is COSIPA? What are the issues here? How is the state giving capital the keys to the plant? Etc. If an earlier posting covered this, could you please just tell me the subject it was listed under, so I can look it up? Thanks. >Posted on 24 Apr 1997 at 13:43:34 by TELEC List Distributor (011802) > >[PEN-L:9644] Ports "crossing the threshold of globalizat > >Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 10:43:07 -0700 (PDT) >Reply-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >From: D Shniad <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Forwarded message: >>From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Thu Apr 24 05:10 PDT 1997 >X-Authentication-Warning: sunrise.ccs.yorku.ca: lanfran owned process doing -bs >X-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >MIME-Version: 1.0 >Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Date: Thu, 24 Apr 1997 08:05:51 -0400 >Reply-To: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Sender: Forum on Labor in the Global Economy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >From: Sam Lanfranco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> >Subject: Ports "crossing the threshold of globalization" >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII >Content-Length: 2667 > >In response to a LabourNet note: >>against the use of non-union casual labour at COSIPA's marine >>terminal. COSIPA's web site invites comments on "any doubts or >>suggestions" concerning its "new venture to cross the threshold of >>Globalisation" including "the new maritime terminal, its most recent > >Doug Henwood wrote: >> I'm a bit mystified by a port crossing a threshold of globalization. >> Ports are all about international trade, and always have been, no? >------------------ > >I assume that Doug is making a little joke here, but there is a deeper >point. As the famous Brando film "On The Waterfront" makes the point, >Docks and Ports have always been about two very different things. The >trade that passes through them is very international. > > But, much of the time, the production regime, and in particluar how labor >'fits in' at the port has been very 'local' in its structure and control. >Reflect on the labor regime on the ships that travel the seas. With 'flag >of convenience' shipping labor conditions range from excellent to >terrible. > >There is something going on at the level of the organization of work, and >rights of workers, at this point in time and it is probably an early >warning for things to follow. For the large shipping interests, two ports >in Sydney and London, or Hong Kong and San Francisco, are just two >platforms at opposite ends of the same 'plant'. Things are loaded here and >unloaded there - much like boxes switching assembly lines in a factory. > >What is new here is not that the goods being moved are for global trade. >Doug is right, they were always for global trade. What is new is that each >port facility is increasingly being looked at as just another workstation >in a global transportation plant. That they are 1000s of miles apart makes >no difference to those trying to organize them. The strategy is the same >as if they were simply different delivery gates at the same factory site. > >Capital, in the form of the owners of the fleets and the port terminals >undrestands that. The current struggles are helping drive the point home >to labour. As for the state - it seems to be standing at the factory gate >handing the keys to the fleet and port owners in a classic model of the >state as handmaiden to capital. > >Other than higher levels of organization on the part of global labor (part >of what Labornet and LABOR-L support) the only other quiet actor which >could play a stronger role is civil society organizations. I am not sure >what it will take for them (those resident in major port cities) to >realize what the game is here, what they have at risk, and where they >should be playing their hand. > >Sam Lanfranco <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Marsh Feldman Phone: 401/874-5953 Community Planning, 204 Rodman Hall FAX: 401/874-5511 The University of Rhode Island Internet: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Kingston, RI 02881-0815
