International Marxist Group Archive

Magazines, bulletins and booklets of the IMG and its forerunners, 1961–1984

Threaten Dockers Jobs

· The Week Vol. 7, No. 26, 29 June 1967 · p. 6 of the scan · 545 words

The scan: The Week v7 no26.pdf (PDF, Marxists Internet Archive, opens at this page)

Uncorrected machine reading. This text was read by machine (Tesseract OCR) from a scan of a stencilled typescript and has not been corrected. Expect misread words; titles in particular are often garbled where the issue printed no contents list. Quote from the scan, not from this page.
How this article was cut and titled: capitals heading; heuristic; title from the OCR of the heading.

If containerisation were adopted for all deep-sea general cargo trade in this country, nine out of ten jobs in British docks would be unnecessary. The British Transport Docks Board has just publishec a report based on a survey prepared by McKinsey and Co., the American menegement consultants, On a continental scale, 25 specialised container ships could handle the entire EBurope-North America trade, As well as the drastic cuts in the number of dockers needed to handle the containers there would be a 70% eut in ship requirements and hence in crews, This in turn would increase the moves towards monopoly control of British shipping, It would make good business sense for the 20 or so existing operators on the Europe - North America run to be rationalised to two or three consortia, The first services from U.K, ports are scheduled to start operating in 1968 - 69, and development thereafter will depend on the availability of capital. As well as a reduction in the number of dockers required to service these ships the report froecasts a reduction in the number of ports. It was calculated that about 25 fully equipped container berths would be all that was necessary to handle this country's deep-sea trade. Small ports would naturally find their competitive position increasingly difficult when containerisation becomes widespread and a large number could be expected to cease operations. at those ports remaining it was estimated that the prod~ uctivity of each docker still employed would increase 24-fold. The report made no mention of any proposal to increase his wages by a similar amount. It was expected, however, that the probable reduction in transport costs would have a major impact on manufacturing companies whose products contain a significant transportation cost element. The report admits the prospect of redundancy on a vast scale which is implied in the introduction of containers. It continues to say that this threat would not, in practice, be insuperable by pointing out that there has been a 20% reduction in the labour force in British docks in the last ten years. A further cut of 20% each five years until the required streamlining is rea-~ ched is suggested. Presumably this would coincide with the rate at which containerisation could be brought into service. The report, which cost £50,000 to produce, is claimed to be the first publicly available to set forth the widespread ramifications of a move to containerisation, both in ports and in the transport system generally. It is being closely studied by the Docks Board and copies have been sent to the Minister of Transport and the National Ports Council, as well as to shipowners, port authorities, trade unions and other interested bodies, The Docks Board has already been making preparations for container operations and expects Southampton to become a major container port. These plans dovetail very neatly into the concentration of British Rail's resources towards the establishment of an efficient liner-train system with minimum staffing. The dockworkers' and seamen's unions must demand full consultation on any plans for the docks before their implementation. Otherwise they face the prospect of a nationalised dock industry run on the same lines as the proposed liner-train terminals with the expensive capital equipment . provided by the Government for the use of private employers.

← Defend Trade Union DemocracyIndustrial Notes →

Something wrong on this page?