Oakland port staff unions seek job cuts delay

Four unions representing all but a dozen of 617 employees at the Port of Oakland are asking port officials to refrain from moving forward with the planned elimination of 105 to 110 full-time positions until a unions-submitted list of financial questions regarding the port's claimed reasons for the layoffs are answered.

In a letter sent Monday to port management, Service Employees International Union Local 1021, International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 1245, Western Council of Engineers, and International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers Local 21 also asked for a delay in approving the port's fiscal year 2009 budget.

The four unions asked port executive director Omar Benjamin and port board president Anthony Batarse to delay the layoffs and budget approval until an analysis of numerous questions and options regarding calculation of the budget figures and mitigation of the impending layoffs,?can be completed. The unions also ask that a study be done on how a recent City of Oakland decision regarding mandated furloughs and/or layoffs might affect the transfer of any laid off port employees. Because the port authority is a city department, laid off port employees can ump less senior city employees and transfer to other city departments.

The union also warned in the letter that any attempt to move forward with the layoffs till result in organizational chaos and irreparable harm to the port. Earlier this month, the IFPTE sent a similar letter to port officials raising union concerns about the possible job cuts. Such a sudden and drastic reduction in staff will tax our organization to the point of implosion, the letter warned, referring to the port. The port has never implemented such a disproportionately massive layoff in its 80-year history. The proposed cuts, which seek to lay off 68 to 70 employees and eliminate 40 vacant positions, were revealed during final development of the port's fiscal year 2009 budget last month. Port officials claim the cuts are needed to offset a predicted $18.6 million budget shortfall due to a combination of slackening cargo volumes and past business decisions by port management.

While the budget has yet to be approved, on June 3 the port's seven-member governing board voted 6-1 to move forward with the layoff plan, approving a notification authorization required under California law when employers plan to layoff more than 50 workers in a 30-day period.

On May 20, port staff presented the Oakland port commissioners with four reasons for the port authority's current budget woes:

Costly investments made in past years at both the airport and the maritime port, failed to yield returns we expected. At the same time, the presentation said, the port authority borrowed heavily to pay for even more development using the strength of the faulty revenue projections as a basis.

Deferred principal payments on these borrowed funds, created an interest-only period on the payment schedule for the funds that runs out this year. The port will have to begin making full payments on both interest and principal for the loans in 2009.

The port authority did not adequately account for the funding necessary to renovate and maintain certain facilities, which led to increased expenses.

The port's expenditure growth rate is outpacing the growth rate of revenues, and its desired capital improvements programs for infrastructure and facilities far outpace the port's projected revenues and funding. While port officials are considering many cost saving measures, which will be implemented if feasible, according to internal port documents, a portion of the necessary reduction in expenses must be achieved through a reduction in the workforce of the port. In Monday's letter, the unions identified nearly $20 million in port revenue that union officials can not immediately locate in the port's proposed budget. The letter request that the port identify where these revenue sources are listed in the budget or if they were included at all.

The unions also suggested nearly $1.8 million in possible discretionary spending cuts including elimination of the automobile allowance for management, a 50 percent cut in staff travel, and 50 percent cuts in numerous promotional and outreach line items.

A lengthy request for various financial information -- such as all professional service contracts paid out by the port, a list of all current employees and position vacancies, audited financial reports for the past five years, and any port business model plans -- was also included in the letter. The unions believe that the (requested) information is directly related to out functions in representing our members and must be provided by law. A set of financial and business practices questions, including several regarding the level of privatization port officials want to see at the port, were also attached to the six-page letter.

The port's proposed budget remains in a port commission committee and no item regarding the budget was on the agenda for the commission's regularly scheduled weekly meeting Tuesday. The port board meets again Aug. 5.

Oakland is the third-busiest container port on the West Coast and the fourth-busiest in the nation. The port authority, which also manages the Oakland International Airport and various commercial properties, maintains a workforce comparable to other ports on the West Coast.

The Port of Long Beach, the nation's second-busiest container port, has nearly 400 workers, while neighboring Los Angeles, the nation's busiest container port, maintains a workforce of more than 900 employees. 

Source: American Shipper