Containers have been more important for globalisation than freer trade • Hacker News Board

Re: Containers have been more important for globalisation than freer trade

#51

Post by raymondduke » Sat, May 18, 2013, 2:27 PM UTC

mc-lovin wrote: post #47

raymondduke wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Automation is coming, without a doubt. The problem right now is implementation. A lot of the terminals have had computer screens with GPS that either don't work or are way too faulty. The terminal I worked at today ordered several new automated cranes this year (video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VdMMDjPPILE ) but they didn't have the power to support them; so now they are digging up the pavement in order to suppl…

Could you shed some light on the strange employment structure in your industry? My impression is that unions in this industry are a combination of the bad (artificially restricting the supply of labor, to the benefit of union members, and the detriment of non members) and good (giving workers to power to maintain safety standards, and making sure that workers feel they can trust their fellow workers). What limits com…

Sure. I'll do my best to clear things up.

Unions are a combination of bad and good, just like corporations, franchises, and any other organization. One of the major flaws of the union for me is that you can't get promoted on the job based on merit. The only way to get a raise and to get more work is to work more, not harder or smarter. When I work on the docks, I work steady and safe. Maybe this is actually a good thing because it is a dangerous place to work and they don't want anyone trying to be a hotshot.

As for the good, there is a sense of organization and community beyond anything I've experienced before in my life. There are about 5,000 Casuals and we all know that we are part time temp labor, so we all do what we can to help one another. Things like powerball pools, buying and selling or services or other part time hustles (plumbing, towing, hanging tvs', etc.), and various other community related things are common.

Things that limit communication: The ones that make the decisions that affect us all, are doing so in their best interest and not the interest of the port or for the economy. For example, fully automated ports move cargo at only around 30% of what we do, but since they don't have to pay pensions for the machine or give them benefits, it's worth the slower move time. As for the union, there is not a long term strategy for the future of its workers at the port. A majority of casuals don't even know what the union President's name is.

It's kind of ironic that the actual job is the most organized thing I've seen (for example, we can unload over 3,000 cars from a ship in about 6 hours), but the organization process for the port itself, is awful.

These are just my opinions as of this moment. It's possible I could just simply be completely in the dark or not doing a good enough job of finding out the answers.

Re: Containers have been more important for globalisation than freer trade

#52

Post by hga » Sat, May 18, 2013, 2:59 PM UTC

thaumasiotes wrote: post #45

No1 wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The way to make money off a standard is to sell it's complements" That seems to be how things went. Tantlinger created over 70 patents related to transportation in his lifetime. Sea-Land, his employer, sold containerized shipping services. I doubt there were any regrets about dropping the patent. Malcom McLean, owner of Sea-Land, did pretty well for himself: [R.J.] Reynolds agreed in January 1969 to buy Sea-Land for…

If I remember right, he hated serving on the board, left to found a rival container-shipping company, and ran it into the ground. (Not to knock Malcom McLean! But I think it makes the story even more interesting.)

Sort of the inverse of "genius is a rising market", it wasn't that he "ran it into the ground", he made a bad bet, but one completely in keeping with the '70s "Limits to Growth" Zeitgeist (more like "no limits to government", especially stupidity in energy policy). From his Wikipedia page, and of course there's more detail in The Box:

"In 1978, McLean purchased United States Lines. There, he built a fleet of 4,400-TEU container ships that were the largest afloat at the time. The ships, operating in round-the-world service, were designed in the aftermath of the 1970s oil shortages and were fuel-efficient but slow, and therefore not well-adapted to compete in the subsequent period of cheap oil. USL went bankrupt in 1987. McLean took very personally the criticism directed against him after the collapse of USL and the resulting loss of many jobs associated with and dependent on USL."

Re: Containers have been more important for globalisation than freer trade

#53

Post by hga » Sat, May 18, 2013, 3:08 PM UTC

mc-lovin wrote: post #40

205guy wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I find logistics and packing problems to be fascinating. However, while there are inherent advantages to the standardization that containers provide, this comment also shows that for some of the work (here loading and packing), the container just moves to the burden to a different entity (here the manufacturer instead of the longshoremen). Also, smaller packet size (ship vs container) means there is less theoretical…

>this comment also shows that for some of the work (here loading and packing), the container just moves to the burden to a different entity (here the manufacturer instead of the longshoremen). But shifting the burden to the manufacturer is clearly advantageous, because, as the post also shows, the manufacturer knows more about their product and how to pack it. Also, because neither origin or the final destination of…

Critically, it also get packed at their schedule.

Renting containers and keeping them on your property (vs. at the other extreme Singapore) is cheap, so you can do whatever makes sense, pack one in hours, days or weeks. No need for fine grained rush, rush efforts at a crowded port (the need for high utilization of expensive cargo ships and terminals does ensure that all moves quickly, and e.g. killed off some historic ports that were somewhat inland on a river, the cargo ships didn't want to take the extra time to transit it).

And a lot less pilferage. Scotch whisky distillers were some of the earliest adopters of the container system according to The Box.

Re: Containers have been more important for globalisation than freer trade

#54

Post by hga » Sat, May 18, 2013, 3:14 PM UTC

steve19 wrote: post #29

I was talking to a former navy Intel officer recently who told me about the former art of deducting what cargo was on deck a ship by the shape of the tarpaulins covering them. books were written on the subject. now that is all obsoleted by containers that hide the objects being carried.

"Crateology" isn't completely obsolete, there's lots of vital stuff that won't fit in containers, but, yeah, this has certainly put a damper in it.

Re: Containers have been more important for globalisation than freer trade

#55

Post by kyllo » Sat, May 18, 2013, 9:34 PM UTC

raymondduke wrote: post #50

kyllo wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hey. I worked at a major steamship line for five years. The coolest part was watching the ships come into the terminal and get worked by the longshoremen. It's still a dangerous job though. Someone gets badly hurt or killed at the port here once every year or two. Ever heard of Euromax in the Netherlands? Not a single human on the docks there most of the time. The entire terminal is robotic now. Just a few engineers…

I have heard of fully automated ports, but not Euromax in particular. I suppose the ILWU and ILA do have a lot of political power when you compare them to other ports. But from my perspective, we are losing more and more ground each day. Since a majority of the workers are temps who can't get involved with meetings and other "official bidness", then I don't know who will take the reigns 10-20 years from now. Did you…

I wasn't really following it, but I see they had to strike for six weeks to get a 9.8% pay raise to keep up with inflation. I believe they probably did need it just for that reason, Hong Kong is a crazy expensive place to live.

I feel bad for longshoremen in Asia, they have more dangerous conditions and weaker unions, so it's much harder for them to get reasonable pay and benefits. And the rate of inflation/cost of living is getting crazy in China and Hong Kong.