Councilmember calls for report on driverless cargo handlers at LA port

Councilmember Tim McOsker introduced a motion this week calling for a report on the impact that driverless cargo handlers at a terminal in the Port of Los Angeles will have on labor hours and on the environment.

The port is responsible for one in 13 jobs in the city, according to the councilmember’s office, but longshore workers throughout the nation continue to be “wrongfully threatened” with losing their jobs to environmentally sustainable automation technology.

McOsker, whose 15th Council District includes POLA, wants answers after hearing that the electric cargo handlers at one of the port’s terminals may be fueled by diesel. His motion instructs port officials to report in 30 days to the council’s Trade, Travel and Tourism Committee.

“We do not need to choose between protecting the environment or the workforce, and course corrections on climate change should not be at the expense of good union jobs,” McOsker said. “But if it turns out that Port of LA jobs were lost to automation technology on a false promise of environmental sustainability, that just adds insult to injury.”

In 2019, the Board of Harbor Commissioners voted 3-2 to approve a permit for Maersk, a global logistics conglomerate, to introduce driverless electric cargo handlers inside its facility at the port. Part of Maersk’s transport and logistics business unit, APM Terminal’s Pier 400, is one of the largest single proprietary terminals in the world, according to McOsker’s office.

The Los Angeles City Council stepped in and voted to deny the permit to begin the process of automating operations at the APM terminal.

Shortly afterward, the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, which represents dockworkers, and the Pacific Maritime Association — the group representing industry leaders — entered into an agreement with APM to proceed with the program.

Under this plan, APM would deploy up to 130 driverless cargo handlers to shuttle containers from the docks to drayage trucks and rail, establish a workforce training program for ILWU members who work at the terminal, and pursue efforts to employ those workers.

At the time, Maersk declined to say how many jobs would be affected by replacing current cargo carriers with the unmanned vehicles, as well as indicate what other jobs at its terminals were likely automated, according to McOsker’s office.

It was argued that while some jobs would be replaced, the electric cargo operation would also replace diesel-powered vehicles and save an estimated 2.2 million gallons of diesel fuel per year, which could lead to a “dramatic improvement” in air quality for the residents of Wilmington and San Pedro.

“In 2019, thousands of community and union members attended public meetings protesting the plan to automate,” harbor ommission Vice President Diane Middleton said in a statement. “I stood as a no vote, yet the Board of Harbor Commissioners narrowly approved Maersk’s permit to install battery chargers.

“Maersk was up front about the fact that these automated driverless machines would not increase production but were being installed to lower labor costs by eliminating hundreds of longshore jobs daily,” she added. “They also said that electric chargers would promote the goals of the Clean Air Action Plan. However, it appears that the only promise Maersk kept was to cut jobs.”

A recent tour of the APM site indicated that the electric cargo handler installation and operation at the terminal are possibly in violation of the agreed-upon plan for Pier 400, resulting in possible harm to the environment and the workforce, according to McOsker’s office

The issue was brought up by Middleton last week during the harbor commission meeting.

According to the South Coast Air Quality Management District, the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach, typically the busiest in the nation, are the single largest fixed source of air pollution in Southern California. Both ports have been working toward a goal of zero emissions.