President Bush took the first step yesterday toward seeking an injunction that would end the shutdown of 29 West Coast ports, acting just hours after negotiations between port operators and the longshoremen's union had broken off. þþWith many businesses urging the president to get the ports reopened, the White House created a three-member board of inquiry that is to report to him today about the economic damage resulting from the shutdown. Under the Taft-Hartley Act, appointment of the board was required before the administration could ask a federal court for the injunction, which would mandate an 80-day cooling-off period.þþA request for such an injunction, which the courts have almost routinely granted in the past, could have political repercussions for Mr. Bush. Labor unions vigorously oppose the idea, and so an injunction could invigorate organized labor, an important Democratic constituency, right before November's elections. But business leaders have warned that unless the president moves, economic damage to the nation could snowball, hurting the Republicans' chances.þþIf Mr. Bush goes to the courts, he will be the first president in a quarter-century to seek a cooling-off period under Taft-Hartley, which covers industries other than railroads and the airlines. þþÿThe country has been patient,ÿ Labor Secretary Elaine L. Chao said at a news conference in Washington. ÿWe have been patient. But now ordinary Americans are being seriously harmed by this dispute. Factory workers are being laid off because they can't get vital parts delivered. These layoffs will only increase if the ports do not reopen this week.ÿþþAri Fleischer, the White House press secretary, told reporters that the president had not yet decided whether to seek the injunction, but several industry officials said they expected him to do so this week. þþThe ports that have been closed, by a lockout in California, Oregon and Washington State, handle $300 billion in cargo a year, about half the nation's annual imports and exports. In recent days, manufacturers, retailers and farmers have increasingly called for a cooling-off period, warning that the shutdown has caused factories to close and produce to rot.þþIn addition, administration officials say they fear that the shutdown could hinder the deployment of American troops, because commercial shipping lines are used to send military supplies overseas.þþLeaders of the International Longshore and Warehouse Union, the Teamsters and the A.F.L.-C.I.O. have denounced the idea of a cooling-off period, saying it would amount to unwarranted governmental meddling in negotiations and throw the administration's weight behind management.þþÿIf every employer thinks the federal government will step in, why should the employers even negotiate?ÿ Richard L. Trumka, the A.F.L.-C.I.O.'s secretary-treasurer, said yesterday. ÿThe administration's move today is nothing short of an attack on American workers.ÿþþThe Pacific Maritime Association, a group of port operators and shipping lines, closed the ports on Sept. 29, indefinitely locking out the West Coast's 10,500 longshoremen and saying the move was in response to a job slowdown. Union officials said the longshoremen were working more slowly because of safety concerns.þþThe board of inquiry created yesterday is headed by former Senator William E. Brock of Tennessee, a Republican who was labor secretary in the Reagan administration. The other members are Patrick Hardin, a University of Tennessee law professor and former official of the National Labor Relations Board, and Dennis Nolan, a law professor at the University of South Carolina who is vice president of the National Academy of Arbitrators.þþOnce the board reports back to the president, he can direct the attorney general to seek the court injunction. Taft-Hartley requires the administration to convince the court that ÿthe national health or safetyÿ is being imperiled. Since the law was adopted in 1947, administrations have sought such injunctions 31 times, and the courts have granted them 29 times.þþThe major issue in the current dispute is management's demand to introduce new technologies to speed cargo handling. The longshoremen say they will not accept the new technology unless their union is granted jurisdiction over all new jobs resulting from it.þþNegotiations broke down early yesterday in San Francisco, and each side blamed the other. Management said the union had turned down its offer for a 90-day contract extension, while the union said the employers had rejected its offer for a seven-day extension.þþþ
Source: NY Times
