Preview

INTERNATIONAL LABOUR OFFICE

A. A. EVANS

TECHNICAL
AND SOCIAL CHANGES
IN THE
WORLDS PORTS

GENEVA 1969

STUDIES AND REPORTS
New Series, No. 74

ILO publications can be obtained through major booksellers or ILO local offices in many countries, or direct
from the International Labour Office (Sales Section),
1211 Geneva 22, Switzerland. The catalogue and list of
booksellers and local offices will be sent free of charge
from the above address.

Imprimerie Vaudoise, Lausanne (Switzerland)

CONTENTS
Page

Introduction

1. New Trends in Cargo Handling
Some Techniques
Containers
The Aim of Containerisation
The Present Position
Advantages of the Container
Future Developments
Obstacles to Containerisation
An Appraisal of the Future
Other Unit Loads
Roll-On/Roll-Off Ships
Carrying in Bulk
Other Developments
Lighter Aboard Ship (LASH)
Ship Design
Port Handling Gear
Ports
Inland Transport
Intermediate Technology .
Some Organisational Considerations
Some Economic Aspects
The Turn-Around of Ships
The Cost of Cargo Handling
Competition
Social Trends

5
6
6
7
7
10
11
18
20
21
24
25
26
26
27
27
28
29
30
32
33
33
34
35
36

2. Régularisation of Employment
Desirability of Régularisation Schemes
Registration
The Need for a Register
Establishing the Register
Ports to Be Covered
Workers to Be Covered
Separate Registers for Different Categories of Dockers . . . .
Whom to Register
Regular and Reserve Registers
Dormant Registers

41
41
43
43
43
43
44
45
46
46
47

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS
Page

Restriction of Employment to Registered Dockers
Registration Cards
Size of the Register
Reducing Turnover
Recruitment
Difficulties in Recruitment
Priorities in Recruiting
Recruitment and Manpower Policy
Medical Examination
Some Undesirable Recruitment Practices
Cutting Down the Register
Adjusting an Initial Register
Limited Reductions
Dealing with Labour Surpluses
Allocation
Systems of Allocation
Regular Employment
Part-Regular, Part-Pool Employment
Allocation by Selection, Seniority or Rota
Allocation by Gangs or by Individuals
Procedures
Hiring
Reducing the Need for Attendance at Calls
Transfers

47
47
48
50
50
51
51
52
52
52
53
53
55
56
59
59
59
60
61
63
64
64
66
67

Guarantees of Income or Employment
Attendance Money
Unemployment Benefit
Guarantee for a Half-Shift
Weekly Guarantee
Longer-Term Guarantees
Guarantees in Cases of Seasonal Unemployment
Income Guarantee Embodied in Rates of Pay

67
68
69
69
69
70
70
71

Steadying the Demand for Labour
Concentration of Employers
Concentration of Ports
Employment of Dockers on Other Jobs
Keeping Ships Waiting
Overtime
Holidays
Co-ordinating Shipping Services
Transferring Work

71
71
73
73
74
74
74
74
75

Organisation of the Régularisation Scheme
Operation by a Public Authority
Operation by a Tripartite Body
Operation by Joint Bodies
Operation by Employers' Associations

75
75
76
76
77

CONTENTS

V
Page

Operation by Workers' Organisations
The Role of the Public Authority in General
Financing
Method of Assessing Employers
Reserve Fund
Some Examples of Levies
3. Training
The Importance of Training
Training between School and Work
Courses for New Entrants
Induction
Other Aspects of Courses for New Entrants
Training the Established Docker
Specialist Training
Drivers
Tallymen
Cranemen
Gang Leaders and Foremen
Training in Safety and First Aid
The Retraining of Injured Dockers
The Retraining of Redundant Dockers
Premises and Equipment
Pay during Training
4. Efficiency in Ports
Through-Handling
Availability of Labour
Importance of the Availability of Labour when and where Wanted . .
Shift Work
Starting Times for Shift Work
Round-the-Clock Working
Week-End Work
Absenteeism
Flexibility in the Use of Labour
Productivity Problems
Unproductive Time
Getting to Work
Bad Time-Keeping
Rest Periods
Ancillary Work
Weather
Time-Wasting Practices
Strength of Gangs
Sling Loads

77
77
77
78
79
79
81
81
84
85
85
86
88
89
90
90
91
91
92
93
93
93
94
95
95
98
98
98
101
102
103
103
104
" 106
107
109
109
110
112
112
113
114
117

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Supervision

Page
117

Co-ordination
Arrangements before Berthing
Co-ordination between Ship and Shore
Work Study
Management Development
The Training of Supervisory Staff
The Organisation of Training
Training Dockers
Training Higher-Level Management
Other Aspects of Training

118
118
118
120
121
121
121
123
123
125

5. Planning and Co-ordination
Research
Research at National and Port Levels
Methods of Handling
Information Needed
Research Agencies
Research at the International Level
Information Needed
Organisations Concerned
Co-ordination of Action
Co-ordination at National and Port Levels
Co-ordination at the International Level
International Through-Handling
Standardisation of Unit Loads
Customs
Transport and Insurance Documents
Common Services
Allocation of Dockers
Payment of Wages
Training
Welfare
Safety
Repair of Equipment

127
127
127
127
129
131
132
132
133
134
134
136
136
137
137
138
139
139
139
139
139
139
139

».
6. Labour-Management Relations
Basic Principles
Patterns of Labour-Management Relations
Machinery of Labour-Management Relations
Negotiation
Operation of a Régularisation Scheme
Other Relations
Consultation and Participation

142
143
145
148
148
149
150
150

CONTENTS

VII
Page

Disputes and Grievances
Causes of Disputes
Settlement Procedures
Position of the Gang Foreman
Communication
Communication between Management and the Dockers
Communication within the Unions
Joint Action
Communication Media
Subject-Matter Communicated

153
153
155
158
158
159
159
160
160
161

7. Conditions of Work
Applicability and Enforcement of Labour Legislation
Remuneration
Time Rates
Payment of a Living Wage
Payment according to Level of Skill
Compensation for the Nature of the Work
Payment by Results
The Case in Favour of Payment by Results
The Case against Payment by Results
Some Criteria for Payment by Results
Guarantees
Royalties and Special Funds
Hours of Work
Normal Hours of Work
Overtime
Actual Hours of Work
Shift Work
Rotation
Additional Compensation
Week-End Work
Holidays with Pay
Collection and Disbursement of Holiday Pay
Public Holidays
Holiday Dates
Social Security
:
Unemployment Benefit
Old Age

162
162
163
164
165
166
166
167
167
169
171
172
172
172
172
174
177
177
177
177
178
180
180
181
181
182
182
182

8. Safety and Welfare
Safety
Containers
Construction
Hoisting

185
186
186
186
187

VIII

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS
Page

The Marking of Weight
Handling on Shore
Other Forms of Handling
General Considerations
Welfare
The Need for Welfare Facilities
Nature of Facilities
Hiring Halls
Basic Health and Welfare Facilities (Sanitary Conveniences, Drinking Water, Washing Facilities and Changing Rooms) . . . .
Facilities for Rest
First-Aid and Medical Care Facilities
Employee Food Services
Travel to and from Work
Cultural and Recreational Facilities
Housing
Working Clothes
Activities in Favour of Retired Dockers
Organisation of Facilities
Survey of Needs and Determination of Responsibilities . . . .
Participation of Employers' and Workers' Organisations . . . .
Inspection

9. A New Deal
Attitude of the Dockers
The Fear of Unemployment or Underemployment
Sharing in the Benefits of Technical Progress
Consultation
Acceptance of Change
Attitude of the Employers
The General Lines of a New Deal
Some New Agreements
The United States Pacific Coast
New York
The St. Lawrence Ports
The United Kingdom
Norway
Sweden
Italy
New Zealand
Singapore
Australia
Other Countries

10. Towards the Future

189
189
190
191
195
195
196
196
197
198
198
199
200
201
202
203
203
203
203
205
205

206
206
206
208
209
210
210
211
213
213
217
219
221
225
225
225
226
226
227
227

229

CONTENTS

Appendices
Page

1. ILO Action on behalf of Dockers
Resolution (No. 25) concerning the régularisation of employment of dockworkers
Resolution (No. 52) concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers . . . .
Resolution (No. 66) concerning methods of improving organisation of work
and output in ports

235

2. Technical Co-operation
General Considerations
Forms of Technical Co-operation
Fields of Co-operation

250
251
253
259

3. Bibliography

261

235
237
241

Tables
Table 1. Estimates of Potential Container Cargo to and from New York, 1975
Table 2. Containerisable General Cargo in Trade to and from the United
Kingdom
Table 3. Unproductive Time as Percentage of Gross Working Time in Ten
Major Australian Ports
Table 4. Tentative Rest Allowances for Acclimatised Persons under Various
Atmospheric Conditions at Selected Kata Readings at High Temperatures
Table 5. Hours Worked and Tonnage Handled on the United States Pacific
Coast, 1960-65

15
16
108
Ill
217

INTRODUCTION
Far-reaching changes in methods of handling cargo in ports are taking
place and are expected to become much more widespread in the next few
years. Goods transport in containers or other unit loads over land, across
ports and by sea has become increasingly common, and ships have had to be
fitted out to carry containers or to enable cargo to be loaded on the rollon/roll-off principle; the equipment and organisation of ports have also
been improved.
Any action which can assist in getting goods handled more expeditiously
and at a lower cost in ports will be of the greatest assistance to economic
development in many parts of the world, as well as helping international trade
in general. In a submission to the Advisory Committee on the Application
of Science and Technology to Development, the Secretary-General of the
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization drew attention to the
problem of the turn-around time of ships in port. He said :
It is considered that there is no subject that has such promise of fruitful
results for the maritime industry as that of an attack on the problems of cargo
handling.... The United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
referred to this problem as a vital one and considered it as being of very great
importance to developing countries. The . . . economic effects . . . on countries
both developed and underdeveloped are vast, and congestion at ports and its
economic costs affect the economics of industrialisation and trade of underdeveloped countries to a large extent. The problem is peculiarly susceptible to
international attack from two points of view. The first is that appropriate solutions will produce large-scale results, in terms of cost-benefit ratios, but the
appropriate solutions will involve a linkage between shipping, port authorities,
labour and, ultimately, for the most massive results, with the transport infrastructure of countries concerned from the point of view of liaison and standardisation. Secondly, this is a problem that calls for collaboration between the
Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organisation, the United Nations
Transport Division and the International Labour Organisation, for a start. *
While technical progress of this kind is to be welcomed, its possible consequences for port workers need to be carefully studied. As a United Nations
expert pointed out, "There is no doubt that a number of factors influence
speed, quality and cost of cargo handling. But the human element repre1
United Nations document STD/3/WWA/TRANS/4, 16 Dec. 1964, reproduced in
United Nations: The Turn-Around Time of Ships in Port, doc. ST/ECA/97, 1967
(mimeographed), para. 1.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

sented by port labour is still to be regarded as the basic and decisive one." *
The primary concern of this study will therefore be the problems of dockers,
although new trends in cargo handling will inevitably have important repercussions for workers in road and rail transport and inland navigation.
The term "dockers" covers workers engaged in the handling of goods at
docks, quays, wharves or warehouses in ports. It includes those working on
board ship (sometimes referred to as "holdsmen", sometimes as "stevedores")
as well as those on land, and—except where the context otherwise requires—
specialised workers such as winchmen, deck hands (or signallers), tallymen
(or checkers), fork-lift truck drivers, cranemen and gang foremen. Those
exercising ancillary crafts, such as electricians, mechanics and maintenance
men, are not covered. On the employers' side, the issues raised will be of
concern to port authorities, shipping companies, shipping agents, stevedoring
firms, wharfingers, railway or road transport undertakings, and other operators for whom dockers work, even if they are not legally speaking the latter's
employers.
The present study has a dual purpose. In the first place, it is intended
to assist in dealing with the social implications of new methods of cargo
handling2, placing special emphasis on a new approach to labour-management
relations in ports, on schemes offering some guarantee of employment or
income and on the development of training for dockers. Secondly, in view
of the fact that experts nominated by the ILO have recently participated in
surveys of many ports and have been called upon to proffer advice on a wide
range of subjects, it was thought that a report indicating how the developing
countries have solved some of their problems in the field of port organisation
and dock labour might be useful. For that reason, a number of issues relating to conventional methods of handling cargo have been discussed, although
space does not permit the inclusion of detailed information on the actual
situation in ports in various parts of the world, for instance in regard to
conditions of work.
It is hoped that the study may contribute to concerted international
action to improve the turn-round time of ships in port, and to ensure that
those concerned can receive the goods they need with the fewest possible
delays and costs arising out of handling in ports. Various economic, techni1
United Nations, Economic and Social Council, Economic Commission for Africa :
A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to Level of Freight Rates
in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, Part I, West Africa, doc. E/CN. 14/TRANS/27 (New
York, 1965) (mimeographed), para. 101.
2
Although close on three-çuarters of the world's tonnage is transported in liquid
form or as bulk cargo, the problems raised here are only seldom and to a limited extent
relevant to their handling, since the great majority of dockers are concerned with the
handling of general cargo. The present study will accordingly concentrate on the latter.

INTRODUCTION

cal and organisational aspects of cargo handling are being examined by the
United Nations through its Transport Division and its Regional Economic
Commissions, by the United Nations Trade and Development Conference, by
the Intergovernmental Maritime Consultative Organization, and by the InterAmerican Port and Harbor Conferences. In addition, non-governmental
organisations such as the International Cargo Handling Co-ordination Assocation, the International Association of Ports and Harbors, the International Chamber of Commerce and the International Organization for Standardization have all been taking an active interest in the matter. The
international trade secretariats have also studied the labour aspects of the
problem and expressed their concern, and the International Transport
Workers' Federation has pressed for the holding of a meeting under ILO
auspices.
The report attempts to describe some of the new methods of cargo
handling, which include not only the much-publicised use of containers, but
also a number of other techniques, many of which can be found in use in
practically every port of the world (Chapter 1). The introduction of these
changes may affect job opportunities for dockers, and will call for a new
approach to cargo handling, including the abandonment by many dockers
of certain practices which have grown up as a result of casual employment
and the fear of unemployment. The workers are not likely to give up these
practices and co-operate in the introduction of new methods unless they can
be given some guarantee of employment or income. This is the theme of
Chapter 2 on régularisation of employment. The new methods of cargo
handling call for an improvement in training with a view to providing more
all-round dockers (Chapter 3).
In view of the importance of speeding up the turn-round of ships in port
and the distribution of goods in general, there is need for a drive to increase
efficiency in ports. While many of the problems are technical, others relate
to methods of working, including arrangements for making labour available
when and where needed, flexibility in the use of labour, and the reduction
of unproductive time and the numerical strength of gangs (Chapter 4).
The efficient use of new methods of cargo handling also calls for preparatory research work and for the co-operation of many different interests and
groups (shipowners, port operators, inland transport undertakings, forwarding agents, etc.). In many cases it is convenient to establish certain common
services in the ports (Chapter 5).
The greatest importance attaches to establishing and maintaining a
climate of confidence between employers and workers (Chapter 6) and to
ensuring the observance of generally accepted conditions of work as regards,
for instance, remuneration, hours of work, rest periods and holidays with

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

pay (Chapter 7). A review of safety regulations and close co-operation between employers and workers in the field of safety are also required, as is the
provision of adequate welfare facilities (Chapter 8).
The various reforms referred to in these chapters are interdependent, and
what is often needed is a major breakthrough in industrial relations, a new
basis of agreement by which the dockers will agree to handle new equipment
and use new methods, abandoning restrictive practices, cutting out unproductive time and generally co-operating in promoting efficiency, in return
receiving guarantees of employment or income which will put an end to the
casual nature of the work, genuine assurances that they will be consulted
about technological changes and their consequences, some safeguards against
possible redundancy, and improvements in conditions of work, safety and
social security. The lines of such a new deal, and examples of agreements
of this kind, are given in Chapter 9. Finally, a glimpse is taken of future
developments (Chapter 10).
The International Labour Organisation has over the years devoted considerable attention to dockers' problems. In particular, the International
Labour Conference has adopted a number of Conventions and Recommendations concerning their safety and many other international instruments. In
particular, those concerning work in industrial undertakings (which include
ports), apply to dockers as they do to other employed persons. The Inland
Transport Committee has on three occasions had an item concerning dockers
on its agenda, adopting resolutions concerning the régularisation of employment of dockworkers in 1949 and 1957, concerning welfare facilities for
dockworkers in 1954 and concerning methods of improving organisation of
work and output in ports in 1957. These texts are given in Appendix 1.
The ILO has also undertaken or participated in a number of activities
under United Nations programmes of technical co-operation designed to
assist those concerned with port labour problems; these activities have
included surveys, projects relating to the establishment of schemes for the
régularisation of employment, courses in training centres and seminars. Some
particulars of the principles governing this co-operation, the types of assistance which might be available and the fields in which it might be given, are
set out in Appendix 2.
A bibliography, which shows the extent of the material on port work
available through the ILO and other international bodies, is provided in
Appendix 3.
This volume was prepared by Mr. A. A. EVANS, former Chief of the General
Conditions of Work Branch of the International Labour Office and a specialist
in social and labour problems in inland transport.

1. NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING
Change is essential to progress in a dynamic society; and change comes
to the ports as to other sectors of the economy.
In the long run, technological changes bring many benefits. These include
higher productivity, particularly through the more effective utilisation of resources, a rising standard of living and stepped-up economic growth. In this context,
technological progress should be considered as inevitable, necessary and desirable,
deserving the support of governments, employers and workers. »
If, therefore, new methods of handling cargo can help to bring goods
more quickly and more cheaply to those who need them, any steps to thwart
their introduction can only be regarded as retrograde. Fortunately, the need
for progress is generally recognised by all concerned. "It is desirable to

accept new types of mechanical equipment, whether they are for use on
board ship or on the quayside, and new methods of work, when they are
efficient, economic and safe."2
A report prepared for the United Nations points out that—
9. Containerisation and palletisation embody elements essential to the stimulation of economic development of all countries
10. The transportation cost of many things required for the economic development and improvement of less developed countries is a substantial part—frequently as much as 50 to 75 per cent—of the total delivered cost of those things.
Hence, the promise of containerisation and palletisation implies that economic
and social gains to less developed countries are to be realised through lower
delivered costs of goods and lower prices to consumers.3
This statement assumes, of course, that cost savings are really passed on.
The possible repercussions of change on job opportunities for dockers,
on their conditions of work, and on safety measures must, however, be fully
1
Official Bulletin, Vol. XLVI, No. 1, Jan. 1963, International Labour Organisation,
Metal Trades Committee, Seventh Session (Geneva, 1962), conclusions (No. 55) concerning the acceleration of technological progress and its influence on the effective utilisation
of manpower and the improvement of workers' income in the metal trades, para. 2,
p. 100.
2
Inland Transport Committee, Sixth Session (Hamburg, 1967), suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in ports, para. 37. See
Appendix 1.
'United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs: An Examination of
Some Aspects of the Unit-Load System of Cargo Shipments: Application to Developing
Countries (New York, 1966) (mimeographed), paras. 9 and 10.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

taken into account in order to mitigate their effects on particular individuals
or groups.
This chapter will give a brief review of some of the more striking changes
which have been introduced or are anticipated in ports and will discuss their
possible impact.
Every port is affected in a greater or lesser degree by change, which can
take many forms : simple handling equipment such as trolleys or carts may
be introduced in primitive ports ; the use of fork-lift trucks and similar devices
may become generalised; roll-on/roll-off facilities may be developed; and
finally, modern and highly mechanised facilities may be built for loading or
unloading specialised container ships. In addition to the technical changes
there are many which are largely organisational in nature. In the pages that
follow some of the more important changes will be described, beginning
with the use of containers because of the interest attaching to this method
of carrying cargo and to its far-reaching implications. Consideration is,
however, also given to many other methods of handling cargo, which will be
of greater interest to ports which are not at present equipped to receive
containers.
In considering the possible effect of the various changes mentioned, the
very great diversity in the conditions in various ports—depending on the
degree of economic development of the country they serve, their size, the
types of cargo handled and their administrative organisation—must constantly be borne in mind.
Although, in some instances, the ports in the developing countries are superior to those in the developed areas, the more complex and sophisticated the
ships, ports and cargo-handling methods become in the developed countries, the
more difficult it becomes to superimpose or reproduce like conditions in a developing country because it lacks the same level
of economic, technical and educational base on which it can be developed.1
SOME TECHNIQUES

Containers
Much has been written about the so-called "container revolution", which
has become a central theme of discussion in port circles. However, after
allowance has been made for exaggeration and a perhaps over-optimistic
promotion in certain quarters of this means of handling cargo, the fact
remains that it is fast gaining acceptance and will continue to do so to
an increasing degree in the future. Writing in 1967, a commentator
1

The Turn-Around

Time of Ships in Port, op. cit., para. 11.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

observes : "Last year it was a matter of faith and confidence ; today containerisation is a fact of life." 1
The Aim of Containerisation.
What is the aim of containerisation? Basically, it is to get goods as
cheaply and quickly as possible to their destination. It seeks to do so by
reducing to a minimum the number of times a piece of general cargo is
handled. The ideal from a transport point of view would be to pack the
goods at the point of origin in a standardised container, load the latter onto
a truck or railway wagon especially fitted to carry it, hoist it directly by a
special gantry-type crane or by other means onto a specially built container
ship, and by means similar to those used in the country of origin deliver the
whole container to one consignee. The related movements would constitute—
a total transportation system, which has specially designed terminals and equipment, including ships, trucks, rail cars, and containers themselves, as well as
high speed cranes for the loading and unloading of ships and transportation equipment for the transporting, sorting and storing of ten 2to 30-ton units in various
size containers which are from 20 to 40 feet in length.
In a through-movement of this type, the amount of work performed by
dockers at ports would be very small indeed.
As times have changed, the role of the port has changed greatly and [it] is
now considered one of the intersections on the big route of through marine-land
transport instead
of a strict checking point for international economy and national
economy.3
The Present Position.
The present situation is one of rapid transition. The target referred to
above has been achieved only in a small minority of cases, but the trend
towards it has started.
For a great many years large boxes of various sizes have been in use for
the transport of furniture and some breakable goods, first on land and then
by sea, and these were the forerunners of the present concept of the container. Larger and more standardised containers gradually came into use,
carried sometimes in the hold with other general cargo and sometimes on
deck. Developments using more specialised equipment started primarily in
'Quoted in James HANSCOM: "1967: Container Passes the Point of No Return",
in Containerization, Supplement to the Journal of Commerce (New York), 1 May 1967,
p. 1A.
2
International Association of Ports and Harbors: Containerization 1967—Report
by the Standing Committee to the Fifth Conference CTokyo, 1967), p. 2.
3
Fujio YONEDA, Director-General of the Japanese Shipowners' Association: Containers and Ports as Seen from the Shipping Industry (mimeographed), submitted to the
International Association of Ports and Harbors, Fifth Conference (Tokyo, 1967), p. 8.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

United States coastal traffic. In 1957, on the East Coast, container cells
were built into the holds of the first of six conventional cargo ships, which
also carried special cranes to handle them. The containers handled were
designed to carry 25 tons. The same principles were soon taken up on the
West Coast of the United States, and in 1959 major container operations
started between the West Coast and Hawai:.1
By 1964 it was estimated that 85 per cent of general cargo in the
United States intercoastal trade and 70 per cent of the trade in general cargo
with Hawaii and Alaska were being carried in containers. The corresponding figure for trade between the United States and Central and South America was 16 per cent. Only about 4 or 5 per cent of the trade between the
United States and North Atlantic or Mediterranean ports was thus carried2,
in small numbers of containers and on conventional ships. There had been
isolated developments elsewhere, in particular on cross-channel services between England and France, where the United Kingdom and French railways
used small containers, and in the internal trade of Australia, which is now
largely handled in this manner, with more than 10,000 containers in use,
varying in size from 3 to 17 tons.3
Containerisation has also been adopted on a large scale in the USSR,
being carried out as far as possible at the place where the goods are produced.
I n world trade as a whole, however, the start was slow.

Many issues of

customs regulations, inland transport arrangements and standardisation of
equipment had first to be tackled. Nevertheless, since 1965 extensive plans
have been made and are gradually being carried out.
In March 1966 the first fully integrated container line service in the
North Atlantic was inaugurated by the United States Lines, with a weekly
schedule from New York to Antwerp and Rotterdam. The ships first used
were part cellular, their holds specially fitted with a cell structure for carrying
20-foot and 40-foot containers. These ships also carry conventional cargo.
Subsequently, a number of container services have sprung into being
between North America, western Europe and the Mediterranean basin.
Each service usually concentrates on a few ports from which the goods are
taken to their destination either by inland transport services or by smaller
coastal vessels. Many of the latter still carry both containers and conventional cargo.
1

Containerization 1967, op. cit., pp. 2-4.
Quoted in The Turn-Around Time of Ships in Port, op. cit., para. 76.
3
V. G. SWANSON, Chairman of the Melbourne Harbour Trust : Containerization on
the Australian Coast, submitted to the International Association of Ports and Harbors,
Fifth Conference (Tokyo, 1967), p. 1.
2

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

Specialised services for containers and trailers have also developed on
the short sea routes between Great Britain and Ireland, Great Britain and
the European continent, between North Sea ports, and—to a lesser extent
—in the Mediterranean.
It used to be assumed that the loss of stowage space would render the
carriage of containers uneconomic over larger distances, and the North
Atlantic run was regarded as being about the longest distance over which
container transport would be economic. These fears have, however, since
proved groundless.
Container services have started operating in the trade between the United
Kingdom and continental Europe and between the United Kingdom and
Australia, to the extent that the services already planned should by the end
of 1969 be able to handle about half the non-bulk seaborne trade on the
latter route. Some of the ships ordered will be capable of carrying about
1,150 20-foot containers, thus carrying about 20,000 tons of cargo and discharging and loading it at the rate of about 1,000 tons an hour, the operations being carried on simultaneously.1 It has been estimated that nine of
these ships will replace 80 existing ships.2 Similarly, container ships have
started operations on a regular basis between the United States and Japan ;
plans for the extension of such services have been made and are coming into
operation progressively, but fairly rapidly, as the ships on order are built.3
Although there are somewhat larger difficulties in the way of developing
container traffic with other areas of the world, a group of shipping companies
serving West Africa specialises in the use of small 10-foot containers between
inland destinations in Europe and West Africa.4
There are parallel developments with regard to port facilities. The
largest is the opening of Port Elizabeth in New Jersey, which is planned to
provide 25 berths, each requiring a total area of about 16 acres. For five
berths, there would be over 2,500 container "spots" on paved land, with the
necessary additional space for roadways and small optional buildings.
Experience shows that a fully containerised vessel can load and unload about
8,000 tons of cargo in 35-foot long boxes during a straight-time working day
using one set of gear. This is an average of cranes aboard ship and shore
'SWANSON, op. cit., pp.
2

4-5.

The Economist (London), 3 Aug. 1968, p. 64.
'Yasuyuki MIZUNO, Chairman of the Japan Container Association: "Containerization", in International Association of Ports and Harbours, Fifth Conference (Tokyo,
1967), Ten-Minute Speeches, p. 39 ; R. B. ORAM: "Recent Trends in the Port Revolution",
in The Times (London), 17 Aug. 1967 ; and John T. MCCULLOUGH, Executive Editor,
Distribution Age : "The Impact of Containerisation in the World's Ports", in Ten-Minute
Speeches, op. cit., p. 46.
4
International Transport Workers' Federation : Report on Marine Containers (London, 1966), p. 10.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

cranes. It is generally1 recognised that the shore cranes will operate faster than
the shipboard cranes.
As has been pointed out, the United States has for years been handling
containers and is therefore equipped with a number of suitable terminals. In
continental Europe and in the United Kingdom, many if not most major
ports have built or are developing special container facilities with ample
paved space on shore and modern gantry cranes. A great many more container berths have been built or are being planned in other parts of the world,
including Ceylon, Hong Kong, Japan, Malta and Singapore.
Advantages of the Container.
What are the advantages which have led to such considerable investment
in containers, specialised ships and terminals? It is clear that the abovementioned developments have taken place because enough shipping companies, land transport agencies and others concerned are convinced that the
investment will pay off.
There is first of all very considerable saving on the actual cost of loading
and discharge, because the labour content of the operation is greatly reduced.
If rates of 8,000 tons per day in and out per berth can be achieved, the saving
in labour costs is obvious. The actual extent of the reduction in cost is difficult to determine, because there are few container berths yet working to
anything like capacity, shipments are often not full and manning scales for
dockers' gangs have been reduced in some ports but not in all. A figure
such as that cited for New York, where loading costs have been reduced from
$22 to $6 a ton, cannot be taken as representative, the more so as the original
figure is a high one and in New York the dockers' gangs working with containers are of the normal strength. Another example cited is a reduction of
terminal costs from $12 to less than $1 a ton through the use of containers.2
Much in any case depends on where the container is stowed and emptied,
because the cost of these operations, wherever they are done, has to be added
to the cost of actual loading or unloading.
In addition to savings in costs, there is the great advantage of speed in
handling, which is in turn dependent on good organisation at the ports (the
expression "terminal" is scarcely an appropriate one if the port is to be considered as only one stage in a through-handling movement) and special
arrangements for customs and documentation clearance. On the basis of
»Colin BARRETT: "A Terminal for Containers", in Traffic World (New York),
24 June 1967 (also available as an offprint).
2
John L. EYRE: "Measuring the Miracle", in ICHCA Quarterly Journal CLondon),
Oct. 1966, p. 17.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

United States experience it is claimed that the turn-round time of a container
ship is a tenth of that of a conventional ship.1
There is also the advantage of having the goods sealed in for the whole
or a large part of the journey, which means that much lighter packing, or
sometimes practically none, is required, resulting in considerable savings on
non-returnable crates for certain types of cargo. Risk of loss from damage
to cargo is much reduced provided the containers themselves are well stowed ;
this condition is, however, important, as experience shows that in many cases
containers have been filled at inland depots or by consignors with little
thought for the stresses to which the cargo, perhaps lightly packed, might be
subjected in the tossing of a ship in a storm, particularly if the container was
not full. Damage has resulted and in some cases influenced insurance rates
unfavourably.
The advocates of containerisation also argue that the risk of pilferage is
much reduced as the cargo is less often exposed to view and handled less
frequently and containers are usually firmly locked. However, this claim
still has to be proved, as some unfortunate experiences of pilferage have
occurred, and there is of course usually no check on the contents during the
journey. Further, cases have been reported of whole containers disappearing with their contents, which of course puts another complexion on the
problem.
Handling by containers should, though it is early to have enough statistical evidence, reduce accidents.
Another question which is still outstanding is that of insurance rates,
because in international trade the question of the rate to be charged on container-shipped goods is still under discussion.
Future Developments.
What proportion of general cargo is likely to be shipped in containers in
future? How quickly will this traffic grow ? These are the questions which
shippers, shipping companies, port authorities and dockers are asking themselves all over the world, and there are several groups undertaking research
into this problem. There is no clear answer, and much has to be left to
enlightened guesswork. The first approach is to analyse existing flows of
traffic in order to ascertain what proportion of the goods transported could
be loaded in containers.
The next stage is to consider what the rate of expansion of potentially
containerisable trade is likely to be. This involves the projection of probable
1
F. D. ARNEY, Chairman, National Ports Council Standing Committee on Research,
in Journal of Commerce and Shipping Telegraph (London), 10 Feb. 1967.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

trends in the flow of trade in the commodities involved, which can only be
studied commodity by commodity. Allowance must be made on certain
routes for the possibility that containerisation will win back to the sea goods
which are otherwise handled by land transport. This has happened mainly
with coastal traffic, and was to a large extent responsible for the rapid development of the United States coastal and intercoastal container traffic. Similar
considerations apply in other sectors where rail and sea compete as, for
instance, on traffic between the North Sea and European Mediterranean
ports. The potential competition of "jumbo jet" air freighters is also a factor
to be considered. Another element to be taken into account is whether any
new trade is likely to be generated as a resali of the rapid and controlled
growth of container traffic. This is an important feature in the field, for
instance, of perishable foodstuffs, which can be kept and carried in relatively
small lots in air- and temperature-controlled containers. A study prepared
for the United Nations considers that "The most challenging aspect of unitisation is the visualisation of prospects for new industry and agricultural
output that the unit-load principles can initiate." 1 Economic and technical
considerations also come into play. How much of the traffic will come in
sufficiently large lots to fill even a 10-foot container to an economic extent?
If this cannot be done what will be the arrangements for assembling small
lots for transport to a single port of destination, there perhaps to be redistributed? It is only where a sufficiently large volume of potentially containerisable cargo is available for transport on the same route that it is economic to put on regular sailings of container ships. Smaller quantities may
move in containers on conventional ships, but the savings in cost will not be
as great. If most containers have to be packed and unpacked in port, it may
often be doubtful whether it is worth while using containers at all.
Handling facilities at both ends have to be considered. The advantages
will be much greater if, as in most of Europe, there are adequate port facilities and arrangements for onward transport by specialised rail and road
vehicles. It may not prove worth while if local conditions make onward
transport in containers a virtual impossibility.
The cost savings will be greatest where labour costs are high ; it may
therefore be some time before goods are sent in containers to the ports of
many developing countries.
The solution of the problems of customs formalities, documentation and
insurance is a prerequisite to successful container traffic.
Lastly, but most important, the dockers must be prepared to handle the
containers and, as will be pointed out, this may call for special measures to
1
An Examination of Some Aspects of the Unit-Load System of Cargo Shipments:
Application to Developing Countries, op. cit., para. 33, p. 6.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

provide them with some assurances regarding job opportunities and security.
The most complete study on the potentialities of containerisation is that
carried out by the Port of New York Authority, with a projection to 1975. *
Trade in general cargo was grouped into four classes:
(1) "prime"—commodities of high value, shipped at relatively high rates,
which can be readily packed in containers, reducing their high degree of
susceptibility to damage and pilferage ;
(2) "suitable"—commodities of moderate value subject to lower shipping
rates and of only moderate susceptibility to damage and pilferage ; commodities which can become contaminated or incur penalty rates come
under this category ;
(3) "marginal"—commodities which might be physically suitable for containerisation but of low value, subject to low shipping rates and of low
susceptibility to damage and pilferage ; many marginal commodities would
be difficult to containerise because of their size and weight ;
(4) "unsuitable"—cargoes that physically cannot b e put into containers or

generally are much more efficiently carried in specialised vessels when
moved in large volume.2
A Japanese study includes the following among cargo for which containerisation can easily be adopted : toys, household electric appliances, ceramics, plastic products, processed foodstuffs, canned beverages, pharmaceuticals, medical supplies, tobaccos and cigarettes, dyestuffs, rubber and leather
products, office equipment, sewing machines and motor cycles. When refrigerated containers are used, perishables and dairy products could be included.
Among commodities which might be containerised under certain conditions
are included raw hides and skins, pulp, edible fats and oils, tars and metal
products.3
Among cargoes which have been advantageously placed in containers
are completely knocked-down cars, an important advantage in this case being
the saving in packing.
There are cargoes which it might not normally be economic to place in
containers, but which would be shipped in this manner if it were the only
way to use containers which would otherwise have to return empty owing to
imbalance between exports and imports of normally containerisable cargo
in the trade concerned. An example is bales of compressed wool from
1

Container Shipping: Full Ahead (New York, 1967).
2 Ibid., p. 21.
3

YONEDA, Op. Cit., p. 3.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Australia. On occasion, it might even be worth while to use containers for
some cargo ordinarily carried in bulk.
A summary of the results arrived at by the Port of New York Authority's
study is given in table 1. The total of "container potential" includes the
prime, suitable and marginal categories. Below are some of the factors
which govern the forecast of the extent of containerisation in the main trades
listed, based on the comments made in the study and on other considerations.
Europe: Bordeaux-Hamburg range.
The United Kingdom, the Netherlands, Belgium, West Germany and France,
which make up most of this trade route, have all the elements for rapid growth
of container traffic. Not only does most of the freight moving on this route
consist of prime or suitable cargoes for containerisation, but a difference of only
1 per cent between east and west-bound traffic assures two-way loads for containers
Almost a dozen steamship lines have announced plans for container
ship service in this one route....
Port facilities exist in Europe already or are developing ; plans for special
trains carrying containers in fast transit traffic exist, and facilities for road
traffic are also good, with transit arrangements for vans.
Europe: Baltic-Scandinavia.
Denmark and Sweden appear ready and receptive to container handling while
Norway, Finland and Poland are geographically situated to permit trans-shipment

of containers through Swedish or North Sea ports.

Europe: Italy, Spain and Southern France.
Full container ship services to Italy, Spain and Southern France are virtually
certain by the end of this decade. These countries have a highly balanced twoway market of containerisable traffic and, in 1964, about 81 per cent of their
container potential consisted of prime or suitable cargoes.
Far East. In 1964 about 65 per cent of the containerisable cargo was
generated by Japan, and 93 per cent if Hong Kong and the Philippines are
added. Seventy per cent of the containerisable exports of these three countries was either prime or suitable. As has been stated, plans are already in
hand for container lines to these countries. The first Japanese container ship
sailed for the West Coast of America in September 1968.
Latin America. Though there is potential movement of containerisable
cargo southbound, the return movement consists largely of lower-rated agricultural products, particularly bananas and coffee. Only some countries
have a sufficient concentration of cargo to justify container ships, and some
of the traffic would have to be handled through feeder ships to larger ports.
Plans are under way to introduce partial container ships in the East Coast
run within three years and full container ships by 1970 or 1971. The West Coast

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

route is served by six partial container ships and additional conventional ships
with container capability are under construction. By 1975, both coasts will
probably be served by full container ships to centres of cargo concentration and
partially containerised ships will serve more widely dispersed sources of cargo.
Other trade routes (Africa, Australia, New Zealand and parts of Asia not
included in the Far East forecast). This group covers some 86 countries,
with no large concentrations of containerisable cargo between New York
and any one of these countries. Therefore "there appears to be little opportunity for maximising the economic advantages of container ship operations".
However, consideration is already being given to a container service between
United States ports and Australia. The trend will be towards partial container ship services, with perhaps 25 per cent being carried in the busier
trades by 1975. »
TABLE 1. ESTIMATES O F POTENTIAL C O N T A I N E R C A R G O T O
A N D F R O M N E W YORK, 1975 l

Route

Container
potential 1964

Container
potential 1975

Probable
proportion
handled in
containers, 1975

(Thousand long
tons)

Per cent

2 233
591

2 621
668

80
65

811
1409
2 673

1031
1870
3 268

60
60
60

2 263

2 765

Europe : Bordeaux-Hamburg
Europe: Baltic-Scandinavia .
Europe: Italy, Spain and
Far East
Other trade routes (Africa,
Australia, New Zealand,
parts of Asia not included
in Far East forecast) . . .

Source: Container Shipping: Full Ahead, op. cit., pp. 24-31.
1
Potential includes even marginally suitable cargo. Estimates of probable proportion handled in
containers includes both containers carried in container ships and in other ships. For comments, see text.

One analyst sums up the position as follows: "By 1970, each day of the
year will find at least one container ship sailing from North Atlantic ports of
the United States alone—providing a shipping capacity of over 222,000
20-foot containers a year." 2
1
2

Based on Container Shipping: Full Ahead, op. cit., pp. 24-31.
McCuixoUGH, in Ten-Minute Speeches, loc. cit.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Another indication is that in 1968 about 12 per cent of the dry cargo
travelling through New York Harbour was in large containers; by 1975 it
was thought that the figure was likely to be 50 per cent or more.*
A study was also prepared in 1967 concerning potentially containerisable
traffic on deep-sea routes to and from the United Kingdom. Based on 1965
traffic volumes, it was estimated that between 9 and 12 million tons of cargo
(total imports and exports) a year might move in containers, corresponding
to approximately 7,300 to 10,300 movements of 20-foot containers each way
per week. Routes to the United States and Canada, Australia and New
Zealand, the Far East and many parts of Africa were regarded as potentially
suitable for container services within five years. The development of such
services to South and Central America, the Caribbean, India, Pakistan and
Ceylon would seem to be a more long-term process. Table 2 gives the estimates of the general cargo which was potentially containerisable in 1965,
together with the percentage it represented of all general cargo in the principal trades with the United Kingdom.2
TABLE 2. CONTAINERISABLE GEN3RAL CARGO IN TRADE
TO AND FROM THE UNITED KINGDOM
(Based on 1965 figures—thousands of tons)
Imports

Trade routes

United States

South Africa
India, Pakistan and Ceylon . .
Far East

Containerisable

2 108
1666
783
773
763
505
503

Exports

Percentage Container- Percentage
of total
isable
of total

99
96
100
100
100
99
99

562
1280
590
365
432
542
670

89
97
72
81
77
84
84

Source : Derived from U.K. Deep Sea Trade Routes, op. cit. For definitions and methods of calculation see the original study. "Containerisable" cargo includes cargo only moderately suitable for this
method of carriage.

Another forecast relates to trade in and out of Japan. The view is taken
that it is the trade between Japan and the United States which lends itself best
to container traffic ; and it is estimated that 37 per cent of Japanese export
cargoes could be carried in containers. The following proportions of trade
1

The Economist, 5 Oct. 1968, p. 45.
National Ports Council (United Kingdom): U.K. Deep Sea Trade Routes—The
Potential for Container Services Based on Physical Cargo Characteristics, prepared by
the University of Lancaster, Department of Operational Research (London, 1967).
8

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

between Japan and the United States could be carried in containers : 73 per
cent on the run to the West Coast, 58 per cent to the Gulf of Mexico, and
80 per cent to the Atlantic Coast.1 One estimate is that it is well within the
realm of possibility that, shortly after 1970, "there will be over 100,000 containerised shipments annually moving in the Pacific".2
For the Europe to Australia trade, it will be recalled that plans are already
laid for carrying about 50 per cent of the general cargo in container ships
within a few years, the operation starting early 1969. A container trade
between Britain and New Zealand is planned for the early 1970s.
There are wide differences of opinion as to how far cargo capable of
being carried in containers will in fact be so carried. A United Nations seminar considered that "it seemed likely that given full unit-load services, virtually everything that could be palletised or containerised would be handled
in this manner".8
The estimates made above make certain assumptions as to the extent to
which obstacles to container traffic will be overcome and therefore may be
on the optimistic side. For instance, the Chairman of the Committee on
Research of the National Ports Council in the United Kingdom takes a more
reserved view.
Suitability is not necessarily synonymous with practicability for the following
reasons: imbalance of imports and exports on particular trade routes; lack of
sufficient flow of cargo on certain routes to make a service viable; impact of
other forms of unitisation ; unsuitable inland communications. I shall, therefore,
be surprised4 if over-all more than half the cargo regarded as suitable becomes
practicable.
What might be possible under theoretically perfect conditions is illustrated by the following calculation :
The present annual tonnage of traffic between the United Kingdom and
North America has been estimated to include 1,600,000 tons of export goods
that can be put into containers, in reasonable balance with imports. A 25-knot
ship carrying 1,200 containers, working between one terminal at each end, with
a 24-hour turn-around, would carry just under a quarter of this tonnage, from
which it may be deduced that five such ships, with one terminal at each end,
could do all the work. *
1

YONEDA, Op. Cit., p. 4 .

MCCULLOUGH, in Ten-Minute Speeches, loc. cit.
'United Nations: Report on the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight
(London, 1-12 May 1967), doc. ST/TAO/SER.C/102 (New York, 1968) (mimeographed),
para. 25.
4
F. D. ARNEY, in Journal of Commerce and Shipping Telegraph, op. cit.
5
J. Ph. BACKX, Chairman of the Executive Committee of the International Cargo
Handling Co-ordination Association, and C. EARLE, Secretary-General of ICHCA:
"Cargo-Handling", in ICHCA Monthly Journal, Mar. 1967, p. 7.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Obstacles to Containerisation.1
In order to balance the picture, it is necessary to indicate briefly some
of the difficulties and problems still involved in containerisation.
The very large amount of capital needed poses a serious problem, particularly when coupled with the intense competition which appears likely to
arise in certain trades, and especially on the North Atlantic, where everybody wants to be in the running. This means that shipping companies (sometimes together with other organisations already specialised in container
traffic) have grouped themselves to form subsidiaries to buy the ships and
organise the traffic. As already indicated, many ports in the same areas are
building container berths and planning to provide special facilities. So heavy
is the capital expenditure incurred in providing deep-water berths, space and
cranage, that it has been said that the docker on a container berth will be
handling the most expensive port equipment in existence. As there is at the
outset no certainty as to which ports will be most used for this traffic, every
port seeks to be in a position to handle a major share of the traffic going
to its region. There is therefore a serious risk of over-investment, with the
result that the yield on investment may be in some cases much below that
which was planned for, and it is by no means impossible that some concerns,
whether public or private, will find themselves operating at a loss.
The majority of freight moving about the world is consigned in small
lots. These have therefore to be assembled and packed into containers at
an inland depot or at the port. Inland depots for the purpose already exist
in the United States, but elsewhere they are still in the initial stage of construction; in many countries there will be competition as to who should
organise them. The savings in cost when goods are packed in containers in
port are, as has been stated, not of the same order as savings on throughshipments. On the other hand, increasing industrial concentration should
yield a higher proportion of through-shipments.
In many countries goods arriving in large containers would have to be
unpacked in or near the port. In the Far East, a substantial part of the
cargo is moved in junks or small craft which could not handle large containers. In some countries the railway gauge is too narrow, and the equipment too small, to handle 20-foot or 40-foot containers. This is the case, for
instance, in Nigeria with its 2 ft 6 in. gauge. In the United Kingdom containers 8 ft 6 in. high (of which many exist though they are 6 in. higher than
1
For a discussion of the various practical problems involved, largely in the light of
the situation in the United States-Japan trade, see W. J. YOUNG, Director of the Far
East Bureau, Virginia State Ports Authority: "Containerization—Panacea or White
Elephant?", in Ports and Harbors, Vol. 12, No. 1, Jan.-Mar. 1967, pp. 19-23.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

recently accepted international standards) could not pass under some bridges
above railways. Length limitations to trailers on the roads have already had
to be altered in some countries to admit 40-foot trailers, and proposals to
this effect are under consideration, for instance in the United Kingdom.
Though large containers can in some cases be discharged in ports by ship's
gear, relatively few inland road transport and railway depots will be equipped
with gear to transfer trailers from rail to road vehicle or conversely, or to set
the containers down so as to free the trailers. It will be a long time before
all the firms which might wish to take advantage of the larger container will
in fact be able to handle it.
A complete customs check of all containers in port would frustrate the
whole system. Arrangements are being made with the appropriate authorities
in many countries for customs checks to take place at point of departure or
destination, but this is not always easy, and the special service has usually
to be paid for. It is easier to organise at inland depots specially designed
for the purpose. These are in fact being developed, and in 1966 there were
18 in existence or planned in the Federal Republic of Germany, 12 each in
France and the United Kingdom, four in Sweden and two in Belgium. 1 In

such cases only spot checks, or no examinations at all, should be made in
port, though of course the right of the customs to insist on a full check
would have to be preserved for use in case of suspected fraud. The organisation required to pass the papers through customs at a speed corresponding
to the potential movement of the goods is completely lacking in many countries and would have to be set up if the documentation work is not to thwart
progress in cargo movement.
It is not for this report, concerned as it is primarily with labour problems,
to go in any detail into the complications which arise as regards freight rates,
documentation and insurance in international trade when containers are
used. Until these problems are solved, however, the development of container traffic will be slow. These matters will be briefly referred to in
Chapter 5 but some of the points may be mentioned here in passing. There
is as yet no generally agreed basis for establishing freight rates for handling
full containers. Commercial practices as regards bills of lading will need
revision: a clean on board ocean bill of lading is a negotiable instrument,
which is required by international law for customs and consular procedures,
banking procedures and the issue of letters of credit, marine insurance and
claims, and it will be difficult to give a shipping company any certificate that
the goods are in good condition when placed on board in a container, or to
give a valid discharge on unloading, if the condition of the goods cannot be
1

Report on Marine Containers, op. cit., p. 12.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

verified. Solutions are being worked out, but they are not yet widely
accepted. As regards insurance, new arrangements covering both the marine
and the land sections of the movement of the containerised cargo in a single
policy already exist, but are still in the stage of breakthrough innovations.
Where the shipping service concerned is closely linked with land transport
services and is a purveyor of containers, the problem of container supply is
largely solved. But ultimately a "container pool" is called for. There have
been many discussions on the subject, but the organisation has still to be
set up in most areas.
To render the containers interchangeable they must be standardised as
to size, certain features of construction, adaptation to standard lifting tackle,
and marking. The absence of such agreed standards was long a cause of
delay in getting international movement of containers developed, but that
has now been largely overcome with the acceptance of the 8 X 8 X 10, 20,
30 or 40-foot container sizes approved through the International Organization for Standardization. There are, however, still a number of other sizes
in use, and there is a risk that some of these will perpetrate "captive systems",
mainly handled by the companies that own them and carried on the ships
they were originally intended for.
An Appraisal of the Future.
It is still too early to express a judgment on the extent to which containerisation will develop and particularly as regards the rate at which it will
progress. The view submitted to the United Nations Interregional Seminar
on Containerization and Other Unitized Melhods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight was that—
The present trend cannot help but gather momentum and eventually become
completely international in its application.... If more sophisticated methods
such as unitisation, containerisation, palletisation and more sophisticated ideas as
to customs procedures and documentation are, out of sheer economic necessity,
being forced into practice in the developed areas, then these methods too must be
adopted by the developing countries if there is to be any hope of closing the
present gap.1
The problems to be overcome have been mentioned. They are being
tackled, but institutional and procedural measures often take longer to bring
into effect than technical ones. There will be resistance to be overcome
from those who have a vested interest in conventional methods of cargo
handling and, in spite of the extensive publicity now being given to containers, a considerable promotional effort will still be needed in most countries before exporters and importers will be sufficiently convinced of the
1

The Turn-Around

Time of Ships in Port, op. cit., paras. 78 and 88 (2) (b).

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

advantages of containers to have recourse to them for through consignments.
In the meantime, shippers and forwarding agents will have to take the responsibility of using containers for as much as they can of the part of the
through-movement which is under their control.
In spite of these difficulties, it would appear that the growth of container
traffic will be considerable. On some routes, and in particular on the North
Atlantic and between Europe and Australia, progress has been rapid. Between the United States and Europe on the one hand and Japan on the other,
change is in sight ; on many other routes, institutional and economic factors
are such that it may take a good deal longer. Nevertheless, one estimate has
been made to the effect that by 1980 at least 630 million tons of cargo will
be moving by container ships on the deep-sea routes of the world, a figure
which should be compared with the estimated 400 million tons of dry cargo
carried in liner trades (excluding bulk carriers and dry cargo moving in
tramps) in 1966. In September 1968 there were about 50 container ships
in service; it is anticipated that by 1970 there will be at least 300, to be
followed by many more in later years.l
Other Unit Loads
If this chapter has concentrated so far on containers, it is because this
form of carriage has attracted so much public attention. It is, however, only
one form of "unitisation . . . an omnibus word to describe the combining of
goods in individual packages into large units which can be handled as one,
with the consequent economies flowing from speedier operation at all stages
of movement".2 The other main forms consist of strapping together individual packages, particularly if they are of a standard size like cartons of
manufactured products and processed foodstuffs, into loads which can be
conveniently handled by a fork-lift truck.
These unit loads may or may not be permanently strapped to a pallet
during transit. If they are not, they may be placed on a pallet in the warehouse and remain on it until loading in the hold, or conversely.
Another form, particularly suitable for cargo in short distance roll-on/
roll-off traffic, consists of very small containers of a size easily handled by
the average fork-lift truck or towed by one man on a small cart, with a solid
base and wire-netting sides (the latter are sometimes collapsible to save space
on return) into which small packages, parcels or mail bags may be loaded.
1

The Economist, 14 Sep. 1968, Supplement on Moving Goods in the 1970s, p. x.
Sir Andrew CRICHTON: The Unitisation Concept, paper submitted to the United
Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized Methods for the
Intermodal Movement of Freight, May 1967.
2

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

The unit-load method of handling has very great advantages in that many
of the difficulties which arise in the case of large containers can be easily
solved.
A particular form of unit load which has proved very practical is
"packaged timber", in which a number of logs or planks are strapped
together into loads of manageable size for ordinary ship's gear or smaller
shore cranes and straddle carriers.
More and more of the world's manufactured consumer goods are packaged for assembly into unit loads at the place of manufacture. Small lots
can be handled by this means without difficulty, and unusual or expensive
handling equipment is not needed. Most unit loads can be handled by ordinary ship's gear, platform tracks and fork-lift trucks. If not already palletised, most unit loads can readily be placed on pallets for fork-Uft truck
handling, often in the holds of the ships. There is no need, as in the case
of containers, for special assembly depots. Stowage on board presents few
difficulties, especially if there is also some other general cargo which can be
fitted into spaces left free by the unit loads. Customs checks are not too
difficult. Pilferage risks are much less than in the case of cargo in separate
cartons or packages.
Since unit loads can be handled almost anywhere and lend themselves
easily to onward carriage by rail or road transport, they can be regarded as
a valid "intermediate technology" between containers and ordinary handling
in separate packages.
Some operators contend that, especially if handling is combined with
loading through side ports, it is possible to achieve handling speeds which
bear comparison with those obtained with much container traffic and that
turn-around is much quicker than with cargo in conventional varied packaging. 1 Where the unit loads are on pallets, there are instances of the speed
of handling being doubled.2
It is therefore not surprising that increased proportions of goods are
being assembled into unit loads. Why, given the obvious advantages of the
system in terms of efficiency, is the practice not more generalised than it is ?
One of the main reasons is that the shipper is often not given much of
an incentive to unitise his goods. Freight rates may actually be higher,
because freight may be charged on the space occupied by the pallet and, if it is
a returnable one, on its return. The shipping company gains in quicker
1
M. MARKUSSEN : Unit Loads and Container Shipments (Bergen, Institute for Shipping Research, 1967).
2
See in general the papers and proceedings of the Symposium on Palletisation
organised by the Institute of Port Management, Calcutta Port Commissioners, in Calcutta, August 1966. See also A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing
to Level of Freight Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, op. cit., Part I, paras. 128-131.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

turn-round and lower handling costs, and this should be reflected in freight
rates more often than it would appear to be.
Another reason relates to the supply of pallets. One solution is for the
consignor, or, if palletisation takes place only at the warehouse in the port
of departure, the shipping firm, to supply a "throw-away" pallet. The
search is still going on for a type of pallet which is strong enough and with
the proper fitments to enable it to be handled by fork-lift truck and yet is
cheap enough to be used only once. Throw-away pallets are at present
expensive, but make for administrative simplicity.l Another method is for
the manufacturer to supply the pallet, and make arrangements for its sale at
destination or for its return. This is usually not satisfactory. The more
usual method is for the shipping firm to supply the manufacturer with the
pallets he needs, either free (recouping himself on the savings in handling
costs) or for rental, and arranging as far as possible to re-use the pallet for
return cargo. A yet more efficient arrangement, widely practised among
European railways, is the constitution of "pallet pools", out of which pallets
are hired to those that need them and returned to the pool when the lessee
has no further use for them.

This ensures the most economical use of

pallets, but involves additional accounting procedures. Allowance must
also be made for loss and damage.
Any pooling implies standardisation. The International Organization
for Standardization has adopted standards for pallets, specifying the sizes,
strengths, and disposition of the slots into which the prongs of fork-lift trucks
are inserted.2
In some cases exemption from customs duty on pallets has to be obtained,
or drawback arrangements on return have to be made.
Once these relatively simple administrative hurdles have been overcome,
it may be expected that there will be a substantial increase in the goods
handled in through-transit on pallets. Savings in handling costs should more
than offset the additional real costs of shipping (use of shipping space and
the cost of shipping unused returns).
The use of palletised cargo is already spreading rapidly. It has long
been established in the Scandinavian and intra-European trades, and recent
reports show that it has become an important factor in the handling of cargo
1
For arguments in favour of the throw-away loading pallet see Swedish Academy
of Engineering Science, Transport Research Commission:.Throw-Away Loading Pallets
(1965), referred to in National Ports Council: Research and Technical Bulletin (London), No. 1, 1966, p. 27.
2
International Organization for Standardization : Recommendation R 198 : DoubleDeck Flat Pallets for Through Transit of Goods, doc. ISO/R 198-1961 (E) (Geneva,
May 1961).

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

in many other countries, including Argentina, Colombia, Cyprus, Israel,
Liberia (where rubber exports are being palletised), Malta, New Zealand,
Poland, Spain, Tunisia and Venezuela. The packaging of sawn timber is
also spreading, as for instance in Finland and Poland.
Roll-On/Roll-Off Ships
Another technique which can greatly speed up the turn-round of ships
in port and enable cargo to be handled expeditiously with considerable
savings in labour is the use of roll-on/roll-off ships.
These include the train and car ferries which have long existed and ships
which are designed to carry trucks or truck-trailers, possibly loaded with
containers, on a number of decks usually loaded over ramps from bow or
stern openings. Many roll-cn/roll-off ships can also load containers or other
cargo placed on a low fìat base with rollers which can be towed on or off
the ship.1 Many ships load through side ports, which may be able to admit
containers, though more often they are designed for loading by fork-lift
trucks straight from ship's side to loading deck.
Originally roll-on/roll-off ships were conceived mainly as ferries operating over quite short distances, because of the considerable loss of hold space
involved in roll-on/roll-off loading arrangements, and the cost, where this is
practised, of carrying the whole truck or the tractor. However, one of the
significant features of present trends in cargo handling is the very rapid
extension of services of this kind. For instance, services between the United
Kingdom and continental Europe started with one train ferry and a very
limited number of cross-channel services intended mainly for private cars
and buses. The number of trucks quickly grew as the regulations and formalities obstructing international transport of goods by road were gradually
reduced to more or less reasonable limits by the efforts of the United Nations
Economic Commission for Europe. Since about 1965 the number of services mainly designed for trucks and trailers (including those carrying containers), though also taking private cars and their passengers, has increased
by leaps and bounds, with strong competition between operators. The distance covered by these services has increased, extending to the Scandinavian
countries and to Portugal and Spain. There has been a similar growth of
such services within and between countries which are near neighbours but
whose territories are separated by water, for instance within Denmark and
between the i Scandinavian countries, between Great Britain and Ireland, be1

F. D. ARNEY, in Journal of Commerce and Shipping Telegraph, op. cit.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

tween mainland France and Corsica, between the Italian mainland, Sardinia
and Sicily, in the Aegean (particularly between the mainland of Greece and
Crete), and between the mainland of Australia and Tasmania. Additional
services are starting up or are planned over longer distances, such as across
the Mediterranean and across the Tasman Sea between Australia and New
Zealand. On one of the North Atlantic services part of the ship is loaded
by the roll-on/roll-off method through side ports. Similar facilities were
inaugurated in the traffic between the United States and Venezuela in 1968.
There is little doubt that these services have proved successful. They
ensure a rapid turn-round for the ships, and the proportion of wasted hold
space has been reduced through improvements in design. One operator
running a wholly palletised door-to-door service with side-port vessels and
fork-lift trucks has obtained a tenfold increase in cargo-handling speed at
one-quarter the labour cost of conventional working.1 Such arrangements
have enabled a Netherlands operator to offer to pick up cargo anywhere in
England and deliver it anywhere in continental Europe within 250 miles of
Rotterdam in 36 hours, a performance which would have been quite impossible by conventional methods.
There is every reason to expect that these services will spread rapidly on
relatively short sea routes between places where there is a large potential for
delivery by through wheeled traffic. They will largely replace conventional
cargo handling on these routes.
Carrying in Bulk
At present, an approximate breakdown of ocean carriage of main commodities shows 53 per cent carried as tanker cargo, 20 per cent (mainly ore,1
grain and coal) as bulk cargo and 27 per cent as general cargo.2 The handling of tanker and bulk cargo is already automatic or highly mechanised
and employs relatively few dockers. There will clearly be pressure to carry
more cargo in bulk where that is possible. What is the scope of potential
change in this respect?
Practically speaking all ore and coal are already carried in bulk, and so
is most grain. The conversion of sugar to bulk carrying is by no means
complete and more of it is likely to be carried in this form as soon as the
required terminal facilities in some of the consumer countries have been set
1
See, for one example, R. K. TRIMMER : "Cargo Handling by the Rolling Method
—Unit Loading at Whangarei, New Zealand", in Ten-Minute Speeches, op. cit., pp. 49-56.
2
Based on Shipping—The Next 100 Years (London, J. and J. Denholm, Ltd.,
1967), p. 7.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

up. Increasing proportions of copra and ground-nuts are being carried in
bulk. More bulk loading of West African oil-seed is foreseen. More wine
and liquid chemicals may shift over to tanker carriage, though it is more
likely that the transfer will be to special containers for liquids. These trends
will affect the total picture somewhat, but there would not appear to be
much scope for further transfer from general cargo to bulk handling, and it
is unlikely that further change will be extensive or rapid.
Other Developments
Transport is a dynamic industry: news about improvements spreads
quickly. There is a constant flow of new ideas; new equipment is being
designed and put on the market; more attention is being paid to methods
of work. All these less publicised but none the less real changes taken as a
whole may exert a very marked effect on the efficiency and the cost of cargo
handling, and also on the demand for dockers' labour. A few of these developments, not already discussed, may be mentioned.
Lighter Aboard Ship (LASH).
This concept involves placing loaded barges in a large ocean carrier for
part of the voyage. The carrier ship acts as a floating dock, submerging
itself sufficiently at destination to enable the barges to be floated out. In
some cases the barges are picked up over the stern and stowed by a gantry
crane. Although this scheme was first proposed in the late 1940s for traffic
from the Thames to the Rhine and north-west European waterways, the idea
was not at once followed up.
The LASH system would be particularly useful where part of the journey
of the cargo is by inland waterway, especially where the loading point and/or
the destination have berths on inland waterways. It would therefore be
appropriate, for instance, where the destination lay on one of the main European navigable rivers or on the extensive canal systems of north-western
Europe. It could also be useful where unloading has to take place in open
roadsteads, normally into lighters or other small craft, as in many ports of
eastern Asia. The saving in turn-around time for the ocean carrier would
be similar to that for full container ships, though the labour component in
finally discharging the barges would remain, and suitable arrangements
would have to be made for chartering them and, if possible, finding them a
return load.
The first mother ship, of 39,000 tons, capable of carrying 73 lighters,
was on order in October 1968. It is intended, for instance, to carry from

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

New Orleans to Rotterdam barges loaded with cellulose on the Mississippi
for paper factories on the Rhine.1
Ship Design.
There are many developments in ship design tending towards faster,
larger and more economical ships; these, however—apart from container
and roll-on/roll-off ships—do not concern this report, as they will have little
influence on the work involved in loading and discharging cargo.
A shipborne handling gear has been devised which would enable any
container to be selected and removed as needed from a fully loaded compartment of a container ship, for instance at an intermediate port. Normal
handling would be at the rate of 600 tons per hour per transporter. The
movement of containers could be controlled from the upper deck by means
of a prearranged circuit or manually, as required.2
Ships offering special combinations of facilities are also appearing : these
may, for instance, have two holds for containers, some deck space for trailers,
cars or other "cargo on wheels", with roll-on access by side ports or openings,
and the remainder of the space for conventionally stowed cargo.
Among the many features of the newer non-specialised ships which will
facilitate and speed up the handling of cargo and reduce labour requirements,
the following are especially important:
(a) larger hatches and easier access to the hold ;
(b) better-designed stowage space to facilitate the loading and stowage of
containers and unit loads ;
(c) more hoisting gear capable of handling heavy loads ;
(d) flush flooring facilitating the use of fork-lift trucks between decks ;
(e) mechanically operated hatch covers, which can reduce unproductive time
for dockers.
In the meantime, it should be emphasised that the construction of many
ships of the traditional type, even recently built ones, is ill-adapted to the
rational use of the available space by unit loads and to the mechanised
handling of goods in the holds.3
Port Handling Gear.
The larger container berths have been, or are being, fitted with specialised cranes which can lift containers between shore and hold at consider1
2
3

The Sunday Times (London), 20 Oct. 1968.
Report on Marine Containers, op. cit., p. 17.
MARKUSSEN, op.

cit.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

able speeds. In some cases loading and unloading operations are carried on
simultaneously. Twenty-foot containers can be handled at the rate of one
minute each under satisfactory conditions.1 Many of the cranes can straddle
a ship and cover several lanes ashore.
Fork-lift trucks, stackers, straddle carriers for timber mobile cranes and
other port equipment are by no means new, but the fact that they have spread
to ports all over the world and are in use in vastly increased numbers constitutes a trend whose significance for improving port efficiency is very considerable indeed. This trend is still continuing, because the use of new
equipment is spreading to further ports where hitherto it was considered
uneconomic, or whose managers hesitated to commit themselves to the necessary investment. This evolution has been speeded up by the fact that the
weight of unit loads has tended to increase. On many lines, most of them
weigh over half a ton and are therefore too heavy to handle except by mechanical means.
Among types of equipment used for certain kinds of more or less standardised cargo mention should be made of conveyor belts and bucket elevator
belts, which are being used in increasing numbers for goods packed in cartons
and for sides of meat. To mention but one example, using apparatus of this
type, a carton of bananas takes less than four minutes to cover the distance
from a ship's hold though the shed into the rail wagon, and the usual load
of a banana boat, 150,000 to 180,000 cartons, is unloaded, checked and
reshipped inside two shifts.2 Conveyor systems operating through side ports
and handling unit loads are a new development in this field.
Ports
A modern container berth can handle perhaps ten times as much cargo
as a berth handling conventionally stowed cargo.3 It needs deep water, a
great deal more apron space, ready access for heavy road traffic, and in most
cases railway access also. The consequence is that container berths must be
built in areas where there is plenty of free space, and generally far downstream where the water is deep enough. Far fewer such berths are required
for the same volume of traffic. The result is that some of the older docks
and piers are no longer economic and must be closed down. Thus some of
1

J. L. HARRINGTON, General Manager, British Railways Shipping and International
Services: "Cranes Can Handle One a Minute", in The Times, Container Supplement,
27 May 1968, p. vm.
2
Werner KLUGMANN: Facts and Figures about the Port of Hamburg (Hamburg,
Verlag OKIS Dr. K. J. Sattelmair, 1966).
3
Dudley PERKINS, Chairman of the Port of London Authority, in a statement to
the Fifth Conference of the International Association of Ports and Harbors, Minutes
of 12 May 1967.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

the older London docks higher up the Thames are to be abandoned, while
Tilbury, further downstream and offering new container and roll-on/roll-off
facilities, is being developed. In New York the finger piers of Manhattan
are losing business while Elizabeth, the recently created container port in
New Jersey, is growing fast. In developing countries investment programmes
may have to be seriously re-examined, with the aim of making more efficient
use of existing facilities rather than extending them, and providing container
traffic with the specialised facilities it needs if it is to grow.
A report published by the United Nations urges developing countries to
re-examine the programming of port development with a view to applying
the unit-load principle. This, it states, "requires a materials handling
approach.... The controlling influence is the flow and manipulation of
unitised loads, mixed as they probably always will be with conventional
cargo." The report adds that "containerisation offers developing countries
remarkable opportunities for low-cost expansion of port facilities to handle
growing external trade". i
Inland Transport
The full impact of new trends in cargo handling will only be felt to the
extent that through-handling is really possible, and if parallel improvements
take place in the handling of cargo—particularly in the form of containers
and other unit loads—in inland transport.
Though nearly all forms of cargo, including furniture containers, have
for long been customarily transported by road and rail, one cannot overlook
the significance of the increasingly efficient arrangements being made for the
rapid handling of unit loads and other freight entering and leaving ports and
the establishment of inland depots to assemble freight, even in small lots,
and pack it into containers. In the United States co-ordinated services by
truck, rail (including the piggyback movement of trailers by rail) and sea
made great strides and launched the movement towards containerisation.
This was greatly facilitated by unified control over the movement, availability
of sufficient capital, absence of customs obstacles as the whole movement
remained within national boundaries, and the tendency towards standardisation in packaging much of the produce handled.
More recently, however, special "freight-liner" trains, with fast point-topoint running between large depots, have started up in several other parts of
the world. Examples of such innovations are the special services in the
United Kingdom, the superfast goods expresses in Japan, and the through1
An Examination of Some Aspects of the Unit-Load System of Cargo Shipments:
Application to Developing Countries, op. cit., paras. 116 and 118.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

train services for containers which are being organised in western Europe,
for instance between Rotterdam or Antwerp and Chiasso on the SwissItalian border. Motorways are also being rapidly developed.
The creation of these facilities increases the volume of traffic where the
only handling required is the lifting of the van or container from inland
transport vehicle to ship and vice versa, with a probable relatively brief
period of parking in a container yard. There is, at any rate in the areas
mentioned, a very considerable organisational effort to get these integrated
facilities to work efficiently in spite of all the institutional obstacles which
have to be overcome. This will accelerate the movement towards containerisation with through-movement across the ports.
Intermediate

Technology

The new methods of handling cargo which have been referred to in this
chapter are in the main capital-intensive. Where labour costs are high and
capital is relatively easy to secure, they would seem to be economically justified. In most developing countries the position is different, and it may
therefore be doubted whether all-out mechanisation of cargo handling is the
most appropriate solution in the economic circumstances of these countries.
The International Labour Conference recommended that member States
"should, subject to technical requirements, explore the possibility of expanding employment by . . . promoting more labour-intensive techniques, in circumstances where these will make for more efficient utilisation of available
resources." 1 The Inland Transport Committee at its Sixth Session (Hamburg, 1957) also recognised the problem:
In countries which lack the capital needed for economic development, in
which wages are relatively low and in which unemployment or underemployment
is widespread, it may not be economically justifiable or socially desirable to
introduce expensive equipment to the same extent as in countries with cheap
capital and relatively high wages. In economically underdeveloped countries,
therefore, attention might appropriately be concentrated in the first place on the
simpler types of equipment involving less capital and fewer maintenance problems, and which save unnecessary physical effort but displace fewer workers.2
For some forms of equipment, however, there are obvious limits to the
extent to which these principles can be applied.
If the savings on shipping make it desirable and economic that containers
be used on a particular route, then at least some ports in all the countries
1

Employment Policy Recommendation, 1964, Para. 25.
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 38. See Appendix 1.
3

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

concerned will be obliged to adopt the same techniques. However, it has
already been pointed out that for a considerable time containerisation is
likely to develop more slowly in the traffic with most developing countries
than on other routes. The reasons are many, but they include the frequent
absence of return cargoes suitable for shipping in containers, the difficulties
of inland transport, and often the small size of the shipments. It may also
be even more difficult in many developing countries than in others to overcome customs formalities and slowness in handling documents.
If, for the reasons stated, it proves impracticable to secure through-handling of containers, or if this form of shipment is recognised as uneconomic
in the circumstances, there remains the middle course of strapping goods
into unit loads. This achieves savings in transport costs while avoiding the
need for heavy capital investment and does not reduce job opportunities to
the same extent.
A United Nations seminar in 1967 considered that pallets could be
adopted as a short-term solution to avoid the risks of heavy investments
necessary for containers and container ships, or as a long-term possibility
where cargo was not suitable for containers, or where there was an insufficient volume of the proper cargo on one leg of a trade to make containers
economic. Pallets had a number of attractions in their own right, since they
offered many of the benefits of unitisation without some of the disadvantages
of containers. Some difference of opinion was expressed over the hopes that
developing countries could benefit from the technological revolution in
shipping. It was suggested that, with few exceptions, the benefit would, for
some time to come, probably rest on the use of less elaborate techniques,
such as palletisation.1
There may also be a stage when a combined system is in use, incorporating some containers, through-pallets and pre-slung cargo on conventional
ships. This combined system, which provides a transition between conventional operation and fully containerised operation2, is regarded as suitable
for certain trade routes.
While it is essential to have all the equipment needed to remove the
excessive physical toil which has for so long been a feature of many ports
in developing countries, this does not mean that all goods must be handled
by expensive equipment like fork-lift trucks. Tractor-drawn carts may, for
instance, be used. These can usually be made in the country concerned,
1
Report of the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and
Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight, op. cit., para. 32.
2
N. N. B. ORDMAN : lntermodal Transfer and Transit Facilities, paper submitted to
the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized
Methods for the lntermodal Movement of Freight (London, 1967), p. 5.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

thus saving foreign exchange, and—if labour is plentiful—can enable cargo
to be handled nearly as fast as by fork-lift truck.
It is important to remember that the techniques advocated by the more
enthusiastic equipment salesmen may not necessarily be the best in the circumstances. Each port must work out its own solution having regard to
present and prospective labour costs, the cosí of capital, the need to save
foreign exchange, the desire to avoid redundancy or to provide more job
opportunities, and the differences which recourse to an intermediate instead
of an advanced technology would make in the utilisation of available berths
and the turn-round of ships. There are many possible combinations of cargohandling equipment, and a choice has to be made after weighing all the factors involved. The solution cannot simply be found by blindly following the
practice of countries with high standards of living and labour shortages.
SOME ORGANISATIONAL CONSIDERATIONS

In order to promote quick and efficient transport from consignor to
consignee, the trend is towards through-handling over the greatest possible
part of the voyage. There will be an increasing tendency to view the transport operation as a whole, rather than as a series of segments each controlled
by a different body. To ensure the smooth passage of cargo and to avoid
hold-ups at ports and other intermodal points, there is a marked trend for
one undertaking to control the cargo over an ever-increasing length of the
journey. So far, it is the shipowner who seems to be taking the lead as far as
container traine is concerned, and this has had the result that some inland
transport concerns which started in trucking have gone into shipping. They
now have their own inland depots, trucks and trailers, supply their own
containers, operate their own container terminals and carry the goods on their
own ships. Where part of the operations are carried out by other firms, it is
on the basis of a close understanding with the main firm. In a few countries
railways are in a leading position, owning inland depots, special freight
trains, ports and ships. This is mainly the case for some short sea routes
in north-western Europe, but the railways have no monopoly as regards the
sea crossings.
It is not appropriate in this report to go into all the consequences of this
form of financial integration and control over various modes of transport on
existing transport undertakings, though they may indeed be far-reaching. It
is sufficient to note that this trend will encourage containerisation and
through-handling, probably improve speed of handling in port and reduce
the turn-round time of ships, thereby creating certain problems as regards
job opportunities and labour.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

The tendency will also be to concentrate operations in fewer ports, with
a corresponding reduction in the number of firms and berths ; this will involve
serious problems for many smaller ports which may no longer be able to pay
their way and justify their existence.
These can only be broad indications of trends, since the situation is still
in a state of flux and it is not yet clear which types of undertakings will be
in the lead. Mergers are taking place; new groups combining shipping,
inland transport and container manufacturing interests are being set up or
are at any rate being discussed.
The view of a well-known firm of consultants is that "the eventual result
of this consolidation and integration will be the emergence of a few very
large organisations with world-wide interests in international transport".1
The role of many port operators is changing, and some of them may find
their very existence threatened. Some of them will, in order to prevent
themselves being virtually by-passed, seek to move much of their work back
from the port to inland points where cargo is collected before containerisation.
The drive for through-handling is likely to produce some struggle for
power between the many and diverse interests concerned with port work and
to result in a new organisational structure which may leave quite a few
victims by the wayside.
SOME ECONOMIC ASPECTS

The Turn-Around of Ships
The new trends in cargo handling increase the pressure to ensure a quick
turn-around of ships. The average cost of running a 10,000 dwt. ton cargo
liner of the conventional type was estimated some years ago at something in
excess of $1,500 a day.2 On the West Coast of the United States the value
of the time of a ship in harbour, while being loaded, or unloaded, or both,
was placed by the industry at between $2,000 and $5,000 a day.3 If the
capital invested in a modern container ship is taken into account, as well as
the capital needed for the containers themselves, the last figure given above
will be nearer the mark and might well be exceeded. These figures do not,
of course, include the interest on the goods being carried, nor do they reflect
1
MCKINSEY and Company, Inc. : Containerization : the Key to Low-Cost Transport
OLondon, British Transport Docks Board, 1967), p. 61.
2
United Nations : Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (Geneva, 23 March-16 June 1964), Vol. V : Financing and Invisibles:
Institutional Arrangements (New York, United Nations, 1964), p. 259.
3
Max D. KOSSORIS : "1966 West Coast Longshore Negotiations", in Monthly Labor
Review, Oct. 1966, p. 1068.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

the natural desire of most consignees to get their goods as soon as possible.
Delays in shipments, although not always due to slow handling of ships, have
often been a factor holding up industrial production in developing countries.
Another reason for speeding up the turn-round of ships is that new
methods of handling enable very much larger tonnages of cargo—the figure
of ten times as much has been cited—to be handled at a given berth.
Though expense will be incurred in equipping berths for modern cargohandling methods, great savings in port investment can be achieved in the
long run.
For these and other reasons, the time ships spend in port is a cost element
to be closely watched. While the improvement of turn-round time is often
associated with the introduction of new methods of handling such as those
which have been described in this chapter, for some time to come equal
attention should be paid to improving the turn-round time of conventional
ships, particularly general cargo liners.
It was estimated some years ago that an average cargo liner spent
219 days a year in port and 146 at sea.1 Some of the stay in port is more
or less inevitable : overhaul, repairs, time at home port for the crew. Some
of it is necessitated by local conditions and economic considerations: no
work being performed in some ports on Sundays or public holidays, or being
performed at a cost which the shipper is unwilling to pay. But ships often
have to spend a number of days—quite considerable in some cases—waiting
to berth in ports. Every effort should be made to eliminate waiting time by
more efficient handling of cargo during loading and unloading. Organisation
can also be improved : sometimes additional facilities are needed ; but in many
cases existing ones are not being used to the full. Many problems affecting
efficiency in ports will be referred to in this report, especially in Chapter 4,
for as the costs of building and operating ships increase the need for improved
efficiency in ports becomes ever more pressing.
The Cost of Cargo Handling
Developing countries have complained that the freight rates charged by
shipping lines serving them were too high. Shipping firms have replied that
their freight rates have necessarily been affected by factors such as delays to
ships awaiting berthing, the inordinate amount of time often wasted to discharge or load perhaps only a few hundred tons at some relatively small port,
difficulties and delays in regard to customs formalities, and many other
1
A. S. SVENDSEN : Seeverkehr und Schiffahrtswirtschaft (Bremen, Institute for
Shipping Research, 1958) quoted in Financing and Invisibles: Institutional Arrangements, loc. cit.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

administrative complications which have held up ships and involved thenowners in costs. Comments have also been made regarding the relatively
low productivity of the dockers' labour in many ports.
Investigations by the United Nations, notably in Central America and
Africa, have drawn attention to the importance of improving port efficiency.
Where this has been achieved, shipping companies have in some cases
removed the surcharge on freight rates which was levied in the case of cargo
proceeding to ports which had a particularly bad reputation for delays to
shipping.
A study made in Latin America showed that in intraregional trade over
66 per cent of the cost of maritime transport was due to cargo handling and
normal port expenses. Transport costs represented from 10 to 17 per cent
of the value of seaborne commodities, and the conclusion was reached that
the most effective place to reduce them was in the ports. i A study made in
Africa pointed out that the influence of maritime freight rates on prices was
for most commodities in fact rather limited.
207. In many countries traders indicated that even if ocean freight rates
were halved or dispensed with entirely, such hypothetical reductions would have
almost no practical effect on the selling prices of the majority of imported goods.
208. It follows that, if fiscal dues are not to be lowered, the only promising
substantial cost reductions are to be sought in the domain of shore handling and
inland transportation. In spite of many obvious difficulties there is little doubt
that in these areas more substantial gains can be obtained than from ocean
freights. It appears, therefore, worth while to direct earliest practical attempts
in these directions.2
Any substantial reductions in cost will, it should be recalled, affect the
ratio of the prices obtained by developing countries for their exports to
those they have to pay for their imports, an issue of crucial importance in
recent discussions regarding economic and industrial development.
Competition
A factor favouring the trend towards the adoption of new methods of
handling cargo is competition, which is becoming constantly more acute.
Firstly, there is competition between ports. Where several of them serve
the same area, this has always been intense. With the arrival of containers,
'Organization of American States: Problems of Ports in Latin America and the
Port Programs of the Organization of American States, Second Inter-American Port and
Harbor Conference, doc. 5 (Washington, Pan American Union, 1962), p. 2.
2
A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, op. cit., Part I, paras.
207-208.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

each of the main ports considers that it must have facilities for containers or
other new forms of handling cargo, or else be left out in the cold. Most
larger ports in north-western Europe, for instance, and in Japan, are therefore developing these facilities in competition with each other. This also
increases the drive for providing quick handling of ships, with shift and
week-end work.
In some cases there is competition between ports wishing to serve as
container clearing stations, or ports where container ships would discharge
and the vans be taken over by smaller ships serving a larger area.
One of the features of the situation is that one or two container ports
may often be sufficient to serve a whole country, the goods being carried
further either by inland transport or by smaller ships. There seems to be a
likelihood that because of competition too many ports will aspire to be the
main container port—or one of the main container ports—of a country or
region, and that there will be a real risk of heavy over-investment and consequent financial loss unless this is prevented by some planning on a national
or—in some parts of the world—on a regional basis.
Ports are also in competition with inland transport in some areas. In
many places the coastal trade has been seriously affected as the high costs
of port handling and the rising costs of coastal shipping, sometimes coupled
with the higher risk of stoppages in ports, have tipped the balance in favour
of road or rail transport, whose facilities have been steadily improving. In
other cases, as in the trade on the United States East Coast, the introduction
of container traffic has enabled shipping to keep a hold on some of the traffic.
But there will shortly be a new factor to be reckoned with. So far, air
transport carries a very small proportion of the world's freight. But by 1970
aircraft will be operational which will carry 14 20-foot cargo containers.
Three of them will provide the same volume of service over a given period of
time as the average container ship—and each containerised shipment will
cross the ocean in one-tenth of the time.1
SOCIAL TRENDS

New trends not only affect the technique of handling cargo; they also
affect society's attitude to labour.
Modern social outlooks place more emphasis on the dignity of the worker,
on his status in the community, on sound relations between management and
labour, and on improvements in conditions of work.
1

MCCULLOUGH, in Ten-Minute Speeches, op. cit., p. 48.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

This situation clearly affects the dockers who have to operate the new
equipment and learn the new techniques of handling cargo.
The first and most important effect of the new trends is to raise the
status of the docker. He should no longer be regarded, as too often he has
been, as a relatively unskilled casual labourer. With new techniques there
will be an increased call for skill. He will need, particularly in the transition
period, to be more versatile—able to handle many kinds of equipment. It
is to be hoped that he will receive additional training, and that his skill status
will be raised.
Nor will the docker be content with purely casual employment. His job
security may be threatened, at least temporarily, by new technical methods,
and he will demand—and is likely to be granted—certain guarantees of
employment or income.
There will be additional costs involved in these new arrangements but—
In considering the costs of technological advances one must include more
than the cost of buildings and machines. The costs of assisting human beings
and communities to adjust to changing technology should be included as an
important part of the total investment costs in the new technology.1
What will be the effect of the new cargo-handling methods on the demand
for manpower? It is very difficult to give any coherent picture at the present
time, as the whole situation is constantly changing.
Where the new methods are introduced, the immediate reduction in the
number of man-hours required for handling is striking. A container of 20
to 25 tons can be discharged in two-and-a-half minutes ; on the East Coast
of the United States two gangs are used, taking about one-and-a-half manhours to do the job. With break-bulk methods 18 to 20 man-hours would
be required. This comparison, however, neglects the labour required to fill
the container or empty it, which may or may not be dock labour.2 On a
roll-on/roll-off ship in London, the number of man-hours required to load
and discharge—and this was done in six hours instead of six days—was
210 as against up to 4,800 by conventional means.3 However, a further
120 to 160 man-hours would be necessary to handle the further movement
of containers before the ship arrives or after she sails. Nor should the impact
of a number of minor changes be ignored. A firm in the Netherlands handling general cargo in the short sea trades switched part of the trade to ships
'Statement by George MEANY, President, AFL-CIO, in United States Congress,
Joint Economic Committee, Subcommittee on Automation and Energy Resources: New
Views on Automation (Washington, 1960), p. 536.
2
Joseph P. GOLDBERG: "Containerization as a Force for Change on the Waterfront", in Monthly Labor Review, Jan. 1968, p. 9.
3
Report on Marine Containers, op. cit., p. 15.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

onto which fork-lift trucks could roll pallets, but much of the trade was
handled in conventional ships but with more palletisation. Over a period
of three years, only half the number of men was needed for the same volume
of cargo.
The impact of a reduction in the demand for manpower may also be
unevenly distributed. The closure of part of the older docks of London will
make labour redundant there, even if more is needed many miles away at
Tilbury. Seniority rights on the finger piers of Manhattan will lose in significance as labour is taken on at container berths across the river. Dockers
in small ports may lose employment first when traffic is concentrated on
fewer, better-equipped poris.
A study carried out in the United Kingdoml pointed out that "the rapid
adoption of container technology will necessitate the redeployment of large
numbers of workers in [the] currently labour-intensive [transportation] industry". It estimated that "in the port industry the reduction in dockworkers
handling general cargo could be as high as 90 per cent of the total employed
using break-bulk methods". A comparison is made between present outputs—assessed at about 25 freight tons per man-week—and the output of a
container berth with three high-speed cranes and associated equipment.
Assuming three-shift, four-gang operation the week round, but allowing for
only two berths operating at a time, with some irregularity of ship arrivals,
the estimate provides for 144 men to handle 3,600 containers each way per
week, or about 600 freight tons per man-week. The study concludes that
"when container systems are fully developed, the productivity of dockworkers
engaged on break-bulk general cargo operations will increase approximately
twentyfold". This estimate, even though making a number of allowances
and not providing for the maximum theoretically possible output, was generally regarded in the press as exaggerated. It was based on container berths
handling 2 million tons a year, whereas in the opinion of the Port of London
Authority half-a-million tons would be more realistic. It assumed availability of labour for 22 V2 hours a day seven days a week, handling ships
larger than those at present in use.
The National Association of Port Employers in the United Kingdom has,
however, referred to a possible drop in the dockers' register from 56,500 to
about 40,000, or 30 per cent, by 1970.2
In New York a union leader came to the conclusion that "it is not too
far-fetched to estimate that we stand to lose, in the full force of the container
use, 8,000 to 9,000 jobs in the New York area alone, and a proportionate
1

MCKINSEY and Company, Inc., op. cit., pp. 68 and 84-86.

The Economist, 24 Feb. 1968, p. 71.

NEW TRENDS IN CARGO HANDLING

number in all other ports. This amounts to 30 per cent of membership." l
This statement was made in 1959, and so far adaptation of the labour force
has been effected without dismissals of active dockers and even with some
recruitment. Even so, a spokesman for the dockers has, perhaps pessimistically, talked of having to cut the number of New York dockers by half
in the future.2
In Rotterdam it has been estimated that the labour force might be
3,000 down by 1975—a drop of just under 20 per cent of the present
force, with reductions of 300 to 500 a year.3
Certain combinations of factors may, however, produce drastic effects in
particular local situations. One example is that of Barbados, where dockside berthing facilities became available to replace off-shore operations and
palletisation of much inward cargo was introduced at the same time. The
number of dockers required dropped from 1,300 to 350.
It is clear that the potential change in the demand for manpower is great
but the problem, though important, should not be exaggerated. The changes
in methods of handling cargo hit the United States first, and on the West
Coast and in the New Y o r k area adaptation has been possible so far without

dismissing workers who really depend on port work for their livelihood ; there
has even been some recruitment. In the United Kingdom, and in particular
in London, the situation has just undergone a fundamental change. There
is certainly a difficult problem to solve, and although the lines of the solution
have been worked out by the parties concerned, time and further planning
are needed. In the continental North Sea ports, only relatively minor adjustments have so far been necessary. There is fairly full employment in these
countries at present, and though further adjustments—perhaps quite important ones—may be necessary, it should be possible with forward planning
to meet the situation. Natural wastage and an adjustment of the pensionable
age have so far as a rule met the situation, except for relatively limited
reductions primarily affecting pool workers. In Japan the employment of
dockers in six major ports was in August 1966 just under 70,000 as compared with a required strength estimated by the Ministry of Labour to be
81,200. Trade has been expanding, and the first container developments
are only just about to start. In Australia also, there is still a shortage of
labour in the ports. In the developing countries, except in a few special
1
Report of the General Organiser, Thomas W. GLEASON, before the 39th Convention of the International Longshoremen's Association, 13 July 1959, p. 13, quoted in
Philip Ross : "Distribution of Power within the ILWU and the ILA", in Monthly Labor
Review, Jan. 1968, p. 5.
2
The Economist, 5 Oct. 1968, p. 45.
J> Journal de la Marine Marchande (Paris), 12 Oct. 1967, p. 2277.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

cases, the impact of new methods of cargo handling has not yet made itself
felt on a substantial scale and, as indicated above, developments are likely
to be relatively slow. Admittedly, "the intractable port labour problem in
some developing countries may be further aggravated by the excessive labour
force, in part a reflection of frequent general disguised unemployment and
by the lack of adequate arrangements towards the decasualisation of port
labour". »
The solution of the problems created by new trends in the handling of
cargo, coupled with the new social outlook towards the docker, calls for an
entirely new approach to the labour problems involved.
The International Transport Workers' Federation has urged that—
Every effort should be made to ensure that the labour and social aspects of
changes in the port industries receive timely and systematic attention by longterm and far-sighted planning, including appropriate discussions and consultations
at local, national and international level,2 between representatives of employers
and unions and the authorities concerned.
The next chapter discusses the first of these major issues : régularisation
of employment.

Financing and Invisibles: Institutional Arrangements, op. cit., p. 262.
Statement on the Social and Trade Union Consequences of Containerization,
Apr. 1968.
2

2. REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT
D E S I R A B I L I T Y OF R É G U L A R I S A T I O N

SCHEMES

One of the essential features of any attempt to meet the situation arising
from the introduction of new methods of cargo handling is either the provision of full-time regular employment or a scheme for the registration and
allocation of dockers so designed as to provide adequate guarantees of
employment or income.
Little progress can be made in securing the workers' consent to new
methods, and therefore in making the best use of them, if some such guarantees are not offered against possible redundancy. A guarantee of this kind
can only be given, in the absence of normal regular work for one employer,
if there is a system of registration of dockers, and when it is possible to
control the entry of newcomers into the job.
It must, however, be emphasised that some form of régularisation of
employment is in any case desirable to overcome the drawbacks of the casual
nature of the work, and that, where it does not exist, it should be introduced
irrespective of whether the port in question is faced with an awkward labour
situation as a result of the introduction of new methods of handling cargo.
It should be remembered that regular employment, or at any rate adequate
income guarantees, are the clearly stated objectives of the workers' organisa\
tions in practically every country, and that they have been asked for and
fought for over a long period, as, for instance, in the United Kingdom, where
. the claim was clearly put forward by Ernest Bevin in 1919. Workers'
, representatives, together with those of governments and of employers, have
voted for the proposition that "The most desirable solution, where practicable, is for dockworkers to be employed on a regular basis." 1
There are other arguments which are also advanced in favour of registration schemes. It has been pointed out that the newer techniques of handling
cargo call for all-round dockers capable of undertaking a variety of tasks
which were previously performed by specialised labour. It is much easier
to secure and retain such men if their entry into the industry is controlled
and a proper system of registration and allocation exists.
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 17. See Appendix 1.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

It is also important that the risk of underemployment arising out of
technological change be as widely spread as possible, as it would be unfair
to let the whole burden fall on an individual docker because he happened to
be regularly employed at a berth where he became redundant because some
change in handling methods was being introduced.
It is for these and other reasons that the Inland Transport Committee of
the ILO at its Third Session (Brussels, 1949), "convinced of the need for
providing greater regularity of employment for dockworkers and for ensuring an adequate supply of labour for the efficient performance of the work
of the ports", recommended that "Registers of regular dockworkers should
be established in the ports".1
The First Inter-American Port and Harbor Conference also declared
that "The governments should recognise the desirability of decasualisation of
port personnel so that a stable and experienced pool of personnel may be
established".2
Though this is the stated objective of the great majority of dockers,
there are still a few who like the independence of casual work. They like to
be able to present themselves for a job when they feel like it, to be free of
any obligation to attend a call, sure enough of their ability to earn well on a
job when they want to, and enjoy a spell of leisure afterwards. They have
on occasions caused trouble when schemes for more regular employment are
being put through. The casual nature oí work in ports, of course, attracts
some workers who like to have as much freedom as possible in their job.
In fact, in New Zealand, the men refused an offer by the Port Employers'
Association for a guaranteed weekly wage (but with a system of allocation
to different employers as necessary) because they feared that their acceptance would mean the loss of the right of a worker to take a day off from
time to time. The unions there still oppose permanent employment.3
There are also some ports where purely casual work without guarantees
on the basis of a week or longer period will long continue to be inevitable.
These are small ports receiving only an occasional ship, usually discharging
or loading only a small tonnage. When the ship comes in, a number of men
turn up who usually have other jobs in the locality during the rest of the time,
and whose earnings as dockers are not their principal means of livelihood.
Doubtless the main problem arising out of the adoption of new methods
is, in some ports, that of dealing with redundancy, and much of this chapter
1
Resolution (No. 25) concerning the régularisation of employment of dockworkers,
preamble and para. 1. See Appendix 1.
2
Resolution XXI (Declaration of San José).
3
ILO: General Report: Effect Given to the Conclusions of the Previous Sessions,
Report I, Item 1 (a) and (b), Inland Transport Committee, Eighth Session (Geneva,
1966), p. 55.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

will be concerned with it. However, there are still many ports where
recourse is had to casual labour, and many others where only the first steps
towards decasualisation have so far been taken. Given the world-wide
character of the problem of regularising employment in ports, and the number of countries in which important changes in this field are taking place or
being discussed, it is worth while to consider the problems which arise at
all the various stages of the establishment or maintenance of a register of
dockers, its adjustment to changing circumstances, including problems both
of recruitment and of redundancy, the methods of allocating dockers to
various employers, and measures to provide guarantees of employment or
income. Consideration will also be given to the steps which may be taken
to reduce the extent of fluctuations in employment in ports.
REGISTRATION

The Need for a Register
In many parts of the world in the past, and in some ports today, anyone
could present himself for work at the dock gates, the pier, or the place of
recruitment. Those offering their services included men whose main usual
source of income was port work, but also other unemployed and casual
workers. In periods of unemployment, large numbers would come forward
in the hope of being selected. In addition, when earnings on a ship were
expected to be good, a number of men with other jobs would come along in
the hope of good pickings. The chances of all were prejudiced and the men
who sought to live by port work resented the intrusion of outsiders who
rendered their livelihood even more precarious than it would otherwise have
been. Employers often found that they had taken on many entirely unskilled
workers. Under conditions in which sheer brawn is less important than it
used to be, such methods cannot make for efficiency and are unsuited to
present-day needs.
Establishing the Register
A first step therefore consists in establishing a register of dockers. In so
doing, a number of problems at once arise.
Ports to Be Covered.
First, there is the question of which ports should be covered : it is clear
that these should include the main ports at which general cargo is handled.
The validity of a registration scheme will not be prejudiced if workers in
specialised ports and installations, such as those handling liquid fuel or ores,

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

are not covered, particularly if the numbers involved are small and if those
who are so employed are, as is often the case, given full-time permanent
employment. Where, however, work of a specialised nature is carried out
within a larger port where there is a registration scheme, a difficult problem
can arise. Thus in Genoa, for instance, a dispute arose over the authorisation
given to a steel plant adjacent to the port to have the ore and coal handled
at its own quays by its own dockers. In the end, despite a strike by the
dockers belonging to the general corporation, the steel plant's authorisation
to employ its own workers was maintained, and the same authorisation has
now been given to several other industrial establishments located in other
port areas in Italy.
There may also be some grounds for leaving out of a registration scheme,
as is the practice in some places, ports which deal exclusively with short sea
ferries at which the work is done by men having regular employment, for
instance with a railway company.
There may also, as has been mentioned, be great difficulty in including
very small ports, handling only small tonnages, in which it may prove impossible or unnecessary to aim at decasualisation, particularly if the work is
carried out by men who are normally otherwise employed.
Developing countries which have serious shortages of trained administrative staff may find it expedient to start with their principal port or ports
and extend any new scheme to other ports only when experience has been
gained and it becomes administratively possible to provide the staff required
to operate the scheme. This situation should not, of course, be used as a
pretext for undue delay. It is important that plans for the recruitment,
training and allocation of the necessary administrative staff be put in hand
as quickly as possible; all that is implied is that it is no good trying to run
an allocation scheme until the staff are there to handle the work and the
administrative regulations have been worked out. Preliminary studies of the
traffic flow may also be necessary.
Workers to Be Covered.
The next question that arises is what categories of workers should be
covered.
In principle, a registration scheme should include all the workers handling goods in port, whether en board ship or on the quay. In the United
Kingdom, for instance, the Dock Labour Scheme applies in principle to any
worker—employed or registered for employment—in, or in the vicinity of,
a port covered by the Scheme on work in connection with the loading,
unloading, movement or storage of cargoes, or work in connection with the
preparation of ships or other vessels for the receipt or discharge of cargo or

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

for leaving port. It is desirable, where practicable, to cover both the stevedores working on board ship and the workers on shore. If this is not done,
or if one group of workers enjoys guarantees of employment or income
denied to another, transfers become virtually impossible and this reduces
flexibility in the allocation of labour.
Where a country has difficulty in initiating a new registration scheme,
experts have suggested that it start with the group whose employment is most
subject to fluctuations—often the stevedores or holdsmen—and then proceed
to extend the scheme later.
Separate Registers for Different Categories of Dockers.
Where some workers possess special skills and others do not and where
the tradition of separation between ship and shore exists, it is quite frequent
to find separate registers for the men who work in the hold ("holdsmen" or
"stevedores") and for those on shore. Though this arrangement gives full
recognition to the special skill of the holdsmen or stevedores and is widely
practised, strong recommendations have been made in some countries in
favour of the single register for both groups, in order to increase the possibility of transfers from ship to shore or conversely. This would not preclude
each member of a composite gang having his preferred function within it.
Clear-cut distinctions become inappropriate in the case of container ships or
roll-on/roll-off ships.
Winchmen, deck-hands (who signal movements from the deck) and forklift truck operators also often constitute separate categories, and tallymen
usually do. Cranemen are most frequently also classed in a separate category.
In some ports they are permanently employed by a port authority or berth
owner and are in consequence sometimes outside any decasualisation scheme.
In a few ports there are also separate registers for various types of craftsmen, such as carpenters, coopers and packers. These are often the consequence of old traditions based on methods of handling cargo which are fast
dying out, and it would be undesirable to include them in any new scheme
unless the need for them can be clearly established.
In a few places there are separate registers for workers handling particular cargoes. In Genoa, for instance, there is a separate corporation of
dockers handling coal. However, the days of coal-heaving in sacks are over
and coal is handled in bulk. The numbers of workers required are small.
In Genoa, for instance, the once large corporation has fallen to just over
100 men, still too many to handle the 3 million tons a year received in the
port. In cases of this kind it would seem to be best to avoid creating special
registers and to merge the work with that covered by the main register.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Whom to Register.
Once the scope of a scheme has been determined, the problem of whom
to include in the register becomes acute.
The first approach is to determine the initial size of the register, call for
applications, and from the latter (assuming there are too many applications)
select the men who will be registered. If this can be carried through without
too much opposition, so much the better. The criteria for selection should
be objective and should, if possible, be agreed between the employers and
the unions, perhaps with the assistance of the ministry responsible for labour
matters. The criteria might aim at excluding from the outset those who have
not earned their living mainly from port work as well as those who do not
pass a medical examination certifying them as fit for the job. After that,
the extent to which the applicants have already worked in the port might be
taken into consideration, but this criterion will be difficult to apply as records
will often be lacking.
It may, however, prove impossible to apply the selective method from
the outset. Failure to register an applicant means depriving him of the possibility of working as a docker, and this may lead to action such as that
taken in New York by the International Longshoremen's Association, which
contested the right of the Waterfront Commission to deprive an applicant of
his opportunity to work in the port; there were court proceedings on the
issue, leading finally to a settlement in favour of the Commission. For such
reasons it has in some cases been found necessary to register initially all
applicants who can prove thai they have in a previous specified period worked
in the port, even if only for a relatively small number of hours. The strength
of the register will then be subsequently cut down, if that is necessary, by the
methods described below. In some developing countries this has been the
only way to get any scheme based on registration launched without those left
out of it feeling so aggrieved as to prejudice its success.
Regular and Reserve Registers.
An arrangement often adopted is to place the required number of
workers who fulfil certain conditions on a main register and the others on a
reserve register. A variant of this solution is to place the excess workers on
a "waiting list", either to the reserve register or directly to the main register.
The rights of those on the reserve are less extensive and their obligations less
exacting.
Practices of this kind are frequent but it is important to make the character of the second register clear. Those on the main register, if this privilege
is to mean anything, need to have a clear priority of opportunities for employ-

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

ment, whether allocation is by selection or rota. If the second register also
serves as a waiting list, recruitment should be only through this list.
In some ports there is a third category, the truly casual workers, who
are called upon only when needed and usually enjoy no special rights. They
are, however, in some cases registered, so that the fact that they have worked
as dockers may be noted, this giving them a claim to proper registration when
gaps have to be filled. Unless there is considerable unemployment in the
area and port work is considered particularly attractive, it is as a rule difficult
to maintain such an emergency reserve list in being. Where there is reasonably full employment such a list can only be regarded, from the point of view
of manpower policy, as a luxury which cannot always be afforded in view of
the fact that there is likely to be a dearth of applicants.
Dormant Registers.
In some countries, including for instance the United Kingdom, there is
a further group of men included in what is sometimes called a dormant
register. It includes dockers who have been granted leave of absence for a
period but with the right to return to employment in the port.

Leave may

have been granted for a number of reasons, the most usual being ill-health,
temporary invalidity—whether due to a work-related injury or not—and
military service. On return to port activity these men may be allocated to
an individual operator in regular employment or placed on the main or the
reserve registers, as the case may be.
Restriction of Employment to Registered Dockers
It should be an essential rule that if there is a registration scheme only
registered dockers should be employed, at any rate as long as there are any
available. It would be very unfair if outsiders were brought in when dockers
in the pool were underemployed; further, this would add to the cost of
operating it and make employers, at least under certain systems of financing,
reluctant to use it. Yet situations have arisen, in the absence of a clear rule
to the contrary, where employers have offered permanent jobs in dock work
to outsiders, leaving the reserve pool to carry an undue burden of underemployed men and to face a problem of redundancy.
Registration Cards
On registration the docker is usually given a card containing identification particulars and if possible a photograph, of a different type or colour
according to whether the docker is in the main register or in a reserve,

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

showing his category (foreman, winchman, deck-hand, etc.) and if possible
the related jobs he is able to carry out. In some cases a metal tally is also
issued, which is handed in when a docker is allocated to a job and picked up
by him at the end of it. In New York each docker is issued with a plastic
tally which, when inserted into an input peint, elicits through a computer
information as to his relative seniority status and eligibility for a particular
job.
It should be made an offence to use another man's card or to pass one's
card to another person, practices which are quite frequent in some ports. In
many places precautions are necessary against corruption in the issue of cards
and against fraud and forgery.
Size of the Register
It is obviously a difficult task to determine the correct size of the register
and to keep it adjusted to changing circumstances.
The essential need is to look well ahead and not to let short-term considerations prejudge the correct meeting of longer-term needs. The objective
has been clearly laid down by the Inland Transport Committee. It is "to
ensure the maintenance of a sufficient but not more than sufficient supply
of labour for the efficient turn-around of ships, while providing regular
dockers with the maximum degree of employment". 1

Much can be done purely on the basis of experience, but background
information is also needed, particularly statistical data on the movement of
ships and cargo requiring handling. Import statistics by value or tonnage
alone are not very helpful. What is needed is the tonnage of general cargo
broken down, if possible, into the following categories :
(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)

cargo handled in containers ;
cargo palletised or strapped into unit loads ;
cargo handled in roll-on/roll-off ships;
bagged cargo;
other miscellaneous general cargo.

A separate assessment should be made of bulk cargo requiring any substantial servicing by dockers, for instance coal, ore and grain, whose handling
is not yet fully mechanised in some ports. Current statistics usually fail to
provide a breakdown of this nature, and more detailed records may therefore
need to be kept as a guide to the performance of a port and its needs in
manpower.
1
Resolution (No. 25) concerning the régularisation of employment of dockworkers,
para. 1. See Appendix 1.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

Whoever is determining the size of the register has to bear in mind
prospective trends in trade. Here a link with national planning authorities
is obviously desirable. Particularly in developing countries, the accomplishment of long-term economic plans is likely to have repercussions on imports
and exports, and these should be analysed sufficiently far in advance to
ascertain their impact on the manpower needs for port work.
A forecast of changes in cargo-handling techniques has to be made, and
this is often very difficult. Port operators who intend changing their systems and installing new equipment should be urged to inform the dock labour
authority ahead of time, so that adjustments in manpower can be planned
pari passu with the introduction of new methods. However obvious this
may sound, it remains true that in a great many cases forecasts of the manpower needed are based on the assumption that cargo-handling techniques
will remain virtually unchanged, so that when the changes are made they
produce more redundancy than would have been the case if more foresight
had been shown.
One of the most difficult problems is to decide on the size of the allowance which must be made for fluctuations in traffic. From a purely shipping
point of view, the ideal would no doubt be to have enough men to service
the maximum number of ships in port at any one time, or at any rate to
service the maximum throughput possible given other limitations in port
capacity (berthing, warehouses, customs, inland clearance, etc.). If fluctuations in traffic are wide, such solutions would leave too many men unemployed or underemployed for most of the time, and if they were in receipt
of a guaranteed income this would throw a heavy burden of cost on operators
(and, of course, on the government, in cases where the latter participates in
the costs). A compromise has therefore to be arrived at, based on a calculation which shows, for each level of manpower, how many ships would probably be kept waiting, or be undermanned with dockers, and for how long.
Such a hypothetical estimate would need to be constantly checked in the light
of experience. It should not be based on too rigid an approach, as it should
be assumed that every possible measure would be taken to meet peak loads
by recourse to overtime, adjustment of holiday periods, and ingenuity in
making the best use of the available labour force.
A further factor has to be taken into account, namely whether the port
will operate on a one-shift, two-shift or round-the-clock basis. Various
aspects of this problem will be brought up in Chapter 4, but the decision
taken with regard to it affects the decisions on the strength of the register.
Shift work implies a larger register and greater fluctuations in employment,
but this may be a minor inconvenience when compared to the advantages
of ensuring a faster turn-around of ships.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Once the register is established, it needs to be kept under constant review
in the light of all the variables referred to, and no doubt others as well.
Forward projections need to be made rather than minor adjustments based
on short-term fluctuations. It is therefore useful to provide for a review of
the situation at fixed intervals, say every three months or so ; this is already
done in many ports. Changes are liable to be made too late if re-examination
of the strength of the register takes place only when one of the parties concerned presses for it.
Reducing Turnover
In some ports, particularly in industrialised countries, the turnover of
dock labour is unduly large. This is also true in some developing countries.
To take an extreme case, in Lomé, Togo, the entire labour force, with the
exception of foremen and workers of particular skills, is changed every six
months, in order to provide employment opportunities.1
Large turnover is obviously undesirable, as it means a constant effort to
recruit and to give the new entrants at least a minimum of training. It is
clearly prejudicial to efficiency and to the development of the trained "allround" docker. It constitutes a heavy cost both to the public authority and
to the industry.
In order to meet the situation, it is necessary to know why the docker
leaves his work. Perhaps it is simply that other occupations offer more
attractive terms as regards income, hours of work and leisure. The irregularity of income so frequent in dock work is clearly a disadvantage, as are
the irregular hours, and, where it exists, the obligation to work at week-ends.
These disadvantages may have to be, and in fact usually are, compensated
by cash benefits, such as high overtime rates and shift bonuses. Unsatisfactory labour-management relations may also contribute to high turnover.
Among countries which have taken steps to reduce turnover one may cite
the case of Poland, where long-service bonuses, payable each year on a rising
scale, are offered as an inducement to reduce turnover.
Recruitment
The first case of adjustment of the register to be considered is recruitment,
firstly to fill vacancies caused by separations and secondly to provide for any
increases which may have been decided on.
1
A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, op. cit., Part I, para. 110.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

Difficulties in Recruitment.
In many countries men show marked reluctance to becoming dockers.
If this difficulty arises, a first and necessary response must be to improve
conditions, not only as regards wages and hours of work, but also through
régularisation schemes and other similar measures discussed in this report.
It may also be necessary to improve the "image" of the docker in the
minds of other workers and of potential young entrants. This is a complex
question, governed by many different factors. A major step towards its solution is to give the docker the status of a skilled worker. In addition, better
amenities can be provided, so that the docker may, if he so wishes, take a
shower and change into town clothes before leaving work. There is also a
need to change the attitude of the authorities, of employers, of trade unions,
of other workers and of society in general towards the docker, so as to ensure
that he is accorded a greater degree of respect. In many countries a major
public relations job needs to be done to displace the persistent but outdated
view that the docker is nothing more than an unskilled casual labourer.
Priorities in Recruiting.
When new workers are taken on, the basic principle is that permanent
employment, where it exists, or priority in getting allocated, should be offered
in the first place to those in the reserve or pool. This is only fair, as these
workers will have suffered the drawbacks of more irregular employment than
the others and should have the first chance of a steadier job. The reserve
should be filled in the first place from a "waiting list", if one is kept. If this
is not done, there is no point in having a waiting list.
For the rest, there are in many ports certain priorities to be observed.
In the United Kingdom, for instance, the employers' and workers' organisations may submit names for registration. In practice, the employers seldom
use this privilege and leave it to the unions, which usually give preference
to the sons of dockers. Although this hereditary principle is now no longer
as important as it once was, in Italy the corporations still give priority to sons
of their members, and in Malta, where there is severe unemployment, an
order of succession among close relatives has been established for the filling
of jobs left vacant as a result of dockers being killed or having to leave jobs
as the result of employment injuries. In certain other countries the eldest
son, or, if he does not wish to apply, other eligible relatives in accordance
with an agreed order, of dockers who leave the industry are placed on a
waiting list, drawn upon when vacancies have to be filled.
Priority should also clearly be given to trainees who have qualified for
the job, especially where, as in the Netherlands, they attend a vocational
school before they reach the minimum age of admission to work in ports.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Recruitment and Manpower Policy.
When priority categories do not suffice, recourse may be had to outside
recruitment.
In many cases, particularly where there is unemployment in the area,
there is no problem in finding enough applicants. A selection is then possible on the basis of previous experience, age, physique and the results of a
medical examination.
The normal course should, however, be to go through the employment
services of the country. In cases where there is full employment in the area
around the port, but labour is available elsewhere, the recruiting policy for
the port has to be fitted in with the manpower policy of the country or region.
Finding men in the port area has obvious advantages in that they are more
readily at hand for shift work. To insist on recruiting in the area, however,
may increase the upward pressure on wages and may therefore run counter
to the anti-inflation policy being pursued. Alternatively, men may be brought
in from the neighbouring countryside, as has been done in the Netherlands.
Even in this case, however, the employment offered has in some cases had the
effect of reducing the pressure on getting industries located in the rural areas.
The two policies—taking labour to the port or bringing industries to the
village—have had to be reconciled. Another difficulty has been that dockers
have often had to be given time off for peak season activities in agriculture.
The cost of employing such workers is also high, as they have to be collected
and brought in by special buses, and, in a few cases, lodged in hostels during
the week and transported to and from home at week-ends.
Medical Examination.
A frequent condition for recruitment is ability to pass a medical examination. This constitutes a reasonable requirement for dock work, but it is
essential that the test be a genuine one, and be seen to be fairly conducted.
There have been attempts to use the medical examination as a means of
preventing admission to the job. This was done, for instance, by the New
York Shipping Association, in agreement with the union, as part of a struggle
to challenge the right of the Waterfront Commission to determine the strength
of the register.
Some Undesirable Recruitment Practices.
In some countries labour is provided by contractors who provide the
whole gang, pay the men themselves, and collect the money on behalf of the
gang. This practice used to be prevalent, particularly in some Asian countries,
and is still occasionally to be found. It is liable to give rise to serious abuses

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

in that there is often no check on the methods used to recruit the men or on
the payments made to members of the gang. In Nigeria, for instance, labour
contractors are paid on a tonnage basis but the workers are on time payment.
Under this system of recruitment normal labour-management relations are
impossible.
A variant of this method is where a labour contractor recruits labour,
very often at a distance from the port or even in another country, and receives
a kickback of a proportion of the worker's wages for an initial period.
These practices have now been abandoned almost everywhere, and strong
recommendations have been made by experts who have come across them
in some ports to ensure that they are given up. The Inland Transport Committee, too, has recommended that "recruitment through labour contractors,
where still practised, should be eliminated".1
Cutting Down the Register
The trade unions have understandably been concerned that every effort
should be made in the port industry at the highest possible levels to avoid
mass dismissals. Nevertheless, circumstances arise in which the difficult
task of drastically reducing the number of workers on the register must be
faced. The necessity for such action is likely to arise more often in the
future than it has done in the past owing to the rapid development of technological changes affecting ports which have been described in Chapter 1.
A distinction must, however, be drawn between three types of situation.
The first is when an over-large initial register has to be reduced to meet the
real needs of the port. The second situation is where adjustments can readily
be made through natural wastage, without any actual redundancy arising.
The third situation is where natural wastage is not enough, and special
measures are needed.
Adjusting an Initial Register.
As an example of the first type of situation, an illustration may be given
from the Port of New York (which covers both sides of the Hudson).
To remove the evils which had been associated with earlier methods of
recruitment and allocation through the "shape-up", a Waterfront Commission
of New York Harbor was set up by the states of New York and New Jersey
in 1953. In previous years the labour force had ranged from around 48,000
to 51,000 (with a drop to about 42,000 in 1950), far in excess of the real
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 30 (b).

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

needs of the port. Daily employment seldom reached 20,000 and averaged
only about 15,000. A large proportion of the workers were attached to the
port only on an occasional basis. The proportion who worked less than
700 hours a year in the pert—the minimum figure regarded as proving a
significant attachment to port work—was well over 50 per cent of the total
from 1948 to 1953. The Waterfront Commission was required to establish
a register and then to remove from it, at regular intervals, persons who failed
to work as longshoremen or to apply at the information centres set up by the
Commission for "such minimum number of days as the Commission may
establish". In addition, workers with certain criminal records were to be
eliminated from the register. During the first six-month phase in 1954 the
minimum qualifying period was set at eight days in each of the six months.
Over 16,000 men failed to meet this standard, but any man removed from the
register had the right of appeal, and absences on grounds of health, paid
holidays, military service and other good causes were taken into account.
The number of men who appealed was 9,000, and the net cut was 7,675.
The operation was repeated, the standard being adjusted to eight days in
each of five months out of six.1 Twenty-one successive decasualisation
operations brought the number of registered longshoremen and checkers
down from a peak of over 50,000 in 1952 to under 24,000 in 1965.2 In
1966, when a guaranteed income was introduced, 21,000 dockers met the
requirement of 700 hours in the period of 1 April 1965 to 31 March 1966.
It should be noted that even while these decasualisation operations proceeded, new entrants were registered. This was strongly opposed by the
union, and for a time by the employers also, but the Commission argued that
it had a duty to meet the manpower requirements of the port, and that it had
no right to refuse registrations. In any case, many of the new entrants failed
to get enough work to meet the standards set for maintaining registration,
and either left voluntarily or were cut out in a subsequent decasualisation
operation.
On the Pacific Coast of the United States, before the scheme of guaranteed employment came into effect in 1960, the distribution of hours worked
by dockers showed that 87 per cent of the casuals (the non-registered
dockers) had less than 300 hours of employment in the port in a year. The
registered men in 1958 worked on average 1,950 hours, the casuals 122 hours.
Registered men accounted for about 92 per cent of the hours worked.s
1
Vernon H. JENSEN : Hiring of Dock Workers (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard University Press, 1964), and "Decasualization of Employment on the New York Waterfront",
in Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 11, No. 4, July 1958.
2
Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor: Annual Report, 1964-65, p. 16.
3
National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Maritime Cargo Transportation Conference: San Francisco Port Study, Vol. 1 (Washington, 1964), p. 23.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

The preliminary operation of bringing a register down to a reasonable
level is an essential precondition of any genuine decasualisation and offer of
guaranteed employment ; it is also essential to the building up of a properly
organised and administered labour force. In the absence of such arrangements serious difficulties can arise. In New Orleans, for instance, where
labour is casual except for that employed by two fruit companies, the number of longshoremen ranged between 11,500 and 15,000 annually in the
seven-year period ending 1962-63. Weekly employment requirements were
most frequently from 6,000 to 6,200 workers, only rarely up to 7,000. * It
is considered that only after a large number of the casual employees have
been eliminated can measures to provide further job security be introduced
for the basic workforce.2 A similar situation exists in several other East
Coast and Gulf ports.
In New Zealand the employers regularly purge the registers of men who
cease regularly to attend for work.
In Malaysia, where a decasualisation scheme is being introduced, it has
been urged that those persons who only seek dock work to supplement the
income they receive from other employment should not be registered.
In several ports of Asia and Africa where the workforce is above that
really needed, experts have recommended that, once a régularisation scheme
has been drawn up, the numbers registered be kept within the necessary
limits on the basis of criteria such as those outlined above, or, if the initial
registration is too large, that the workforce be cut down to that needed.
Medical examination, as has been pointed out, can be a means of avoiding the registration of men not fit for the job on the basis of medical criteria.
In dealing with old-established dockers, however, the medical examination
may have to be applied with leniency, with recommendations that where a
man is not physically fit for the more strenuous jobs efforts should be made
to employ him on less strenuous work (deck-hand, storekeeper, watchman,
tallyman).
Limited Reductions.
The second situation, namely one in which the cut needed can be secured
through natural wastage only, gives rise to little difficulty. Separations will
arise from death, incapacity and retirement. The proportions involved will
depend largely on the average age of the workforce.
1
Phyllis GROOM: "Hiring Practices for Longshoremen", in Monthly Labor Review,
Nov. 1965 (also issued as a reprint by the Waterfront Commission of New York Harbor).
2
United States Department of Labor: Manpower Utilization—Job Security in the
Longshore Industry—Port of New Orleans (Washington, 1964), p. 33.

TECHNICAL AND"SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

A number of men will leave voluntarily, the proportion depending on the
economic situation in the country or region, on the possibilities of alternative
employment, and on conditions of work in the port. In a developing country
where jobs are scarce there are not likely to be many voluntary departures.
Further, the existence of guaranteed employment or income will naturally
tend to reduce the number of voluntary separations, and that sometimes at
a time when they would be welcome.
There may be some separations "for cause", that is for disciplinary
reasons. A promise of "no redundancy" does not mean that serious breaches
of discipline, such as theft, will not involve dismissal or suspension, in accordance with recognised practice. When there is an over-abundance of labour,
there is also usually a tendency to tighten up on discipline, and this is quite
understandable.
Normally, a situation in which numbers have to be reduced will be
accompanied by a stoppage of recruiting. This cannot, however, be absolute,
as some trained specialists niay have to be drawn in from outside if they
are not available within the existing force. Further, if training schemes for
juniors exist, it would be unwise and unduly harsh to shut out the trainees.
In the great majority of cases in which registration schemes exist, it has
recently been possible to make such downward adjustments as were necessary
(once the register had been adjusted to normal needs) by means of natural
wastage. The costs of having to give guarantees to a workforce sometimes
slightly in excess of needs were in most cases more than compensated for by
increased security for the dockers, by the ability to meet all or most demands
for labour easily, and by improved labour-management relations, with favourable effects on productivity. It is when redundancy threatens that restrictive
practices are held on to most tenaciously.
In normal circumstances the speed of change is such that adjustments to
the strength of the register carefully planned ahead of time can be brought
about by natural wastage at a reasonable cost to the port industry. Clearly,
this should be the practice followed where at all possible.
In the period preceding 1967, it may be said that the volume of international trade and the general economic situation were such that, once the
initial strength had been brought into line, cases in which dismissals were
necessary were very rare. In many cases, in fact, recruitment was necessary.
Dealing with Labour Surpluses.
However, situations are now arising in which there is a surplus of labour
which it may not be possible to reabsorb through natural wastage and cessation of recruitment. This surplus may arise from the introduction of new
techniques of handling cargo. The fact that in some cases dockers have

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

recognised the necessity of abandoning some out-of-date work rules so that
advantage can be taken of new handling methods may actually increase
the labour surplus. That is the reason why such concessions are made only
in exchange for improvements in conditions of work and on the understanding that they will not result in dismissals. Examples of such successful negotiations will be given in Chapter 9. In cases where the rule of "no dismissals", except for cause, is not absolute, certain procedures, such as the
approval of the public authority and full consultation of the workers' organisations concerned, must be gone through before workers are dismissed.
If there are to be no dismissals and natural wastage is not enough, certain
measures may be taken to cut down the register.
One of them is an offer of guaranteed minimum employment or income.
If only those who have proved their attachment to the industry by working
a certain minimum number of hours a year as dockers can qualify, then the
casual fringe, seeing preference in employment going to the regulars, will drift
away because their earnings from port work will tend to be even lower than
before.
The next group which may be cut down is that of the older workers.
Even where a state pension scheme exists, there will be a tendency for the
older men to stay on if they can if benefits are low in relation to earnings;
other dockers will often make it easier for them to do so by carrying an older
man or two in a gang. In the United Kingdom, for instance, the unions
made it clear that the older men would not be dropped until they were
covered by satisfactory supplementary pensions. The need to keep on men
who are no longer able to pull their weight is not conducive to efficiency,
and this has led to schemes for lump-sum retirement grants or supplementary
pensions such as will be described in Chapter 9. In the United Kingdom
such a scheme is under active discussion.
Adjustments on this basis have been considered in several ports, quite
apart from the introduction of major new schemes. In Rotterdam, for
instance, recent changes led to the conclusion that there were 400 men too
many in the reserve. One of the measures agreed to was to pension off
125 men at 60 instead of 65. In Hamburg discussions took place regarding
the necessity of reducing the register by 300 men. The suggestion was made
that workers above 60 should be pensioned off, and agreement was reached
between the parties as regards 150 men. Encouragement to such earlier
retirement was later given by bringing their retirement benefits up to those
they would have secured on retiring at 65. In Genoa, where the retirement
age of 60 is strictly adhered to (with a supplementary pension), consideration
is being given to earlier retirement from 55 onwards, if this is required to
secure the necessary reduction in the register.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

If the reduction in the labour force in the upper age bracket is not adequate, there remains the possibility, if a promise of "no dismissals" has been
made, of offering lump-sum compensation to others willing to leave. The
sum involved and the workers entitled to it are a matter for negotiation.
If the prospects in port work for new entrants are poor, there may be
grounds for encouraging the younger workers who have the best chance of
finding employment elsewhere to leave by offering them lump-sum compensation.
Finally, recourse may have to be had to dismissals after all. In such
cases it is most important that every attempt be made to reach agreement on
the subject between the employers' and workers' organisations. Adequate
notice should be given, and the employment service organisation brought into
the picture, so that dockers can receive all possible help in finding other
employment. Thus in Rotterdam it was agreed that part of the redundancy
could be met by dispensing with the services of some of the men brought
into the port from a considerable distance by bus, and who had not been
dockers before.
Most countries have legislation dealing with the termination of employment in general, and in some countries compensation is offered in certain
cases.1 The International Transport Workers' Federation has urged that
"when labour has to be laid off, provision should be made for adequate
severance payments".2 It would seem reasonable that the procedures laid
down should be followed in the case of dismissals of dockers, and any compensation laid down by law or otherwise customary should be paid. However, it can happen that, because of the traditionally casual nature of work
in ports, these are not covered by the legislation in question. In such cases
it might be hoped that similar procedures would nevertheless be followed and
equivalent compensation offered. In the United Kingdom, for instance,
where ports are not covered by the Redundancy Payments Act, 1965, the
National Dock Labour Board stated that "the spirit and intention of that Act
are followed as closely as the relevant circumstances permit".3 Since then,
the promise of "no redundancy" has been made. A request by the National
Association of Port Employers to the Government for financial assistance for
the payment of separation allowances has, however, been turned down.4
1

Termination of Employment (Dismissal and Lay-off), Report VII (1), International
Labour Conference, Geneva, 1962 (Geneva, ILO, 1961), and the Termination of
Employment Recommendation, 1963.
2
Statement on the Social and Trade Union Consequences of Containerization,
op. cit.
'National Dock Labour Board: Annual Report and Accounts, 1966 (London,
1967), para. 61.
*The Economist, 24 Feb. 1968, p. 71.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

ALLOCATION

Systems of Allocation
A port or nation-wide scheme for the régularisation of the employment
of dockers implies an efficient system for allocating them to their place of
employment.
The difficulty of the task will depend in part on the numbers of operators
and workers involved, the extent and layout of the port or ports, the ease
of communication between parts of the area to be covered, and the variety
of cargoes handled. Where there is only a single operator in the port, the
task is relatively simple. Where, however, there are a number of operators
handling a variety of types of cargo, it is important to ensure that the system
of allocation enables the most efficient use to be made of the available labour.
When a system of allocation is devised decisions will have to be taken regarding how much of the labour should be in regular employment and how much
in a reserve pool, and whether allocation should be primarily by selection,
seniority or rota.
The objective should be that "every operator is able to obtain, when
needed, the labour required in order to secure a quick turn-around of ships,
or, in case of shortage, has a fair share of such labour". The system "should
also aim at reducing the idle shifts for the dockworkers to the lowest limit
compatible with the necessity of maintaining a number of registered dockworkers sufficient, but not more than sufficient, to meet the needs of the
port".1
Regular Employment.
It has already been indicated that the most desirable solution is for
dockers to be employed on a regular basis.
This, in fact, is the case in a number of countries. In the USSR and
Poland2, for instance, and in some other countries where port work is carried out by state undertakmgs, the docker is employed by the State on a
regular basis. In any port he will be allocated to different berths as needed,
and if there are workers not required for work in connection with a ship they
may be employed for other duties in the warehouses, including maintenance
work. They draw their pay on a regular basis in any case. In other countries similar arrangements exist for at least a proportion of workers in many
port undertakings, particularly in connection with warehouse work.
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 18.
2
For a description of the system in Poland see Tadeusz SZCZEPANIAK: "Stabilisation
of Dockworkers' Employment in Polish Ports", in International Labour Review,
Vol. 90, No. 6, Dec. 1964, pp. 503-520.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

In the United Kingdom the placement of all dockers (except for a few
awaiting allocation by the Dock Labour Board) with individual employers on
a regular basis was achieved in September 1967. At the start it meant that
most employers in some of the ports, for instance London, had to take on
more men than they really needed. This situation arose out of the underemployment existing at the time of the introduction of the scheme, due in
part to trade conditions and in part to technological change, as well as out of
the savings in manpower consequent on the abandonment of restrictive practices and the introduction of the new system. The allocation of gangs was
worked out by the local Dock Labour Boards. Dockers were given the
opportunity of indicating wMch employers they would prefer to work for,
and the employers could indicate the men they would like to have. Owing
to the practices previously existing, a fair proportion of the men had already
been in regular weekly employment with the same employer, or had been
frequently picked for jobs with a given employer, so that more or less regular
contracts had previously existed for many of the dockers.
The rigidity of the scheme is mitigated by a provision to the effect that
a permanent worker may be transferred temporarily to another registered
employer in accordance with arrangements to be approved by the local Dock
Labour Board. The regulax employer should, however, avoid making men
available for temporary transfer to an "excessive extent", defined as involving
over 20 per cent of their working time in any 12 months.
In Montreal also, a new scheme involves allocating all the dockers to
one of nine operators, who keeps control over them. However, an operator
is obliged to lend his gangs to others when there is no work to offer them at
a given moment, and likewise he is obliged, once his gangs have attained
their quota of guaranteed hours, to take on those of other companies who
have not at the time attained their quota. This system was introduced
because when gangs were permanently allocated to an employer there was
considerable inequality in the distribution of hours of work and in income.
In the opinion of the commission which determined the system, the loyalty
of gangs to their employer and continuity of relations between shippers and
their gangs is safeguarded in large measure, while rotation is reduced to a
minimum. A week-by-week check is kept to ensure that each gang gets its
fair share of the work.
Part-Regular, Part-Pool Employment.
Failing regular employment, the most usual practice is to have part of
the labour force in regular employment with a given operator and the other
part in a pool or reserve. This arrangement aims at reaping the advantages
of both systems.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

This was, for instance, the system in force in the United Kingdom before
September 1967. The National Dock Labour Board was the legal employer
and controlled the over-all situation. In 1965 about 20 per cent of the labour
force were in regular weekly employment, though a substantial further proportion was so often picked by the same employer as to have in fact quasiregular employment with him. In Rotterdam the proportion in regular
employment is approximately 75 to 80 per cent; in Hamburg it was over
80 per cent by 1965. The determination of the correct proportion will
depend on the extent to which the numbers required by individual employers
fluctuate. Regular employment has obvious advantages, but if it reaches too
high a proportion in a mixed system the whole impact of fluctuation in
demand is thrown on the pool workers. This makes their employment much
more irregular and makes it more difficult to keep them in the pool. In
addition, the overhead cost of maintaining the pool, when measured against
the wages paid to pool workers, becomes high and acts as a deterrent to
employers to have recourse to the pool under certain systems of financing.
Further, if, as happens in certain developing countries, only a privileged
few obtain permanent employment or even enjoy priority, with much larger
numbers remaining casual, it can hardly be said that a scheme of régularisation really exists, or at any rate that it works.
Although the mixed system has many advantages, unless pool workers
are given very substantial guarantees they may become jealous of those who
get regular jobs. This aspect of the question will be referred to later.
In a few countries there are, or have been at times, two categories of
pool workers: those who enjoy certain guarantees and those who do not.
The latter may be a casual fringe, sometimes with other jobs as well, or they
may be a genuine "waiting list", anxious to get onto the more permanent
register. As already pointed out, it is becoming more and more difficult to
maintain such a marginal reserve in existence.
In some countries virtually all the workers are in the pool. This is, for
instance, the case in France, New Zealand and the United States.
Allocation by Selection, Seniority or Rota.
In the matter of allocation by selection, seniority or rota there are divergent approaches.
Employers not unnaturally prefer to be able to exercise some control
over the choice of the men they employ, and to be able to select them instead
of having to accept whoever is allocated to them by rota. In addition, selection makes for efficiency because the men tend to specialise in handling
certain types of cargo and the employers' agents know which gangs are best

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

for certain jobs. For their part, the men, under most systems of selection,
are in a position to push themselves forward with a view to being taken on
by an employer they like or working on a ship that pays well on account of
the piece rates payable on its cargo, the length of the assignment or the
probability of overtime or week-end work. Conversely, the docker may try
to avoid getting picked by certain employers or working an unpopular cargo.
One example of a difficult situation arising out of the method of selection
was a strike in Barcelona in 1968. Selection was by rota, but dockers
insisted on choosing their employers in order to get rates above the minimum
by servicing urgent ships. When the authorities insisted on the rota, the
dockers refused to present themselves.1
Although, therefore, there are substantial advantages for both parties in
the system of allocation by selection, the fundamental drawback to it is the
amount of rivalry and jealousy it can generate. Unless a port has sound
traditions and operates a strict control, and unless there is a union prepared
to resist any abuses and itself above any suspicion of corrupt practices,
abuses can occur. One form is the kickback by the worker of part of his
earnings to the recruiting agent or foreman who selects him. There is often
a risk of violence when men push themselves forward to be picked. It was
these abuses and others thai led to the legislation of 1953 strictly regulating
the allocation procedures in ihe Port of New York.
In the absence of suitable income guarantees, and if there are too many
dockers, selection procedures breed uncertainty and lead men who get a job
to hold on to it even at the cost of working round the clock in consecutive
shifts so as to make the best of their opportunity. For the same reason, the
system makes it more difficult to overcome practices restricting flexibility in
the use of labour.
The selection system can therefore work smoothly only where there is
strict control to eliminate undesirable practices, impartial supervision of the
selection and allocation operations, and a good spirit among the men concerned.
Where selection is not practised, allocation of the pool workers may be
by seniority or by rota or a combination of both. Thus in New York, for
instance, the gangs normally attached to a pier are taken on first, followed
by other available gangs attached to another pier in the same district.
Workers not in gangs are selected according to strict seniority rules. Each
man carries a priority rating; the first taken on, after pierhead recruitment
is exhausted, are those in the geographical sector, then those in the borough,
each individual in accordance with his priority rating. The circle of those
1

The Economist,

13 July 1968, p. 64.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

eligible progressively extends. There are variations for different parts of the
port area. Checkers have a different priority sequence. On the Pacific
Coast of the United States men are allocated in such a way as to spread the
number of hours worked fairly among them. Even before the present
guarantee of employment came into effect, gangs were dispatched so that all
gangs got within 50 hours of the annual average work opportunity, with a
reasonable balance of work opportunity between day and night shifts.l
In many developing countries, where the keen competition for scarce
jobs means that any undue favouritism could readily flare up into real trouble,
and where the aptitudes of the dockers are often relatively undifferentiated,
there is a tendency to favour a rotation system. This at any rate ensures
fairness and puts a stop to rivalries. Normally, all men get about the same
share of good and bad jobs, and they gain a more varied experience.
Even where a rotation system exists, however, there are substantial
advantages in letting a gang or a worker stay with the same operator for as
long as is needed to work a given ship, provided no man works consecutive
shifts. The advantage is that the worker knows the ship, the cargo, the
warehouse and their characteristics, so that there is greater efficiency and
more continuity in the work. This continuity also reduces the number of
men who have to attend the call, thus saving much time both in the allocation
procedures and in getting on to the job.
Any rota system should be worked in such a way as to ensure fair distribution of the hours worked among different gangs or workers.
Allocation by Gangs or by Individuals.
In some countries allocation was at first carried out by assigning individual workers. This had the drawback that much time could be wasted in
making up gangs with the right number of specialist workers. It is much
more efficient to ensure allocation by basic gangs—that is gangs of minimum
strength—in the first place. The members of the gang develop a team spirit
and get accustomed to working together, and the gang leader knows his men
and their abilities. Selection and allocation can thus be carried out much
faster.
It is, of course, still necessary also to allocate a number of individuals,
firstly to complete gangs to the minimum number required if one or more of
their members fails to turn up, and secondly to provide extra men when larger
gangs are required for certain types of cargo or ship.
For the system to work efficiently, there should be a willingness on the
part of gangs to start work even if they are incomplete, because it may take
1

San Francisco Port Study, op. cit., Vol. 1, pp. 24-25.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

time to allocate and move the replacement men. This condition is usually,
but not universally, accepted, sometimes subject to the gang receiving and
sharing out the pay that would have gone to the missing member. Often
gangs agree to carry on short-handed if they are satisfied that every reasonable effort is being made to find a fill-in, but would refuse if they thought
that an attempt was being made to effect a saving at their expense or to
prove a case for working with a smaller gang.
Procedures
Whatever the system of allocation adopted, sound procedures—particularly in the matter of hiring, reducing the need for attendance at calls, and
transfers—are essential if it is to function effectively.
Hiring.
Efficiency in getting the dockers promptly to work depends to a considerable extent on the hiring procedures followed. So does the avoidance of
resentment.
The objections to picking men at a "shape-up" without adequate control
have already been mentioned. The process, even when supervised, has been
likened to a slave market, where often physical strength still plays a predominant part in securing a job. This practice still exists in a few ports, particularly—but by no means only—in developing countries. It is to be hoped
that it will be suppressed or brought under strict control.
Where selection is used, it is usual for it to take place in a call stand or
hiring hall where the men can assemble under shelter. In some cases the
pay offices and other administrative services are housed in the same building.
Good telephone or telex links with the offices of the main operators and with
related hiring halls are most important.
The men are usually grouped by categories (stevedores or holdsmen,
winchmen, deck-hands, fork-lift truck Operators, quaymen, tallymen, or
whatever categories happen to be in use in the port). The agents of the
employers or operators, having indicated their needs, proceed to select the
men, whether individually or by gangs, supplemented by spare and extra men.
The usual practice is for the men selected to hand over their books to the
agent. In many ports all operations are supervised by the public authority,
or by the agents of a board, such as the Dock Labour Board in the United
Kingdom, which runs the hiring halls.
To reduce the cases of direct confrontation between agent and docker,
a system is in use in Rotterdam by which the dockers place their books in
the box of the agent of the employer for whom they would prefer to work.
The box is open-faced, so that the docker can see how many books are

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

already placed in it and relate that to the number of men needed, on the
basis of information posted. This gives the docker free choice. The foreman now exercises his choice among the books when they are collected. The
books of dockers who are not selected are handed over to the controller of
the hiring hall, who makes the final allocations.1
It is, of course, necessary for the officials in charge of operations (whether
from the employment service, a tripartite or joint body, or an employers'
association) to be in attendance at the hiring hall well before the actual call,
in order to assess the demand for dockers of various categories. In some
cases, where there is a shortage of labour, decisions have to be taken to
"ration" employers and to give priority to certain ships (for instance passenger ships and those carrying perishable goods).
The initial selection, normally by gangs, is usually quickly done. Extra
men are then selected. Thereafter comes the more difficult task of trying to
meet unsatisfied demands for labour out of those not initially selected. This
may involve the making up of gangs and may call for a certain amount of
give and take. For instance, men who are not qualified as winchmen or
deck-hands, but have some experience and are willing to take on the job,
may be accepted by employers in order to complete a gang.
Finally, where there are several hiring halls within a port or a group of
related ports, attempts are made to meet the unsatisfied needs of one centre
by calling on the others. Where necessary, transport has to be laid on. In
such cases operations may well extend beyond the normal starting time for
work and, as the men have to be paid, any delays are expensive.
Where seniority or rota systems apply, the gangs or men allocated,
usually indicated by their numbers, are shown on a board. The controller
gives them instructions as to where to report and notifies the operator.
In New York a more elaborate system is in use. A computer linked
with 56 input and output units located in 13 hiring centres run by the
Waterfront Commission maintains all relevant records and works out the
allocation. A first phase covers requests at the same pier, hiring agents
automatically registering their requests, including those for gangs whose
employment carries on with the same employer. When this is completed,
the computer supplies lists of gangs available in a wider area (section and
borough) and further hirings can be effected. A subsequent phase covers
the extra men (as distinct from gangs) required, including those carrying on
in the same job. By this means usually about 90 per cent of those required
on any given day receive their orders the day before. At the next phase,
the so-called "casual hiring", men left over who are eligible for the guarantee,
1

For further details see JENSEN, Hiring of Dock Workers, op. cit., pp. 238-239.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

have to report to their own hiring centres or be liable to suffer a reduction
in their guarantee, and casuals not eligible for the guarantee may offer their
services. Selection is based on a system of seniority or priority ratings,
recorded on each worker's plastic tally, which he feeds into the computer
input at his hiring centre. The information is passed through the central
computer, which checks whether the man is supposed to have reported
elsewhere and also checks his seniority position. It provides the worker
within five or six seconds with eligibility information required for hiring,
which can then proceed. However, some difficulties have occurred. A
number of those concerned by-pass the computer system. Hiring agents
prefer to see the men they engage rather than work from lists and sometimes
make arrangements directly in advance of the formal programme ; sometimes
dockworkers fail to turn up at jobs to which they have been allocated but
do not like (perhaps because they are at other piers or in other districts),
and report for work and get taken on at other locations in spite of the computer advice that they are supposed to be working elsewhere. Further consideration is being given to the resulting situations. *
Reducing the Need for Attendance at Calls.
It is obviously more convenient and practical if the docker can go straight
to work without having to attend at the hiring hall. Those in regular employment with a given employer of course do so, as do those who are automatically re-engaged to carry on work on a ship on which they have started. As
the example of New York shows, only a small proportion may have to attend
at the hiring centre.
In many ports, where recruitment is by gangs, gang foremen, who are
presumed to be in touch with their men, can be notified in advance of their
allocation. In the Netherlands leaders of gangs coming in from the countryside are notified ahead of time as to where the men should be driven to.
The men are picked up at agreed points, and if the bus does not arrive
within 15 minutes of the scheduled time they are entitled to assume that there
is no work for them and are given the guarantee payment as if they had
attended a call.
A further technique for reducing attendance at the hiring hall is the use
of the local radio. This has been used for instance in Melbourne to instruct
particular men to report at the wharf they are needed. The men are required
to watch for the announcement and if their numbers are listed they proceed
straight to work. The system is reported to have worked well and saves
1

Based on Vernon H. JENSEN: "Computer Hiring of Dock Workers in the Port
of New York", in Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 20, No. 3, Apr. 1967.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

unproductive time.1 In Poland also recourse is had to radio announcements
when reserve labour is needed.
Transfers.
It has already been mentioned that some schemes of régularisation of
employment provide for the transfer of workers from one operator to another.
In the United Kingdom selection by rotation is recommended and the
arrangements are supervised by the local Dock Labour Board.
It is important in some areas to make it abundantly clear that transfers
from one employer to another must not be made on a commercial basis.
Practices of this kind have existed, and were condemned by the Inland
Transport Committee in the following terms:
Transfers of workers employed on a regular basis by one employer to temporary work with another employer (where the latter is not working for the
former or under him) should only be effected by agreement or, where appropriate, with the approval of a competent authority. The first employer should
not receive
a commission or similar monetary reward as a result of the arrangement.2
Transfers between ports may also be provided for. Under the earlier
system in the United Kingdom there was provision for such transfers, but
relatively little use was made of this possibility. In 1966 transfers between
local Dock Labour Board areas amounted to a daily average of only 44 men,
and transfers between different ports (or port areas) within each Local Board
area to a daily average of 1,372 men.3 The United States Pacific Coast
agreement also provides that longshoremen shall be available on an interport basis. Under the new scheme in Japan, the employment security service
may, where a special necessity arises, conduct referrals of registered casual
workers between neighbouring ports.4 In the USSR dockers in ports that
are frozen up in winter may be transferred to ports that are open.5
GUARANTEES OF INCOME OR EMPLOYMENT

If dockers are to continue to be willing to put up with the drawbacks of
casual employment, even with a scheme of registration and allocation to
'Commonwealth of Australia: Stevedoring Industry Act, 1954, Interim Report by
Committee of Inquiry (Canberra, Commonwealth Government Printer, 1956), paras.
44-45.
2
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 30 (c).
'National Dock Labour Board: Annual Report and Accounts, 1966, op. cit., p. 26.
4
Report of the Policy Council on Dock Work to the Prime Minister, Mar. 1964.
5
I L O : General Report: Effect Given to the Conclusions of the Previous Sessions,
Report I, Item 1 (a) and (b), Inland Transport Committee, Seventh Session (Geneva,
1961), p. 53.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

work, they can only be expected to do so if some guarantees are offered as
regards either employment or income. Excessive fluctuations of income can
cause great hardship in any household. There is a tendency among some
men to allocate a given sum to their wives for household expenses, and to
spend any surplus earned in a good week rather freely ; in a bad week the
household money is inevitably cut. The strength of mind needed in casual
employment to save in a good week and keep money in reserve is quite often
lacking; and this is scarcely surprising.
Figures of average earnings are often deceptive, because in ports where
allocation is by selection it is frequent for some men to earn consistently well
above the average, while at the other end of the scale there are many men
with very low earnings indeed. The average for an individual may often be
made up of good earnings for a short spell, perhaps followed by unemployment. This is particularly the case where men work a ship to the finish with
extremely long spells of continuous work, much of it paid at overtime rates.
For these reasons one of the most pressing claims of the dockers has
been for some guarantees. These may vary greatly in extent.
Attendance Money
The simplest guarantee—rather a limited one—is payment of attendance money to any docker who has made himself available for work but is
not taken on. It is, however, usually denied to dockers who refuse work
when it is offered to them, subject to certain rules permitting a docker to
refuse work in certain categories other than his own.
The sums offered should be sufficient at the very least to cover the cost
of transport to the hiring hall or call stand and the loss of time involved in
waiting about. In some cases, as in New Zealand, two hours' pay is granted.
A variant of attendance money is paid, for instance in Antwerp, as a
"livelihood indemnity" (indemnité de sécurité d'existence). The purpose is
to provide a supplement to unemployment benefit to bring it up to a more
acceptable level. The combined payment in Antwerp amounted to about
60 per cent of the wage, but as it was not readjusted to changes in the cost
of living it fell to about 50 per cent. In France a similar indemnity is offered.
The practice exists in many countries. In Malaysia, for instance, it
amounts to 40 per cent of the basic wage, as an incentive to secure regular
attendance ; in the Malagasy Republic, 50 per cent. A similar guarantee is
given to "second-class labour" (i.e. not including wharf labour) in Thailand.
Another form of attendance money, payable for instance in Thailand, is
"waiting money", which is paid to workers who stay on in case they are
needed at a later call for night work.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

In some cases there are forms of penalty for failure to attend. For
instance, any longer-term guarantee enjoyed by the docker may be cut by a
day's pay for every call he fails to attend, or if he fails to turn up for work
to which he is allocated.
Unemployment Benefit
Arrangements may also be made to pay unemployment benefit for days
on which no work is available. This may mean altering for dockers the rules
governing payment of benefit, if, for instance, no benefit is normally paid if
the worker is unemployed for less than three consecutive days.
Guarantee for a Half-Shift
If a man is taken on, it must as a rule be for at least half a shift or four
hours. Guarantees for two or three hours only have largely disappeared. It
is true that in the St. Lawrence ports the minimum guarantee on a call or
recall has been reduced from four hours to three, but this is part of a more
general bargain providing for a guaranteed income for a whole season.
In the Malagasy Republic, if a man is taken on for four hours only, he
is guaranteed 60 per cent of his full daily wage.
Weekly Guarantee
In many schemes workers on the reserve are paid when not taken on.
In the Netherlands and in Hamburg this payment is fixed at the full weekly
wage. Thus any worker who regularly makes himself available for work
draws his full standard wage whether he is employed or not. In some
countries less than the full wage is offered as a guarantee. Thus, in Malaysia,
it is 80 per cent for dockers covered by the registration scheme. This is also
the percentage which used to be paid in the Netherlands before it was raised
to 100 per cent. In the United Kingdom regular employment is offered with
guaranteed minimum earnings of £16 outside London and £17 in London
(the former guaranteed week was £9). These figures may be compared with
average earnings in 1966 of about £21 3s. Od. In New Zealand the guarantee is a fixed sum laid down for each port by order, after hearing the parties.
A lower guarantee is paid to workers who, on medical grounds, have to
restrict themselves to certain types of work.
In the United States Pacific Coast scheme the guarantee is for a number
of straight-time hours a week to be specified from time to time. It has been
35 hours a week. It applies only if work opportunity has been reduced as
a result of new contract provisions (including alteration of certain work
rules) and not if tonnage declines as a result of curtailed economic activity.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Longer-Term Guarantees
In some ports the guarantees offered cover a period longer than a week.
For instance, in New York, for workers covered by the guarantee, it
amounts to the pay of 1,600 hours a contract year. In order that make-up
payments should not be unduly delayed, it is provided that at the end of each
of the first three quarters of the contract year each qualified employee shall
be paid up to 75 per cent of the guarantee cumulatively due to him at the
end of each quarter. For computing the guarantee, gross earnings are
deducted (at straight-tirae rates) from it, as well as payments for vacations,
public holidays and unemployment compensation. Deductions are made for
failure to report when ordered and failure to attend calls. In the St.
Lawrence ports the guarantee covers the season of 37 or 39 weeks: it is
paid on a week-by-week basis in Montreal, and over the whole period in
the other ports. The basis is pay for 40 hours a week, which, as has been
explained, may be reduced if productivity is not maintained.
In Basle, Switzerland, a guarantee of 240 days of employment a year, or
pay in lieu thereof, is given.
Several schemes are based on monthly guarantees, or pay in lieu, as for
instance in Argentina (15 days), India (21 days for regular employees in
Bombay and Calcutta), Malaysia (20 shifts), Nigeria (15 days), Senegal
(120 hours), Singapore (26 days) and Spain (21 days). In Italy, as regards
Genoa, Naples and Venice, an income of 75,000 liras a month is guaranteed,
make-up money being provided by a special levy on the cost of port handling.
In West Africa it is reported that as a rale "The worker is assured of a
daily, and in some cases monthly, and mostly minimum, income irrespective
of his output."1
In Tanzania, to take another example, about 60 per cent of the dockers
are on permanent employment, on a monthly basis.
To these longer-term guarantees must be added all those cases, already
referred to, in which the docker is in permanent employment, or enjoys a
weekly guarantee coupled with an assurance that he will not be dismissed
except for cause.
Guarantees in Cases of Seasonal Unemployment
In some countries work is stopped by the freezing-up of ports for some
weeks or months in the year. In the USSR and Poland the dockers are
kept on the payroll on a regular basis, but they may be employed in winter
1

A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, op. cit., Part I, para. 105.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

on maintenance work, or even on work outside the port. In the USSR
provision is made, as has been stated, for the possibility of transferring
dockers to other ports, in which case all their expenses are paid and they
are granted a daily allowance in addition to wages. In Canada the guarantee
does not extend to the winter months, and the problem is still unsolved. In
Sweden special winter compensation to dockers in ports which freeze up is
paid on the basis of the number of hours they work when the ports are open.
Income Guarantee Embodied in Rates of Pay
It is also possible to embody in the rates of pay an element designed to
compensate the docker for the disadvantages of casual employment, so that
his annual income will stand comparison with those of workers regularly
employed. Thus, in Genoa, the rates for handling cargo agreed with the
dockers' corporations and approved by the public authority are stated to
embody a guarantee of income.
STEADYING THE DEMAND FOR LABOUR

Schemes for the régularisation of employment can be greatly assisted if
means can be found of reducing the irregularity in the demand for labour
on the part both of individual operators and of a port as a whole. In this
connection there is need to consider the question of reducing the number of
operators, increasing the concentration of ports, and reducing fluctuations in
the demand for labour within a port.
Concentration of Employers
Where there is a very large number of employers, many of whom have
small concerns, the irregularity of the demand for labour by any one of them
is likely to be high. In London, for instance, there were in 1962 nearly
400 different employers entitled to call for labour at any time. Some of
them handled ships only occasionally.
It is clear that this state of affairs is incompatible with arrangements for the
employment of dockworkers on a regular basis. This can only be achieved if
employers are substantial firms with a continuing demand for labour; only such
firms can make flexible
and productive use of labour and establish satisfactory
working relationships.1
1
Ministry of Transport : Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Major Ports
of Great Britain, Cmnd. 1824 (London, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1962), para. 389.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Before regular employaient could be introduced, it proved necessary to
make drastic cuts in the number of port employers.
This is also necessary for another reason. New methods of cargo
handling, and in particular container berths, require heavy outlay in equipment and need a great deal of space. Roll-on/roll-off methods also involve
new arrangements for access to the hold, such as end-on roadways. Smaller
firms have not the means to invest in these methods and are in danger of
being pushed aside.
In the United Kingdom, under the Docks and Harbours Act, 1966, all
port employers have to be licensed. In each port a licensing authority has
been appointed, charged with the duty of regrouping existing employers and
reducing their number. Compensation has been provided for employers who
are refused licences, provided they employed dockworkers for some time
during each of not less than 80 weeks during a qualifying period of 104 weeks
or for a minimum of 500 working days during that period. Provision is also
made for compensation to a self-employed dockworker who loses employment. Compensation is to be paid on the diminution on the value of the
assets of the business directly attributable to refusal to grant a licence, and
reimbursement of any expenditure incurred in winding up the business
which is similarly attributable. The considerations governing the grant of a
licence are the applicant's ability to manage his business efficiently and to
provide the necessary equipment; his ability to employ a reasonable quota
of the dock labour force in the port without excessive temporary transfer of
workers to other employers; and the maximum number of employers compatible with the efficient working of the port. Another requirement is that
the employer must be able to provide adequate welfare amenities for the
dockers he employs. It was pointed out thai allowance has to be made for
employers who handle cargo themselves for the purposes of their own businesses. The need for specialist and other ancillary services has also to be
borne in mind. In other words, the objective is "to ensure that cargo handling
is concentrated in the hands of a smaller number of substantial employers who
will be able to provide the quality of management and conditions of employment required in a modernised port industry".1
In Japan also, the decasualisation scheme introduced in 1965 called for
a concentration of enterprises. It had been proposed that the State should
adopt, where necessary, a method of subsidies in order to promote such
action. It was also suggested that appropriate methods to secure the
co-operation of banking institutions should be studied.2
'National Dock Labour Board: Annual Report and Accounts, 1966, op. cit.,
para. 10.
* Report of the Policy Council on Dock Work to the Prime Minister, op. cit.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

In Malaysia proposals were made some years ago to reduce the number
of employers of stevedore labour in Penang from 47 to 5 in connection with
the introduction of a new decasualisation scheme for these workers. Only
those who could permanently employ 17 gangs of 13 men for at least
22V2 days a month were considered.1
In many ports the need for greater capital investment in equipment and
berths arising out of the generalisation of new methods of handling cargo has
prompted a number of mergers or take-overs of firms engaged in dock work.
Concentration of Ports
The more labour is split up between a number of small ports, the more
difficult it is to regularise employment.
Present trends are away from the smaller ports and towards greater
concentration in a few ports. This arises partly because the larger and more
specialised ships require heavier capital outlay and their movements to
smaller ports and the delays which may result therefrom are unduly expensive. On the side of inland transport, improvements in roads and vehicles
reduce costs and make it less important to get as near as possible to the
final destination by ship. These trends assist in the steadying of demand for
port labour, as the running of small ports with irregular traffic always presents
difficulties.
Container traffic pushes concentration to its extreme. Container berths
are likely to be set up in a limited number of ports only, the containers being
handled for the next stage of the journey either by inland transport or by
smaller ships of the coastal type adapted for the purpose. As a result, a
number of ports are competing for the installation of container ship terminals
and trans-shipment berths. Quite apart from ports of destination, others,
such as the port of Valletta in Malta, Singapore and a port in Ceylon are
considering the possibility of acting as container distribution centres serving
a considerable area.
Employment of Dockers on Other Jobs
The demand for labour can be rendered much more stable if dockers can
be employed on ancillary jobs when no ship is working. In many cases the
same staff receive and deliver goods from the warehouse and handle the
loading and discharge of ships. Sometimes workers may be called on to do
1
ILO : Report to the Government of Malaysia on Decasualisation of Dock Labour
in the Port of Penang, doc. ILO/TAP/Malaysia/R. 20 (Geneva, ILO, 1956) (mimeographed), para. 18.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

maintenance and cleaning work. The acceptance of such arrangements may
be a condition of regular employment.
Keeping Ships Waiting
Having examined some of the steps designed to steady the demand for
labour on a larger scale, what can be done at the level of each port, or even
each employer, to reduce fluctuations?
There is one time-honoured method: keeping ships waiting. This is no
doubt convenient from the point of view of the steadier use of port facilities
and of labour, but enough has already been said about the real cost of wasting the time of ships to condemn this system.
However, it must be recognised that a calculation has to be made. If
peaks which can only be met by much additional labour and heavy investment occur only infrequently, it may not be possible to act otherwise, it
being understood that in such a case every effort will be made to minimise
the delay to shipping.
This is the type of case where careful cost-benefit analysis is helpful,
provided that it is made not from the point of view of the port operator only,
but from all points of view, including that of the shipowner, the owner of the
goods, and the national economy.
Overtime
If overtime is not abused by having recourse to it too frequently or on
a systematic basis, it can obviously greatly help to deal with emergencies and
to smooth out the demand fcr labour in terms of numbers.
Holidays
Where there are foreseeable seasonal fluctuations in shipping, anything
which can be done to ensure that too many dockers are not taking their
annual holidays during this period will reduce the extent of fluctuations and
help to stabilise employment.
Co-ordinating Shipping Services
Some isolated attempts have been made by firms servicing the same
shipping routes on regular sailings to avoid bunching the arrivals and departures of their ships. This can assist in equalising the demand for labour, but
it has to be recognised that the scope for such action is very limited.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

Transferring Work
Quite apart from arrangements to transfer dockers from one employer
to another which have already been described, operators can on occasion
help each other out by taking on work for each other. An operator who is
short of labour will pass on work to another who has regular dockers
unemployed. Such arrangements have obvious advantages in reducing fluctuations, but are normally only possible where there is very good understanding between the firms concerned. There is also a risk that, if such
practices are frequent, an employer may tend to hoard labour in times of
shortage in order to be in a good position to accept additional work.
ORGANISATION OF THE RÉGULARISATION

SCHEME

The question here is that of deciding who should run a scheme for the
régularisation of employment in ports. There are many models, and their
choice has been the result of local circumstances. A good deal also depends
on whether the scheme covers all dockers, or only those in a reserve or pool.
Operation by a Public Authority
It may be necessary to place the basic responsibility for a régularisation
scheme on a government service or an independent public authority. In
New York, for instance, it would have been impossible, at the time the new
scheme was introduced, for it to have worked on a joint or tripartite basis.
Labour conflicts had been too acute, with frequent strikes, and corrupt practices were too widespread. The operation of the information centres and the
allocation of labour was therefore left in the hands of the Waterfront Commission, an independent public body set up under statutes of the states of
New York and New Jersey. It enjoys a great deal of autonomy and has at
times had to assert itself against the will of the employers, the unions or
even both at once, following its own interpretation of its duties under the
legislation which gave it its charter.
The employers and the workers have, however, set up, in virtue of an
agreement of 1965, a Management-Labor Employment Co-operation Committee, which has been given the responsibility for working out procedures
for the closing of the register and making arrangements to have hiring monitored by union representatives at the Commission's hiring centres to ensure
that the provisions of the 1965 agreement, including those relating to the
income guarantee, are carried out.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Operation by a Tripartite Body
In many countries it has been possible to vest authority for the administration of the dockers' scheme in a tripartite body.
In the United Kingdom, for instance, the National Dock Labour Board
is an autonomous body, set up by Act of Parliament. It consists of a Chairman, Vice-Chairman and not less than eight and not more than ten other
members, appointed by the Secretary of State for Employment and Productivity (formerly the Minister of Labour) after consultation with the
National Joint Council ior the Port Transport Industry. Apart from the
Chairman and Vice-Chairman, the members are nominated by the Joint
Council, half to represent the port employers and half the dockworkers.
There are local Dock Labour Boards of the same pattern in each port. This
model has been widely followed in such countries as Burma, Cyprus and
India.
In France also, the system is tripartite. The Central Manpower Office
in each port is under the chairmanship of the Port Director, who is a government official, or his designated representative. There are two or three
representatives of management and the same number for the workers on
each board. Where there are three representatives a side, one of them is to
represent the supervisors or foremen (la maîtrise). For the representatives
of the employers and the workers, the Port Director puts up two names for

each position to be filled after consulting the organisations concerned. The
Minister of Public Works makes the final appointments. Similar models are
found in a number of French-speaking countries in Africa.
The financial arrangements for the payment of the guarantee come under
the National Dockers' Guarantee Fund, whose Administrative Board is a
tripartite body, with representatives of the Ministries of Public Works and
Transport, Labour and Finance, three representatives of the employers and
three of the workers, nominated by the most representative national organisations in the industry.
Operation by Joint Bodies
Another model is provided by the Federal Republic of Germany, where
any port may set up a joint port operating company for the purpose of
administering the dockers' reserve. In Hamburg, for instance, it consists of
four representatives of the employers and four of the workers, who appoint
an independent chairman. It determines the number of dockers in the
reserve and the rules for their allocation.
On the Pacific Coast of the United States the hiring halls and the allocation system are jointly controlled by the Pacific Maritime Association and
the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union.

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

Operation by Employers' Associations
In some cases the pool is operated by the employers' association. This
is the case, for instance, in the Netherlands and in Belgium, though the extent
of the guarantee offered is a matter for negotiation.
Operation by Workers' Organisations
Finally, the allocation of labour and supervision of hiring may be in the
hands of the workers themselves. In Italy dock labour is provided by the
dockers' corporations or guilds, who undertake to carry out the assigned
tasks for over-all charges. Although they pay their members and cover
their social charges themselves, their tariffs are controlled by the public
authority. A number of workers are, however, taken on outside the corporations on a casual basis.
The Role of the Public Authority in General
In most cases the public authority is involved.

Its role is largely to

ensure fair play and to see that the registration and allocation of dockers
take place without giving rise to trouble. In many ports it has to play the
leading role, particularly where, as in a number of developing countries, there
is such disparity of bargaining power between the parties that a fair deal
would not be secured if bargaining were left to the parties alone, without
close supervision and assistance from the government.
The public authority also has the common interest to protect, since the
smooth operation of ports is essential to the national economy. Large
national investments may also be at stake. Finally, as has already been
pointed out, the public authority must ensure that the policies regarding
registration of dockers keep in line with national manpower policy.
FINANCING

There are some issues to be considered in regard to the financing of
decasualisation arrangements.
The most usual practice is for employers to pay a levy into a common
fund in order to support the costs of running a decasualisation scheme.
These costs include widely differing elements. In the first place, there
are the administrative costs. Hiring halls with the requisite facilities have
to be built, maintained and staffed, and dockers may have to be transported
from hiring hall to place of work or within and between ports. Buses and
launches may have to be operated or public transport hired. Then there are

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

the costs of paying the dockers the sums required to make up the guarantees
when they are not employed (attendance money and/or make-up money).
Sometimes the institutions concerned with decasualisation also take on other
duties, such as centralised payroll and accounting work and the provision
of certain common welfare amenities.
Method of Assessing Employers
When all labour is temporarily allocated, the method of assessing
employers is usually simple : a percentage is levied on the wages of all dockers
employed sufficient to cover the cost and to create and maintain a reserve
fund. Sometimes the payment is per ton of cargo handled.
However, when a substantial proportion of the dockers are in regular
employment, the question arises as to whether the whole burden should fall
on those who have recourse to pool labour in proportion to the extent to
which they draw on it. There are strong arguments against such a course.
First, if a reserve pool of dockers has been created in a public service which
should help the smooth operation of the port as a whole and all operators
have the advantage of being able to draw on the pool when in need, it seems
fair that all should pay something towards its maintenance. Further, if
some of his regular dockers become redundant, the operator can, under many
schemes, transfer them back to the pool, which frees him from severance
payments or redundancy grants. The pool therefore constitutes a kind of
insurance for which a premium should be paid.
There is another practical argument: if '¿he pool comes to be a fairly
small part of the total labour force, and yet has to be in a position to meet
peak demands, it will be bearing the whole burden of fluctuations in demand.
As a result, it is to be expected that a high proportion of its members will be
drawing make-up money and the cost of having recourse to the pool will
appear to be prohibitively high. An operator will therefore be tempted to
cut his costs by hoarding labour in regular employment even if this means
that a number of workers are temporarily underemployed. In terms of
rational use of manpower, this is an undesirable practice. In addition, the
high cost of pool labour will tempt employers to flout the rule which requires
them to recruit additional workers only through the pool, thus making it
still more difficult for the pool to operate and vitiating the whole system.
Finally, some of the services rendered by the body administering the
pool, such as the operation of hiring services, are common services for the
port.
There are therefore strong grounds for requiring all port operators to
contribute to the cost of the pool, though it may be fair to set different rates

REGULARISATION OF EMPLOYMENT

of contribution in respect of workers in regular employment and those in the
pool.
A further question is whether the government should contribute to the
cost of running the pool. It often does not do so, beyond perhaps providing
the assistance of ministry of labour officials to help with the allocations, or
on occasions providing premises. But in so far as unemployed dockers
would otherwise be drawing unemployment benefit usually largely subsidised
by the State, it might well be asked whether the government should not
contribute at least an equivalent amount. This is occasionally done, as, for
instance, in Belgium.
Reserve Fund
The importance of constituting a substantial reserve fund to cover pool
guarantees needs to be emphasised. The demand for labour may drop quite
suddenly, for instance because of economic recession, changes in the flow of
trade, or political disturbances. The numbers in the pool cannot always be
readjusted quickly enough, particularly if guarantees of continued employment have been given as a necessary condition for securing the workers'
acceptance of mechanisation or containerisation and the abandonment of
certain restrictive work rules. In any case, it may be that the fall in demand
is only temporary and the workers may soon be needed again. It is most
undesirable to keep on drastically altering the surcharge collected from
employers, with sharp increases just when business is slack. So a fairly large
financial reserve should be constituted as soon as it is possible to do so, and
it is only when the fund reaches a sufficient level and the future looks bright
that contributions should be scaled down.
Some Examples of Levies
A few examples may be given of the levies called for under certain
schemes. International comparisons cannot, however, be made, because the
economic circumstances of each port and the type of scheme are different,
and because the sums levied cover different services.
In Montreal a sum of 15 Canadian cents per "equivalent ton" is initially
paid into the job security fund, the payments being suspended when the fund
stands at or above a stated amount. The "equivalent ton" is 2,000 pounds
or 40 cubic feet, or 30 tons of bulk grain or soya beans, or 10 tons of bulk
sugar or other bulk solids handled mechanically.
In France the contribution was raised as from January 1967 to 7 per
cent of the gross remuneration paid to all dockers. This covers the cost of
making up a minimum guaranteed wage substantially less than the normal

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

wage, plus the administrative costs of the Central Manpower Offices.
Employers have to cover social security charges and holidays with pay
separately.
In Hamburg the overhead payment for pool labour in 1966 was 44 per
cent of wages. This covers the guaranteed wage, holidays with pay, payment
for certain public holidays, social security charges and some training activities.
Under the scheme in force in the United Kingdom before regular employment was introduced, the levy of the Dock Labour Board in 1966 was at the
rate of 4.5 per cent on the wages of weekly workers, and 15 per cent on
the wages of daily workers (8 per cent for work on coastal traffic). This
covered attendance money, the making-up of the weekly guarantee (at that
time less than half average earnings), holidays with pay and rather restricted
expenditure on welfare amenities and training.
In New York the Waterfront Commission receives an assessment of
longshore payrolls (1.25 per cent in 1964-65). This covers the licensing of
dockers, the operation of the information centres or hiring halls and related
administrative costs. It does not cover the cost of the wage guarantee,
which results from a collective agreement.

3. TRAINING
THE IMPORTANCE OF TRAINING

To the new picture of cargo handling there should correspond a new
picture of the docker, and this poses the question of how he should be
trained.
In exchange for the regular job and the guaranteed minimum income to
which the previous chapter has referred, the employer may expect the
docker to be available for a variety of jobs, in order that work may be found
for him even when he is not engaged in his usual job in connection with the
immediate loading or unloading of a ship. New methods also call for different combinations of skills.
A management consultant addressing an international gathering devoted
to the subject of new trends in cargo handling asked his audience:
Do we see training as an instrument to prepare men as quickly as possible
for the restricted function in which they work for as long as possible, or do we
see training as an all-embracing activity in which, by learning many kinds of1
work, the basis is laid for a high standard of self-reliance and responsibility ?
There are clearly two approaches to the training of the docker. One is
to train a man for just one job, or at any rate only one at a time. He may
be given training in work in the warehouse, or on the quay, or as a holdsman, or he may be given specialist training as a fork-lift truck driver, deckhand or winchman. His line of promotion will be to become a specialist
in one of these fields. The other approach is to provide training of such
a nature that the docker can quickly become an all-round man, able to
handle all or most of the kinds of jobs referred to.
If the first is all that is wanted, it may be possible to go a long way by
learning on the job without any formal instruction or training, with perhaps
a little supplement for certain specialist jobs. That is in fact how most
dockers have learned their trade. But is this good enough? The docker
with this background will not be easily interchangeable, and will therefore
1
A. H. Bos : Training and Developing Human Skills as a Condition for Technical
Innovation and Organisational Change (mimeographed), paper presented to the Eighth
Technical Conference of the International Cargo Handling Co-ordination Association
(Antwerp, May 1967).

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

be at a disadvantage when new methods of handling are adopted. If the
same men are required to handle anything from a container to roll-on/roll-off
unit loads, or mixed cargo requiring careful stowage in the hold by traditional methods, it is important for them to be able to switch from one
method to another without difficulty; the second approach therefore seems
to be called for in order to give dockers the skills they need for their trade
and thus improve their image in line with modern trends.
Referring to conditions in West Africa, an expert writes : "A certain misconception as to the status of port labour is still evident. It is, in most
instances, considered as unskilled labour barely entitled to the official minimum wages. Port labour certainly must be regarded as skilled labour." *
The same observation could apply in many other parts of the world. The
implication, however, is that the docker should receive training.
The Inland Transport Committee of the ILO, as long ago as 1951,
stressed this point, when it expressed the view that "in modern ports the
handling of cargo, especially mixed cargo, calls for a certain amount of
experience and knowledge on the part of tie dockworkers" and requested
the Governing Body "to draw the attention of governments and the employers' and workers' organisations concerned to the importance of an adequate
training of dockworkers for the handling of mixed cargo in modern ports".2
A report prepared for the United Nations urges developing countries,

independently or by regional groups, to consider the training of operating,
supervisory and administrative personnel related to unitisation practices.8
A document submitted by the Pan American Union to the Second InterAmerican Port and Harbor Conference of the Organization of American
States also urged that port regulations should make provision for education
or training to increase the skill of cargo handlers.4
Experts who have been advising governments on port work have consistently recommended that they make further arrangements for the training of
dockers. It is pointed out that with all the mechanical equipment available
under modern conditions, and in the search for improved methods of moving
cargo, organised vocational training of the port workers is both an essential
1
A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, op. cit., Parí I, para. 107.
2
Official Bulletin, Vol. XXXIV, No. 2, 20 Dec. 1951, Inland Transport Committee,
Fourth Session (Nervi, Genoa, 1951), resolution (No. 50) concerning the training of
dockworkers.
3
An Examination of Some Aspects of the Unit-Load System of Cargo Shipments:
Application to Developing Countries, op. cit., para. 22 (e).
4
Problems of Ports in Latin America and the Port Programs of the Organization
of American States, op. cit., p. 8.

TRAINING

requirement and a practical possibility. No longer should workers be
expected to acquire their skill simply by experience on the job. They should
undergo training courses in proficiency and be taught how to increase their
productivity in order to speed up the handling of cargo.
There are further arguments in favour of training, of which, perhaps, the
lowering of accident rates is the most important. Many accidents are due
to ignorance rather than negligence, and can be reduced through training in
the correct way of handling cargo. Damage to the cargo, which in many
ports has been extremely serious, can likewise be reduced if dockers are
properly trained, and this in its turn can have favourable repercussions on
insurance claims and rates. In fact, as the expert who visited West African
ports remarks: "Although there are many real and some psychological difficulties, it has been proved in many places that patient and thorough training of labour in a conducive environment of material and social conditions
is bound to show profitable results for all concerned." í
It should also be remembered that the docker is less and less a casual
worker and is increasingly in regular employment, so that the cost of training can be readily recovered over time. The problem is not therefore simply
to instruct the docker what to do on a particular job, but to enable him to
handle a variety of tasks over the years.
There is another and rather delicate point to be borne in mind. Hitherto
we have been considering the training of the docker. Those concerned with
the stowage of cargo have as a rule acquired considerable skill in this task,
so that damage at sea is reduced in consequence. However, containers are
often stowed by the consignor, or in inland depots. The packing is usually
light—one of the advantages of container traffic—and the work may well
be carried out by other workers than dockers. They may know how to pack
for a short truck or rail journey, but have no experience of marine stowage.
Special training is therefore necessary to ensure that those who fill containers
stow the goods in such a way as to preclude damage when the container is
subjected to the movement of a storm at sea.
It is thus increasingly recognised that the docker should be trained;
however, the advocates of training often have widely different conceptions
of the amount and nature of training which ought to be given. It is therefore necessary to describe a few examples of training schemes. The brief
indications which follow are just a selection, as space precludes a full
description. However, these examples should not be allowed to create
the impression that training schemes are the general rule: there are still far
1

A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, op. cit., Part I, para. 103.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

too many countries, and some of them with important ports, in which there
are virtually no arrangements for training dockers and where everything is
still to be done.
TRAINING BETWEEN SCHOOL AND WORK

In many countries youths who are not pursuing their full-time studies
beyond normal school-leaving age go into formal apprenticeship, or take
jobs, or go into technical schools with a view to preparing themselves for
some more skilled or specialised job. In most countries none of these possibilities is open to prospective dockers. A youth will not be taken on for
dock work until he is regarded as adult, a frequent minimum age, given the
nature of the work, being 18. There is as a rule no apprenticeship scheme,
and there are no technical colleges which aim at training port workers. In a
country with fairly full employment, what will then be the source of recruitment for dockers? There is a risk that it will have to depend largely on
drop-outs from training for other jobs, which will not help to enhance the
prestige of port work or provide the best workers. There is therefore, in
many countries, a need for some form of continued education and training
to bridge this gap.
The Netherlands is among the few countries which have dealt with this
problem. In both Rotterdam and Amsterdam there are pre-vocational training schools designed to interest youths in dock work and train them for it.
In Rotterdam a Dockers' Training School was established in 1953. The
school now offers a programme consisting of three years' school instruction
followed by a two-year apprenticeship. Older boys who do not possess an
elementary school certificate are enrolled in a three years' apprenticeship
course, also conducted by the school. This usually covers the ages 16 to 18.
The employer agrees to give the apprentice practical training in shipping,
warehousing and stevedoring undertakings. Training is both practical and
theoretical. Trainees successfully completing the programme obtain a
journeyman's certifícate. In Amsterdam the Dockers' Vocational School
provides a two-year course with a minimum entry age of 14, which may, if
necessary, be preceded by a preparatory year. The course covers general
subjects, but is orientated towards dock work. Examples in mathematics
can be taken from the mechanics of hoisting gear; commercial geography
includes the origin and nature of most types of cargo handled in the port.
There is emphasis on English as a language frequently used in shipping.
Handicrafts include splicing and sailmaking. Physical training is also important. The pupil is then placed in apprenticeship with the Shipping Federation, the organisation of port employers. To become an all-round docker,
he works in different port undertakings, with one full day and an evening

TRAINING

a week in class. He is trained in cargo handling, winch driving, checking
and measuring, stowing, warehouse work, fork-lift truck driving, customs
formalities and acting as gang foreman. He acquires experience in various
work situations, which widens his horizons and increases his adaptability
and his prospects for the future.
The results are reported to be very satisfactory. Most of the pupils do
become dockers. They are proud of their occupation, which they rightly
regard as a skilled trade. Many of them rise to supervisory posts remarkably
quickly, and in spite of their extreme youth it is stated that their authority
is accepted by the older dockers, who recognise the value of their specialised
training.
There are few other countries in which this problem has been tackled.
In the Republic of China, however, the Keelung Harbour Bureau maintains
a dock labour training centre where boys are enrolled at the age of 15 for
a three years' course, sons of dockers receiving some preference. The boys
enter the training centre from primary/middle school after passing an entrance
examination. In addition to general education in Chinese, English, mathematics, physics, geography, etc., the boys are given practical instruction in
knotting and splicing, cargo handling, stevedoring, the internal combustion
engine, mobile truck and fork-lift truck operating, and a general knowledge
of port working. They also have some physical training. On passing out
from the training centre at the end of the three-year course, they start work
in the port as trainees under instruction.
In Poland secondary schools attached to port administrations carry out
three-year vocational training programmes in dock work for boys between
14 and 16 who possess a primary-school certificate. This training includes
theoretical courses in dock work, instruction in general educational subjects,
and practical training in ports and dock work undertakings.
COURSES FOR NEW ENTRANTS

An increasing number of countries are organising courses for new
entrants into port work, which as a rule, however, fall far short of anything approaching apprenticeship. Part of these activities are really no more
than a form of induction.
Induction
It is obviously desirable, both on grounds of efficiency and as a help
towards establishing sound labour-management relations, that some kind of
an induction course be given to the new entrant. The kind of subjects
covered might include the nature of the work covered by the port and the

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

main factors influencing it; the organisation and lay-out of the port; the
rights and obligations of the dockers in the light of the legislation, collective
agreements, or awards in force, the working of whatever scheme may exist
for the régularisation of employment and the allocation of labour; pay
arrangements; how to bring up grievances and the machinery for dealing
with them; safety; availability of welfare amenities, training facilities and
promotion possibilities ; rights and obligations under social security schemes.
Where there are training schools or apprenticeship schemes it may be
expected that all this information will be covered, though it may be well to
check that this is really the case. Short training arrangements for new
entrants usually cover some, but not necessarily all, of the above points.
In some ports—but not, :t would seem, very many—booklets are provided
on at least some of the above points, and more especially hints regarding
safety. It would seem highly desirable tliat this practice be generally
followed.
Among examples of this type of instruction is that given at the ports of
Auckland and Wellington, New Zealand, where new entrants are informed
of their duties and responsibilities to the industry, of the operation of a
co-operative contracting system and of pay arrangements, and are provided
with a booklet as a guide to employment. Since 1960 the United States
Government has conducted 1- to 30-hour training sessions for longshoremen in almost every port of the country. These are primarily concerned
with the application of federal longshore regulations pertaining to activities
on board vessels, but also refer where applicable to quayside activities.
Other Aspects of Courses for New Entrants
Courses for new entrants are still the exception rather than the rule, but
with the present need for adaptability it may be hoped that many more will
be provided in cases where longer-term and more thorough courses cannot
be envisaged.
Mention has already been made of pre-vocational training schools and
of a few apprenticeship schemes. Sometimes there is a real vocational
training school for new entrants. In Poland, for instance, a technical school
was established in 1965 at Gdansk to provide professional dockworkers
with theoretical instruction in the operation of cargo-handling equipment.
Trainees successfully completing this course receive a certificate qualifying
them for training in higher-level technical schools.
In the United Kingdom the National Dock Labour Board has responsibilities for training dockworkers, and it was agreed in December 1960 by

TRAINING

the National Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry that entrants to
the industry might be required as a condition of entry to undertake such
courses of training as might be specified by the national or local joint councils.
Training facilities for new entrants now exist for all port areas, at seven
training schools, the full-time staff being 39 in 1966. The courses usually
last three weeks, but may in some cases be as short as one week. In 1966,
2,600 dockers went through the basic training courses. l
As the National Dock Labour Board points out,
It is essential that the programme evolved for training men with no knowledge of dock operations should be of sufficient variety to hold their attention
and should cover as wide a range of subjects as possible, but without becoming
too involved. A proper balance between theoretical and practical instruction
must be obtained and experience has shown that approximately one-third of the
course spent in the lecture room and the remainder on the practical side of dock
work produces the best results
Lectures are given on such varied subjects
as the Dock Labour Scheme, industrial relations, docks regulations and fire
prevention.... The practical side of the programme is designed to introduce
trainees to the handling, slinging and stowage of cargo, as well as teaching them
the basis of rigging ship's gear, knots and splices. For example, tuition is given
in taking cargo from the shed, by hand-barrow, electric platform truck or forklift truck, delivering to the quay and loading and stowing aboard barge, either
using ship's gear or the mobile crane
The underlying theme throughout
instruction is instruction in safe working methods.
The Board concludes that—
The schools, in satisfactorily providing pre-entry training, have successfully
fulfilled the purpose for which they were established. No longer are men brought
onto the dockworkers' register without knowledge of the Dock Labour Scheme,
joint industrial arrangements or of the work they are expected to perform. It is
a considered conclusion that the atmosphere and facilities existing in the school
evoke the right response in the individual and make him aware of the part he can
play in the industry.2
In Israel, at Ashdod, where training was required for hundreds of new
dockers, the Ports Authority maintains a special vocational school, complete
with dummy ship hold, winches and other training aids.
Another approach is a combination of on-the-job training and courses.
For instance, in Amsterdam, the entrants to the reserve pool start work in
gangs under the supervision of three "mentors" for each gang, who instruct
the new dockers in practical work, the handling of tools, safety measures,
etc. After this period the dockers work for three to five months in special
training gangs to gain more experience in the work. Later, after about a
year-and-a-half of service, they follow a theoretical course of about 15 days,
1
National Dock Labour Board: Annual Report and Accounts, 1966, op. cit.,
Appendix 9.
2
Idem : Training of Dock Workers (London, 1966), pp. 3-5.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

and may then go up for an examination ; if ûey succeed, they are eligible for
further promotion and higher wages.1
A valuable suggestion made by an expert in a developing country is that
instructors in the port should from time to time observe the work being
carried out and seek to correct wrong or undesirable methods of handling
by on-the-spot demonstrations. They should show how the cargo should be
handled, the correct way to operate the equipment and the correct method
of tallying and checking cargo. It may well be that this method would be
resented by the older hands in ports in industrialised countries, and also be
less necessary there, but it should prove helpful in developing countries where
there is often a great deal of inexperienced labour.
There have been many suggestions thai schemes of training of dockworkers should be brought into being to a greater extent in developing
countries. One of the recommendations made, quite apart from training in
dock work itself, is that literacy classes should be organised. If dockers
could read the cargo marks and indications of destination, it would reduce
the amount of supervision needed in the sorting of cargo. Literacy would
also assist safety, and the promotion of dockers to other jobs would be
easier.
TRAINING THE ESTABLISHED DOCKER

It is, however, not enough to train the new entrant. Though it is
natural to give a high priority to those who are unfamiliar with the work,
it is also desirable to provide training facilities for those already in the job.
One reason for doing so is to enable the dockers to adapt themselves to new
methods of cargo handling. Another consideration is the desire to prevent
the training of adults from lagging too far behind that of the youngsters, so
that both groups have equal opportunities for promotion.
Important as these aspects are, the facilities available to the adult
worker, apart from training as a specialist or for supervisory positions, do
not exist in most countries, and where they do, are usually rather limited in
scope.
A few examples may, however, be given.
In the Netherlands the Shipping Association in Amsterdam has since
1965 provided a course for adult or established dockers. They receive
special instruction in cargo handling, winch driving, fork-lift truck driving
and acting as hatchwayman. Under a day-release system they can get
theoretical training for examination in such subjects as Dutch, geography,
arithmetic and social questions. The dockers are then set to work on a
1
Scheepvaart Vereeniging Noord : Training Dock Workers (Amsterdam, 1967)
(mimeographed).

TRAINING

rotating system, on the basis that what is needed in future is very adaptable
all-round workers able to cope with rapidly changing methods of work.
The Shipping Association states that the view is rapidly gaining ground that
operators need to have good workers who may be entrusted with increasing
responsibilities and who can derive satisfaction from their work.
In the United Kingdom there are "advanced courses", usually of two
weeks, with emphasis placed on the handling of mechanical equipment such
as the mobile crane, the platform truck and the fork-lift truck and tuition on
practical and theoretical rigging, the use of ship's gear, winch driving and
the duties of hatchwaymen. The National Dock Labour Board reports that
many favourable comments regarding this form of training have been
received from employers and from the men themselves, and there is no
doubt that the participants attain a standard of technical ability which
otherwise would take them many years to acquire. "Moreover, the emphasis
on mechanical aids in the advanced training courses is in full accord with
current trends towards greater mechanisation and clearly illustrates the part
the schools can play in this important development in the industry."1
In the United States the federal and state governments, as well as
organisations of employers and workers, co-operate in providing training for
longshoremen and supervisors in safety, first aid and the operation of cranes
and other cargo-handling machinery, and the Government reports that this
instruction has made important contributions to increases in efficiency and
reduction in the rate of accidents in dock work.
In the USSR arrangements are made to interchange jobs among workers
in gangs during normal shifts. The workers can thus perform a variety of
skilled jobs, and this is said to be responsible for increased efficiency.
In Israel all port staff is being thoroughly trained. During 1966 some
800 men took 19 different courses at the ports of Ashdod, Haifa and Eilat.
The courses covered subjects such as stevedoring, signalling, operation of
tractors and fork-lifts, crane driving, winch operation, coxwainship, operation and maintenance of diesel tugs, shed-keeping, first aid, safety measures
and fire-fighting.
SPECIALIST TRAINING

Much more widespread is specialised training for particular categories
of dockworkers, which was recommended by the Inland Transport Committee in 1949.2
1

Training of Dock Workers, op. cit., pp. 4-5.
Resolution concerning the régularisation of employment of dockworkers, para. 8.
See Appendix 1.
2

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

The occupations covered most often are fork-lift truck drivers, winchmen, deck-hands, checkers or tallymen. In many cases, of course, the skills
required for these jobs are covered by the more comprehensive training
for the all-round docker already described. In a number of countries there
are separate short courses for each of these functions.
Drivers
The driving of various forms of mechanical equipment, and especially
the fork-lift truck, has come in for much attention, as its careless use can be
both dangerous and wasteful. An expert who advised on African ports has
emphasised the fact that "The rational use of mechanical equipment such as
fork-lifts, mobile cranes, tractors and trailers is a precondition for deriving
the full benefits in over-all productivity.... It is, therefore, recommended
that a thorough training and education of the drivers of the mechanical
appliances is urgently introduced." 1 Though this advice is of particular
importance in developing countries, where the workers have less experience
with, for instance, motor vehicles and where the replacement of a badly
maintained fork-lift truck calls for a heavy commitment in scarce foreign
exchange, it is valid anywhere. Also most countries which have training
schemes for dockers include training in the use of mechanical appliances.
However, in the case of fork-lift trucks, which are widely used in industry
and by transport undertakings, there may be advantages in sending dockers
to existing training establishments set up as part of the general vocational
training programme in the country as a whole, especially if only a small
number of dockers have to be trained at any one time. This is, for instance,
done in Denmark, though two ports are setting up training arrangements of
their own.
The length of the courses varies greatly. There are some who consider
that fork-lift truck driving, which should include knowledge of the care of
the vehicle, can be learnt in three days. In the United Kingdom the courses
usually last one week. In some places two weeks are allowed. In Denmark
the vocational training school course is three weeks, which may be reduced
to two for trainees who have a driving licence.
Tallymen
There is in many countries a special form of training for tallymen or
checkers. These workers have an important part to play in the movement
1
Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in the
Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, Part II, the East African Subregion
(including Madagascar and the Mascarene Islands), paras. 450 and 451.

TRAINING

of cargo, and slackness or carelessness on their part can lead to great difficulties as regards claims for loss or damage to freight, and even the locating
of cargo in the port. It is quite essential that they should meet minimum
educational standards, and that these should be strictly enforced. This point
has been stressed by experts advising governments both in Africa and in
Asia. They must be literate and be able to perform simple arithmetical
calculations, and in some countries it has been urged that courses be started
to improve their standard of literacy and arithmetic and to develop their
sense of responsibility. This may take rather more time than might be
expected, especially where the educational background at the start is inadequate. An expert in Africa recommends that in each country there should
be an official training course for tally clerks and cargo measurers, leading up,
after an examination supervised by a high-level board, to the grant of an
official certificate and licence. The aim is to make the profession more
attractive and to raise it to a more independent status, and to enable abuses
to be checked by means of the threat of revocation of the licence. » In more
industrialised countries where those concerned already have a broad educational background, short courses are regarded as sufficient. For instance,
the course run by the United Kingdom Dock Labour Board for London
ocean shipowners' tally clerks only lasts five days, part of which is taken
up by some of the subjects normally regarded as part of an induction
course.
Cranemen
Cranemen often have quite a separate training scheme, sometimes with
formal apprenticeship, especially where they are regarded not as dockers but
as skilled employees of a port authority or similar institution.
When special equipment for the handling of containers becomes widespread, training in its use will obviously be called for.
Gang Leaders and Foremen
Special importance attaches to the training of gangers (or gang leaders)
and foremen (who may be in charge of more than one gang), and courses
are provided for this purpose in a number of countries.
In Hamburg, to take an example, every quay and warehouse worker of
the Hamburg Warehousing Company is encouraged to take a ganger's course
1
A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, op. cit., Part I, paras. 354-363.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

after six months' service. The course lasts five days with five hours of talks
each day. Subjects covered are the responsibilities and duties of the ganger
on the quay and in the warehouse, railway loading and papers, safety, damage
to cargo, warehousing, and some general background. A year after being
incorporated in the slightly higher wage group to which success in the first
stage gives access, the second stage of the course, that of foreman, may be
taken. This covers in more detail the relevant regulations and tariffs, weighing and checking and practice in the preparation of written reports. It
includes developments in the field of containers and references to the preparation of shipping and customs documents for containers. Another year
later, a further week's course may be taken for the post of warehousemaster.
At each stage examinations are held.
Other courses cover a longer period. Thus in Finland the whole timetable for a foreman's course covers 88 weeks, of which 37 are in a full-time
training-school at Kotka, 47 are devoted to practical work and probation in
the ports, 2 to examinations and 2 to leave. For the part carried out
at the school, the programme consists of 480 hours devoted to general
subjects (languages, community training, physical education); 530 hours of
general vocational training (elements of mathematics, organisation of shipping, types of cargo, safety); 315 of specialised training (study of ships,
hoisting gear, methods of work, stowing, warehousing, etc.), and 100 hours
for practical demonstrations on the gear of the model hatch.
TRAINING IN SAFETY AND FIRST AID

It will be noted that nearly all the courses referred to above include
safety measures. It is most desirable that all dockers should receive some
instruction in this field, and, where safety problems are not dealt with as
part of a more comprehensive course of training, separate courses should be
held for it.
In many ports dockers are encouraged to take part in first-aid training,
including rescue from drowning. Sometimes these courses are organised by
societies such as the Red Cross, and are specially adapted to the injuries likely
to arise in docks. Competitions between teams are held and official encouragement is given by the authorities of the employers and the unions. In
some cases some knowledge of first aid is required of foremen. In other
cases attempts are made to ensure that there is at least one docker trained
in first aid either in each gang, or at least in each group of gangs working on
a given ship.

TRAINING

THE RETRAINING OF INJURED DOCKERS

The Inland Transport Committee has recommended that "Dockers who
are injured in accidents should be given access to vocational retraining centres
at which they receive treatment and instruction, and, in certain cases, accommodation, meals and travelling expenses." 1 Stays in such centres should
lead, wherever practicable, to a resumption of work in the same occupation
or a related one.
THE RETRAINING OF REDUNDANT DOCKERS

Finally, if dockers have to be dismissed on grounds of redundancy, it is
reasonable that they should be afforded some help in finding new employment. Though this falls somewhat outside the purview of the port industry
itself, it can co-operate with the authorities in assisting redundant workers.
Many countries have schemes for retraining in such cases. The International Transport Workers' Federation has urged that "appropriate retraining and rehabilitation schemes, supervised by joint employer-union committees, should be provided so as to enable port workers to perform alternative
work, having due regard to the limited adaptability of older men and to
employment opportunities in the industries for which they are retrained."2
PREMISES AND EQUIPMENT

The various activities described call for the establishment of training
schools with premises of their own, and an increasing number are gradually
being set up. An early school in Rotterdam was set up on board an old
ship, but this solution, though it provides a good environment, is likely to
give rise to difficulties: the ship's gear is no longer up to date as a model
and cannot easily be changed, and the expenses of maintenance mount up.
Schools are now usually on land, sometimes using available warehouse space.
The type and nature of the equipment needed naturally varies a great
deal with the type of work carried out in the port and the nature of the training provided. A "land ship" with full-scale derricks, hatch and a bit of
quayside has been found to provide realistic practice. Small-scale models of
various types of hoisting gear on which demonstrations can be made and
1
Conclusions and statements concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers, para. 31.
See Appendix 1.
2
Statement on the Social and Trade Union Consequences of Containerization,
op. cit.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

tests carried out are fairly generally in use. Where containers are in use,
models of the special gantry cranes used should be available. Exhibitions
of pictures or models of ships in current use help to provide the right background, and samples of cargo, knots and splices are also useful.
Wall charts, or flip charts, are particularly useful if indications of organisational structure or statistical background are being given. Films can be
most helpful, especially in the field of safety training.
Nor should written material be neglected. Explanatory booklets, well
illustrated, are appreciated. Synopses of lectures should wherever possible
be provided, as they often are. One aspect of language training may be
mentioned. In the Netherlands a simple Dutch-English phrase book for
cargo handling was produced, partly to facilitate communication between
dockers' gang leaders and the officers of visiting ships. This example might
usefully be copied elsewhere.
PAY DURING TRAINING

In most countries the employed docker, or the docker in a reserve pool,
usually undergoes training in working time and receives pay during training.
Where training is on a more or less full-time basis, the docker is as a rule
not allowed to work on a shift such as a late evening or night shift during
the training period.
Training in first aid, where it takes the foim of a separate course, is very
often undertaken by the docker on a voluntary basis, the authorities, the
employers or the sponsoring society (such as the Red Cross) providing the
necessary facilities.
At the pre-vocational schools training is usually free and grants are
available as a rule on the same basis as for pupils in other vocational schools.

4. EFFICIENCY IN PORTS
The introduction of more capital-intensive methods of handling cargo and
the use of larger and more expensive ships make it more important than ever
to ensure that the most efficient methods are used, that ships are not kept
waiting for labour more than is necessary, and that when the labour is provided it is really on the job and working as efficiently as is reasonably
possible.
Efficiency is partly a function of the equipment and the ships used, and
some of the more striking new developments in this field have already been
described. It is largely a question of labour, and of the willingness of labour
to enable the equipment to be used to best advantage, and it is with the
labour aspects of efficiency that this chapter will mainly deal. However,
Although labour definitely plays a decisive part in port productivity, it is
altogether wrong to assume that labour alone is to be blamed for poor production results, and it may well prove that lack of appropriate supervision and organisational work,
including work discipline, are directly linked to curtailed port
productivity.1
These aspects will be touched on in this chapter, and it may be mentioned here that dockers are often the first to suffer from deficiencies in
organisation, as these may prevent dockers paid at tonnage rates from making
the earnings they expect.
Some of the other labour aspects of efficient work in ports, such as those
connected with labour-management relations, methods of remuneration and
safety, will be referred to in subsequent chapters. The importance of training
dockers has already been stressed. Some problems of organisation which
affect the workers, including co-ordination with other modes of transport,
will be mentioned in the next chapter. However, this report cannot cover
all the aspects of port organisation and administration which affect efficiency.
THROUGH-HANDLING

In describing the new trends in handling cargo, one of the points emphasised was the attempt to reduce the number of times a unit of general cargo
is handled, and to reduce the number of units handled per ton.
1

The Turn-Around Time of Ships in Port, op. cit., para. 46.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

In the case of containers, with modern gantry cranes the container can
theoretically be moved from ship straight onto truck, trailer or railway
wagon, or conversely, in a single operation, the time of which can be reduced
to about two minutes. More often than not this type of direct handling is
not possible because of organisational difficulties, and the container has to be
put down on, or picked up from, the apron of the container yard, with a
further movement to or from its place in the container yard. Even with this
additional handling, however, the operation can be very rapid and smooth.
If a large number of containers are being handled, as when a container ship
calls, speed of operation requires the most careful preparation of the programme prior to loading, or prior to the berthing of a ship on arrival.
Arrangements for parking the container must be made and the movements
of trucks and trailers and railway rolling stock particularly carefully programmed and controlled. These implications carry with them certain requirements regarding customs and documentation, which will be referred to in
Chapter 5.
Striking results can also be achieved in the operation of roll-on/roll-off
ships. The speed with which private cars come off a car ferry cannot necessarily be reached in the case of trucks, trailers and palletised unit loads, but
where customs and documentation problems can be solved similar results
can be achieved. The number of dockers needed for such operations is
small.
In the case of palletised cargo, it is also often possible to arrive at a
considerable degree of through-movement. If the cargo is already in pallets
or arrives strapped in unit loads it can be placed in a single movement on
trailer or truck for its destination. In some cases, as where cargo is loaded
into covered railway wagons or trucks, it may have to be put down on the
dock and picked up by fork-lift truck for loading. However, in many cases
the pallet has to be built up or broken down in the dock warehouse or in the
ship's hold. In some African ports, for instance, there is even more unnecessary handling: once goods arrive in shed from ship they are invariably
removed from the pallets and are stowed for storage by hand. Upon delivery
of goods or upon cartage to customs, rail terminus, etc., they are mostly
removed by hand to trailers, whence they are transferred to railway wagons,
etc. The procedure involves a multitude of slow manual rehandling operations. If the goods were stored in sheds on the pallets on which they arrived
and on removal were allowed to move through all stages on the same pallets
until final loading on rail or lorries, the entire handling procedure would
be far more economic.l
1
Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in the
Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, op. cit., Part n , para. 445.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

The suppression of multiple handling is seldom an easy or straightforward operation, and many difficulties have to be overcome.
One of these occurs where different groups of dockers handle the cargo.
In the past this led to the rule that the cargo had to be put down on the
"skin of the dock" and picked up by the other group of dockers. The suppression of this practice was one of the important concessions made by the
unions on the United States Pacific Coast when the new agreement was
arrived at. The inclusion of both holdsmen and quayside workers in the
same union is an important element in overcoming practices of this kind and
in facilitating through-movement.
A similar problem may, however, arise on the side of the operators. The
shipowner may be responsible for delivering cargo to ship's side. What happens to it after that is not his responsibility. He may therefore want a tally
made at that point so that he, or his agent, and his insurer may have a discharge from their liability. Arrangements may be made to make the tally
when the pallet is being assembled in the hold, or later in the warehouse.
But when pilfering is a serious problem, there may be objections to such a
simplification. Further, the fact that small damaged packages may be hidden inside a palletised unit where they cannot easily be seen has to be borne
in mind.
In many ports practices are too firmly set for it to be easy to change
them. But where a choice is still possible, integrated cargo movement from
ship hold to shed or inland transport vehicle is desirable. An expert writes
that—
87. The divided movement suffers marked disadvantages in over-all productivity in most cases. Co-ordination between the two contracting bodies is frequently lacking. Mostly stevedores [holdsmen] stay idle while waiting for shorehandlers to remove (or deliver) the cargo.
88. Since two contractors are involved, it is impracticable to shift manpower
from one operation to another.... Wherever lighterage is employed, the shortcomings of the system are even magnified.
91. One of the most serious points of contention inherent in the system
involving two contracting bodies is the impossibility of establishing clear responsibility for shortages and damages of cargo occurring during handling operations.
92. It is, therefore, strongly recommended to adopt the integrated system
in all the ports irrespective of whether management is by private or public contractors. Integration will allow for increased productivity
combined with greater
economies to the contractor as well as to the vessel.1
1

A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, op. cit., Part I, paras. 87-92.

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

In the case of roll-on/roll-off operations, the integrated system is essential, and it is certainly particularly important also in the case of container
ships.
Where pallets are built up in the hold of a ship and include similar packages for different consignees in the same unit, the tally may be particularly
difficult. Unless the pallet is broken up and checked in the warehouse, this
may constitute a limitation on through-movement.
Thus, though the dockers may abandon any demand for multiple handling, this does not mean that it will automatically disappear, as it may be
insisted upon for other reasons of the kind already mentioned, such as customs inspection.
However, one of the basic elements of work study which calls for constant
attention is the analysis of how often a particular package is raised, lowered,
transported, left standing and handled.
AVAILABILITY OF LABOUR

Importance of the Availability of Labour
when and where Wanted
The ideal arrangement, seen purely from the point of view of the turnaround of the ship, would be that labour would always be ready to handle her
cargo the moment she berths. Thus, the United Nations report cited earlier,
estimating that some 60 per cent of a ship's time is spent in port, claimed
that 75 per cent of time in port could be eliminated if the 24-hour day and
seven-day week were adopted the same as they are at sea. ' Wherever possible, ports should endeavour to create conditions that would allow them to
operate 24 hours a day. Ships should be free to berth and unberth at any
time during the day or night and all customs, medical, pilotage, towage and
other facilities should be available as required. The economic advantages
to the ship and to the community are considerable—always assuming, though
this is a short-term consideration, that the ship would find cargo to be carried
in the time thus saved.
Shift Work
The economic advantages of shift work become much greater as the
capital investment increases. Thus the owner of a container ship will ask to
have her handled at all hours, even at considerable additional labour cost;
1

The Turn-Around Time of Ships in Port, op. cit., para. 16.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

in any case, the labour costs involved are likely to be low in relation to the
value of the cargo handled, not to mention the cost to the ship of any delay.
Similarly, if very expensive port equipment is in use, this will increase the
pressure to work shifts. It should also be borne in mind that, since the
greatest shortage from which most developing countries suffer is foreign
exchange and in most cases their primary need is to provide additional jobs,
they are naturally anxious that each unit of foreign exchange should produce
as many jobs as possible. If, therefore, shift working in a port can reduce
or postpone the need for expenditure on port expansion by fuller use of
existing berths, ensure that the existing cranes can handle increased traffic
and enable imported fork-lift trucks to be more fully used, this may constitute
a substantial gain in foreign exchange expenditure and capital investment,
while giving ships a better service and providing jobs for more dockers. The
International Labour Conference drew attention to this point in the Employment Policy Recommendation, 1964, in the following terms :
26. Measures should be taken—
(a) to promote fuller utilisation of existing industrial capacity to the extent
compatible with the requirements of domestic and export markets, for instance by more extensive introduction of multiple shifts, with due regard to
the provision of amenities for workers on the night shift and to the need for
training a sufficient number of key personnel to permit efficient operation
of night shifts.
The advantages of shift work are, however, accompanied by a number of
drawbacks.
Firstly, the pool of workers required to meet work on two or three shifts
is likely to be greater than on one shift, and the irregularity of work greater.
To take an extreme and over-simplified example, if a port received one ship
a week and could handle it in five shifts, one set of gangs on a single shift
would be enough, and these men would be regularly employed five days a
week. No guarantee make-up would be necessary. With three shifts of eight
hours each, three sets of gangs would be required, two of which would work
two shifts and one of them only one shift a week. To carry that increased
reserve with a guarantee of income would impose a costly burden on the
operators.
Secondly, shift work has social disadvantages and disrupts the family life
of the workers concerned. Recourse should therefore not be had to it
without taking this factor into account, and shifts should be used only when
it is clear that the economic advantages are so important that the social
sacrifice has to be accepted.

100

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Thirdly, dockers normally have to be compensated for the inconvenience
of shift work and for the additional costs tliey incur as a result of it; this
adds to the cost of the operation and constitutes a charge which has to be
paid by shipowners, their agents or port operators, and ultimately perhaps
by the consumer. In many cases, particularly in the case of smaller ships
which have not altered their schedules to take account of new methods of
cargo handling, those concerned are not willing to pay the extra cost.
Fourthly, to increase the number of hours a day during which ships are
worked only serves its purpose if this action does not create a bottleneck
elsewhere. The services required to enable ships to berth must be on duty.
If prompt clearance is desired, as is often the case, particularly for container
and roll-on/roll-off ships, adequate arrangements for customs clearance
(whether in transit or final), documentation work and onward movement by
road or rail during the same periods must have been made. Failing these
—and such efficient arrangements are exceptional where international trade
is involved—there must be enough warehousing or yard space, more than
would be required for single-shift operation.
In some cases shift work on a large scale is not possible, if only because
there are not enough dockers to go round.
Where it is possible, it becomes a question of cost and its distribution.
There is often a need for a thoroughgoing cost-benefit analysis of shift working in particular cases. Such an analysis needs to be carried out from two
points of view. Firstly, the whole operation should be viewed as a whole so
as to determine whether, and on what basis, it is worth while working shifts.
Secondly, the analysis has to be made from the point of view of the various
parties who derive benefit and pay costs. It may well be found that, though
shift working may be desirable from an over-all point of view, it is not in the
interest of the parties who have to pay for it. An operator may avoid congestion if a ship stays longer in port, particularly if there is no other ship waiting
to take her place. It is difficult to give examples, because the practices
regarding the distribution of costs vary from port to port and even from case
to case. It is, however, increasingly apparent that firms handling a high proportion of container traffic are viewing the operation as a whole, from inland
consignor to inland consignee wherever possible. They are therefore better
placed than most to judge of the advantages of shift work and are more likely
than smaller operators to press for it and to be ready to pay for it.
Any cost-benefit analysis should allow for such imponderables, difficult
by their nature to quantify, as the social effects of shift work on the life of
the family and the fact that capital equipment imported at high cost by a
country short of foreign exchange is not always utilised to the full.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

101

Starting Times for Shift Work
Arrangements to provide prompt service through shift work vary considerably, depending on the custom of the port, its needs and its labour supply.
Probably the majority of ports still work mainly the normal day shift only,
extended by overtime when desired. This arrangement, however convenient
to the dockers and the authorities concerned, often causes delays which would
be uneconomic in the case of larger and more modern ships, especially those
carrying containers.
In a large number of other ports provision is made for the working of a
night shift, usually at high cost. Yet another arrangement is the double day
shift, with no night work.
In some ports very flexible arrangements exist, so that ships are seldom
kept waiting. For instance, in Antwerp, calls are made at 7 a.m. for the day
shift, at 1 p.m. for the afternoon shift, at 2.30 p.m. for an early morning
shift the next day, and at 3.30 p.m. for the night shift. There are thus
several different times of starting work each day. In Rotterdam the night
shift is usually 4Va hours, worked during the period from 5.30 p.m. to
3.30 a.m., with half-an-hour's break, but some men may work a second night
shift of 4 hours, during the period from 10.30 p.m. to 7 a.m., with a halfhour break. In Buenos Aires four 6-hour shifts are worked, starting respectively at 7 a.m., 1 p.m., 7 p.m. and 1 a.m. These arrangements are
reported to have helped to clear port congestion and to have substantially
reduced overtime costs.
The afternoon or night shifts are much less often worked than the day
shift, because of the cost. The proportions of men on different shifts vary
too much from port to port for any generalisation to be made, but a few
examples may be given. In Hamburg it was estimated that about 60 per cent
of the men are on day shift, 30 per cent on the late afternoon shift, and
10 per cent on the night shift. In Amsterdam just over 10 per cent of the
hours worked in a normal working week were performed in the evening shift,
and another 10 per cent at night. In Rotterdam 20 to 25 per cent were normally worked on the ordinary night shift, the second night shift (through the
night) being seldom worked. In Liverpool, in 1967, usually one ship in four
was worked nights, but with a reduced number of gangs.
There is room for some difference of opinion on the relative efficiency
of day and night work, and studies relating to dock work are not readily
available. In northern and temperate climates the general impression is that
night work is less efficient, for three main reasons : workers are not physically
at their best at night, particularly in the early hours of the morning ; supervision is often slack at night; and inefficient or inadequate lighting often

102

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

slows down work and adds to risk. Under tropical conditions, however,
there may well be some advantage in night work if the temperature drops
somewhat. These are matters on which further careful investigation would
be useful.
Round-the-Clock Working
There are various ways of allocating dockers to shifts, and these will be
referred to in connection with conditions of work. There is, however, one
practice which is brought up here because of its marked negative effect on
efficiency, and that is "through-working", or working round the clock by the
same gang, which is allocated to a particular ship and stays on the job until
it is finished, with no more than brief intervals such as meal breaks. This
practice, which used formerly to exist in the United Kingdom, is still current
in many ports in developing countries, including the Republic of China,
Thailand and several ports in West Africa; it was recently abandoned in
Malaysia. Round-the-clock working is particularly prevalent when there is
no guarantee of employment or income ; in such circumstances it is natural
that when dockers have managed to get a job they should want to hold on to
it for as long as they can and get as much out of it as possible. Moreover,
under this system many of the hours worked are paid at premium rates for
overtime—night work or week-end work—so that earnings are relatively
high. It is the dockers who insist on it, often showing a serious disregard
for their own health. In one country regulations permit 72 hours' continuous
work with only a compulsory half-night's rest. In a number of others there
is no restriction at all.
There are obvious objections to such a system. In the first place, it is
frankly inhuman, in that it puts pressure on men to carry on work under
conditions of physical exhaustion for the sake of cash and because they do
not know when the next job will come. Secondly, it is grossly inefficient:
physiological experiments tend to show that physical output cannot be maintained, but tends to drop after eight or ten hours, and that this trend is particularly marked where effort has to be exerted under conditions of high
temperature and humidity such as often prevail in tropical ports. In practice,
the men often protect themselves by snatching some sleep on the job, especially during the night shift, and this means that gangs have to be larger than
really necessary. Damage to cargo and careless checking and sorting also
result. Thirdly, round-the-clock working is dangerous in that accidents are
far more likely to occur. Finally, it increases irregularity of employment
and renders more difficult the introduction of a proper scheme for the allocation of labour.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

103

Round-the-clock working has been investigated by experts, who all
roundly condemn it. It is strongly urged that, where this is still necessary,
regulations should be adopted prohibiting dockers from working for two
consecutive shifts, or working overtime to an extent which would have much
the same effect. There should be new labour for each shift.
In Penang, Malaysia, the Wages Council agreed that round-the-clock
working would be replaced by two eight-hour shifts, with no worker being
allowed to work for more than one shift a day. It was calculated that,
although so-called round-the-clock working resulted in only 19 hours of
effective work, with fresh labour for each of two eight-hour shifts a similar
tonnage would be obtained as a result of 16 hours' work.
Pressure to work round the clock will, however, continue as long as
schemes for the registration of dockers with a fair allocation of available
jobs and some guarantees of employment or income, such as those described
in Chapter 2, have not been set up.
Week-End Work
Many of the observations made above with regard to shift work apply
also to work at week-ends or on public holidays. Here again, there is often
a conflict between the desire to secure a quick turn-around for ships and the
social considerations which make it desirable for dockers, like most other
workers, to be able to use their week-ends for family life and recreation.
In some countries religious considerations are also important.
Practices vary between ports, and this sometimes leads shipowners, when
they can, to route their ships so as to spend the week-ends either at sea or in
ports which offer week-end handling, avoiding in that period those that do
not. The result is that many ports have come to offer week-end handling,
but at substantial additional cost, since premium rates must be paid to
dockers in order to induce them to work at week-ends.
Week-end work has generally been provided for passenger liners and car
ferries, and the pressure for it will be very great indeed in the case of container ships.
Absenteeism
In some ports the availability of labour is seriously affected by absenteeism. Some of it is inevitable; allowance must be made for holidays,
sickness and personal circumstances. However, when work is still on a
purely casual basis, a worker may turn up or not, as he pleases, and whether
he does so may depend in part on what he can earn in some other job and in
part on how much he earned in his last turn as a docker. Where absenteeism

104

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

constitutes a serious problem, it is well worth while making a careful analysis
of the reasons for it, so that some of them can be eliminated by appropriate
counter-measures.
The best way, however, of dealing with unauthorised absenteeism is to
have a proper scheme for regular employment with suitable income guarantees. If a worker does not attend a call or accept the work offered to him
under the local rules, he usually cannot draw attendance money and will find
any guarantee offered to him reduced in consequence. If unauthorised
absences are too frequent, he may even lose registration.
FLEXIBILITY IN THE USE OF LABOUR

In many ports limitations imposed on the use by the employer of available labour complicate the task of allocation and prevent the most rational
utilisation of manpower.
Some of the difficulties are due to differentiation by categories of occupations, with the men sometimes grouped in different unions, and to the
practice of assigning specified functions to individual employers. Other limitations arise out of a desire of the men to "make work", to make each job last
as long as possible, and not to deprive another gang of its chance of a job.
Such practices are therefore often the result of a fear of unemployment, and
flourish particularly where there is no guarantee of employment or income.
When such a guarantee is given, they should logically disappear, and it is in
fact on these lines that the kind of negotiations described in Chapter 9 as a
"new deal" have been conducted.
One of the restrictions sometimes found prevents dockers working a particular hatch from being transferred to another hatch of the same ship during
a given shift. This means that a gang finishing a hatch early will stand by
idle and be paid for the remainder of the shift or half-shift as the case may
be. There are variants of this rule, which can be applied differently even in
parts of the same port, as it was in London before the new agreement was
negotiated. In some cases the workers accept transfer even though the rule
applies in other parts of the same port; in others they will accept transfer
only if the same type of cargo is being handled in the two holds. Apart from
the loss of paid time, one of the drawbacks of this type of restriction is that
it may make it more difficult to conduct loading or unloading operations so
as to keep the ship in trim. To do so might mean working an extra shift.
The reasons for practices of this kind need to be understood. The docker
may in such cases regard himself as having been engaged to do a particular
job. When that is done, he may wish to preserve his right to try to get
another job of his choice, perhaps a better-paying one. For that matter, an

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

105

employer may wish to be in a position to select a better gang. If the docker
is moved to another hatch, to the handling of a different type of cargo
(regarded as another job), or to another ship, he might, under the custom of
some ports, be expected to see that job through. Good gangs could thus be
kept on by employers who wanted to keep them, possibly depriving others
of a chance of "good" work (work that pays well or is not unpleasant), while
some other gangs might get stuck with a succession of disagreeable cargoes
or with an employer for whom they would prefer not to work.
Another reason is that a gang leader may be accustomed to working
with the same team and may not want to see them dispersed to reinforce
other gangs. This point has to be borne in mind so that a gang that has been
broken up during a shift, where that is permissible, may reconstitute itself for
the next call.
Whatever the reasons for the practice, it is wasteful. A ship which has
finished unloading from one hatch has to wait for the start of the next shift
or half-shift to start loading. Efficiency is hampered, but it is very difficult
to say by how much. In the United Kingdom the Devlin Committee refers
to an investigation carried out by one firm, which suggested a loss of about
5 or 6 per cent due to "continuity rules".1 It would be difficult and inappropriate to try to apply any such restrictions in the case of roll-on/roll-off
or container ships.
A similar restriction applies to the transfer of dockers from one ship to
another during a shift. This creates a problem where dockers are accustomed to finishing a ship with the same gangs (subject to new labour on consecutive shifts). Clearly, if a gang is finishing a ship when another ship
berths, and both ships are handled by the same operator, that gang enjoys
priority over others in working the next ship, if it can be transferred to her
before the end of the shift.
These restrictions are tied up with the allocation system and are a result
of casual employment. They are among those which are to be abandoned,
at any rate in the United Kingdom, in exchange for regular employment and
other advantages.
Another restriction often prevents transfer from ship to shore and conversely. There may be considerable advantage in being able to reduce the
number of men in the hold at a certain stage of operations and transfer some
of them to quayside. In wet weather, if work on board is held up, it is useful
to transfer the men to warehouse work. In many countries this is possible ;
in others, any such transfers run into serious obstacles.
1
Ministry of Labour : Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon.
Lord Devlin into Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, Cmnd. 2734
(London, Her Majesty's Stationery Office, 1965), para. 33.

106

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

In many ports the gangs on board are employed by the shipowner or his
agent, and those on shore by a port authority or another operator. In such
cases no transfer is possible. Holdsmen (known in some countries as stevedores) are often specialists, recruited in separate gangs, and may even be
members of different trade unions from other dockers. There is no doubt
that in a conventional ship the stowage of general cargo calls for special
skills and care; this is a matter of special pride for the holdsmen, and they
would in some countries resent being transferred to quayside jobs. Reluctance to transfer from ship to shore is not therefore just based on "making
work", but has a long tradition behind it. However, the advantages of
transferability are considerable, and with new methods of cargo handling the
distinction between ship and shore work tends to disappear. Work on container ships is likely to be carried out by one gang, without distinction between work on board and on shore, and the same is the case of roll-on/roll-off
ships. For instance, in the Bellport terminal in Wales, the "whole concept is
based on the almost complete interchangeability of function of the terminal
staff", every one of whom is trained to operate the equipment in use.1
Distinctions based on skOs continue to exist. Deck-hands (or signallers),
winchmen and fork-lift truck drivers require certain experience and skills
which must be recognised. But again the trend is towards training all-round
dockers, any of whom, in a modern port, may ultimately be expected to be
able to handle fork-lift trucks, and many of whom will be able to work the
winches or act as deck-hands. Their interchangeability would make it easier
to constitute gangs, to replace members of gangs momentarily absent and
generally enable a more efficient use to be made of the manpower available.
As already stated, expert opinion has urged that the distinction between
ship and shore be abandoned where possible, so that composite gangs can,
without divided responsibility, handle both sides of the work, shifting from
one to the other as required.
The fact that many references have been made in this section to practices which restrict flexibility in the use of labour should not be interpreted
to mean that such difficulties arise in all ports. There are indeed a great
many in which there is no obstacle to shifting men from hatch to hatch, from
one ship to another, from ship to shore, and from job to job.
PRODUCTIVITY PROBLEMS

Much of this report is concerned with the general issue of increasing
productivity in ports, whether measured by the turn-around time of ships or
1

Report on Marine Containers, op. cit., p. 15.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

107

tons of general cargo handled per gang per hour. Figures will not, however,
be given, because they do not lend themselves readily to international comparison. It is rare indeed to be able to obtain figures for the handling of the
same type of cargo under sufficiently similar conditions in different ports.
In particular, methods of handling often vary greatly.
In this section some particular aspects which give rise to discussion in
many ports will be referred to, mainly unproductive time, its analysis and its
causes, the strength and composition of gangs and the size of sling loads.
Unproductive Time
For the purpose of this discussion, "unproductive time" will be used to
mean time during which dockers are being employed and remunerated but
during which no cargo is being loaded or discharged. It will therefore not
include other periods during which a ship has no dockers allocated to it, for
instance because it is waiting for berthing faculties, pilotage, customs or
medical clearance or other formalities, or because it is waiting for labour to
be allocated to it or for the hour at which work can start. These delays can,
of course, also be significant, but except for the question of times at which
the men start work, which has already been referred to, are scarcely relevant
to this report. Unproductive time should, however, not be deemed to include
periods during which workers are being paid but are not expected to be on
the job, as when they are drawing attendance money or payments to make
up their guaranteed minimum, or on holiday, or in receipt of employer-paid
sick pay where this exists.
Unproductive time may, for purposes of analysis, be divided into three
broad types :
(a) unproductive time due to labour issues, such as delays in starting work,
completion of shift after work has been finished, bad time-keeping, washing time, rest periods, spelling and inefficient use of available time ;
(b) periods during which cargo is not being handled because related work
has to be carried out, such as uncovering and covering of hatches, dunnaging, or shifting cargo to adjust stowage or trim ;
(c) delays due to extraneous causes: weather, failure of cargo to arrive,
congestion in clearance, unavailability or breakdown of equipment, etc.
"It is desirable that a concerted effort be made to reduce unproductive
time to a minimum." 1 However, a certain amount of it cannot be avoided,
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 27.

108

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

and it would therefore be tnfair to regard its existence as an indication of
inefficiency on the part of management or labour. Nevertheless, it seems
likely that in most ports there is plenty of room for improvement, and it is
consequently important that the matter should be kept under constant observation and the extent and causes of unproductive time analysed with a view
to seeking remedies.
To give some idea of its extent, reference may be made to analyses carried out in Australia and New Zealand.
In ten major ports of Australia unproductive time in 1965-66 totalled
38.3 per cent of gross working time x , classified as shown in table 3.
TABLE 3. U N P R O D U C T I V E T I M E AS P E R C E N T A G E O F GROSS
W O R K I N G T I M E IN T E N M A I O R AUSTRALIAN PORTS
Unproductive time

Percentage of gross
working time

Award Provisions * :
Rest periods
Unused m i n i m a 2
Travelling time
Waiting time, etc
Pay period

6.2
3.1
0.9
2.2
0.4

Ancillary Stevedoring Operations :
Covering and uncovering
Rigging, etc.—ships' gear
Rigging, etc.—shore gear
Dunnaging, clearing, etc

5.9
4.0
2.0
2.6

Other Delays:
Cargo delays
Shunting
Berthing delays
Weather delays
Labour delays
Disputes

2.6
0.6
0.7
4.3
2.7
0.1
Total .

38.3

Time granted in accordance with the provisions of the Waterside Workers' Award issued by the
Arbitration Court.
'Time to complete minimum guaranteed time for shift, even though work has been completed.

In New Zealand 2 , for overseas ships, the total of unproductive time in
1966 amounted to 56.3 per cent of paid time, classified as follows:
(a) working time other than cargo work, including the time
taken in the removal and replacement of hatches, rigging
gear, cleaning and preparing holds, and shifting and
restowing cargo, and time taken on non-contract work
such as mails, luggage, livestock, etc

23.3 per cent

1
Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority : Report and Financial Statements
Year Ended 30 June 1966, p. 82.
2
Waterfront Industry Commission: Annual Report and Statement of Accounts
the Year Ended 31 December 1966 (Wellington, Government Printer, 1967), p. 7.

for
for

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

(b) conditions of employment, including weather delays,
travelling time, smoke periods, pay and balance of minimum period of employment after work completed . . .
(c) employers' time, including awaiting ship, awaiting cargo,
awaiting trucks, breakdown of machinery, shortage of
mechanical equipment

109

16.5 per cent
16.5 per cent

Getting to Work.
Where allocation systems are in use, dockers who have to report to the
hiring hall or call stand must often do so an hour before work starts. If the
halls are suitably located, this usually means that gangs and extra men, who
are quickly selected or allocated by any other means, can start on time at
dock gates or place of work according to the practice of the port. For this
to be possible a certain amount of planning will have had to be done before
call time, and the officials concerned cannot keep normal civil service hours.
Cases are on record where failure to realise this was a serious cause of lost
time to the men and to ships. Once the easy allocations are over and additional men have to be selected and possibly transferred from one part of
the port to another, delays are difficult to avoid. Possible lines of action to
be urged are (a) sufficiently early notification of needs by operators ; (b) good
communications between different hiring centres and the operators; and
(c) efficient transport arrangements for men transferred. In many ports
transport within the port is in working time, and where ships are moored in
stream or at sea delays for transport by launch can quickly mount up if there
are not enough launches and if efficient organisation is not provided.
If the call time is too close to the time for starting work, and sometimes
there is only a gap of 15 minutes, the men often cannot reach their workplace on time. Sometimes the bulk of the gang is on time, but there are
delays in finding the extra men. The gang may or may not be willing to
start work without them; it is often largely a question of whether they
believe that they will arrive before long.
The avoidance of these delays and complex allocation operations is one
of the great advantages of regular employment. Further, as stated in
Chapter 2, to the extent that the men can be told in advance where to report,
or have the opportunity to carry on with the same employer, the smaller the
proportion of men who have to be allocated at each call, the smaller the loss
of time.
Bad Time-Keeping.
There have been complaints in many ports about bad time-keeping, consisting of late starts for which there was no justification, unduly extended
rest periods, and knocking off early.

110

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

To some extent, some unproductive time may legitimately arise from
these causes. Working time may, for instance, be calculated from the dock
gates, which may be some distance away. In some countries the dockers
are, by agreement or award, allowed time for washing or taking a shower
during working hours. Further, it is difficult to shut down all operations in
a port at the same moment, and some cargo handling may have to cease a
few minutes before the end of a shift, for instance to enable equipment to be
put away or the last load to be taken to the warehouse.
No doubt, however, there are cases where early knocking off, or bad
time-keeping generally, has become a habit. In such cases, it may be primarily a question of better supervision and the re-establishment of normal
work discipline on the basis of real understanding between management and
the dockers.
Rest Periods.
Rest periods or breaks a the course of work have been the subject of
much misunderstanding and recrimination.
Where work involves strenuous physical effort, and work in the hold on
conventional methods of handling still quite often does, no man can be
expected to exert muscular effort consistently for eight hours, or even for
four. Some alternation of effort and relaxation is a physical necessity, and
this must be recognised when, time studies are undertaken of the handling of
cargo.
In most cases of general cargo handling by hook and sling or pallet,
periods of physical inactivity usually occur for both holdsman and quay
worker in the natural cycle of operations. These are usually sufficient to
avoid muscular strain, but are too short for the satisfaction of physical needs,
so that some possibility of brief absences from the place of work have to be
provided for. On some operations, for instance where conveyors or pocket
belts are in use, there may be little or no let-up.
Under conditions of high temperature and humidity, such as often obtain
in tropical ports, rest periods for dockers exerting muscular effort are even
more necessary from a purely physiological point of view. Table 4 indicates
tentative rest allowances for workers exerting physical effort, but already
acclimatised, for various atmospheric conditions at selected readings of a
kata thermometer at high temperatures. It is based on experience gained
by an ILO productivity mission in India. It will be noted that in extreme
cases work becomes virtually impossible.

111

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS
TABLE 4. TENTATIVE REST ALLOWANCES FOR ACCLIMATISED
PERSONS UNDER VARIOUS ATMOSPHERIC CONDITIONS AT
SELECTED KATA READINGS AT HIGH TEMPERATURES
Cooling power
(in millicalories
per sq. cm/sec)

Percentage rest
per shift

16
14
12
10
8
6
5
4
3
2

—
—
—
3
10
21
31
45
64
100

Source : International Labour Office : Introduction to Work Study (Geneva, ILO, second edition
(revised), 1969), p. 300.

In other cases it is the continuity of the duty that has to be taken into
account. When cargo is being handled winchmen and deck-hands must be
on duty, and even if the task does not call for much physical effort it requires
concentrated attention.
The question arises as to whether it is best to have recognised breaks,
during which work stops, or so to organise the work that those concerned
can in practice have adequate breaks while the work carries on. In the case
of holdsmen and quayside workers much depends on the nature of the work
cycle and the method of work. The need for rest periods may have to be
taken into account in determining the strength of gangs. In the case of
winchmen and deck-hands, as well as cranemen, a relief man should be
provided, sometimes from among the other members of the gang. Rest
periods can then be staggered.
From the point of view of the ship, there would appear to be every
advantage in not having fixed breaks, but to enable the work to carry on,
giving the dockers enough time to satisfy physical needs and to obtain refreshments. The solution will depend on the nature of the equipment and the
custom of the port, but it should be clear that any attempt to regard any
period during which a worker is "at ease" as "unproductive" and to be eliminated may well defeat its own object. It will create resentment and the
workers concerned are more likely to protect themselves by slowing down
the general pace of work.
This does not, however, mean that organised practices such as spelling
or welting should be condoned. These practices, by which a proportion of
the men are idle for part of the time (perhaps for as much as half) are said
to have originated in the excessively long hours worked in war-time and
carried on into peace-time in Liverpool and Glasgow. It has been found to

112

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

arise in developing countries where gangs work around the clock, some men
sleeping part of the night shift. The practice of spelling used also to be
prevalent in New Zealand £nd has been reported at times from other places
as far apart as Colombo and San Francisco.
In the United Kingdom both the employers and the unions have declared
themselves against this practice, but it has proved difficult to eradicate under
a casual system of employment. An employer will hesitate to enforce discipline if he believes his action will make it more difficult for him to select
the gangs he wants at the hiring hall. In any case, there is need for agreement between employers and unions against abusive practices of this kind,
and employers must be able to take disciplinary action without opposition
from the union. It is hoped that the abolition of casual employment and the
switch to regular employment will improve the situation.
On the United States Pacific Coast the system known as "four-on, fouroff", according to which two holdsmen out of four in each of two gangs
were as a rule either resting or absent, used to be prevalent. The unions
agreed in 1960 that the practice should not continue, though it is reported
that it still persists to some extent.
Ancillary Work.
A certain amount of cargo-handling time is "unproductive" because
several members of a gang may have to stand by while the ship berths, the
hatches are uncovered, or the rigging got into position. Some of this cannot
be avoided. However, opinions differ on the question of whether the ship's
crew or the dockers should uncover the hatches. This is largely a demarcation issue, though from the ship's point of view time would be saved if the
work could be done by the crew. It is to be noted that in the Australian
publication referred to 1 this kind of work accounts for 10 per cent of the
gross working time, which seems high.
Once again modern techniques are rendering much of the discussion
obsolete. The increasing use of mechanically operated hatch covers provides
a practical solution to the problem. In the case of roll-on/roll-off ships the
issue does not arise.
Weather.
Another source of lost time is bad weather. It also often gives rise to
discussion, as differences of opinion arise as to whether or not the weather
is too bad for work to continue.
1
Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority : Report and Financial Statements for
Year Ended 30 June 1966, op. cit.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

113

New techniques can be of great help in this matter. Containers can normally be handled in practically any weather. Roll-on/roll-off operations are
but slightly affected, depending on the nature of the cargo and the distance
from ship to warehouse or inland transport vehicle. Trailers are covered,
and palletised units can be covered by waterproof sheets if necessary. The
dockers should be issued with protective clothing.
The protection of hatches and cargoes by waterproof canopies or "rain
tents" has been tried. A survey team in Australia "has observed a reasonable rate of work being achieved under most adverse circumstances of wind
and rain through the use of rain tents".1 Where conveyors or bucket belts
are used, this system is manageable. In other cases it is stated that it interferes with derricks or cranes. The difficulties of working ordinary cargo
during bad monsoon weather still await a satisfactory solution.
Experts in tropical countries have urged that maximum use be made,
particularly through shift work and overtime, of the workable weather periods
in order to make up for the inevitable loss of time during the heavy rains.
Time-Wasting Practices.
There are a number of other practices which waste working time, and the
reduction of their impact is largely a question of efficient organisation of
work and supervision. The desire on the part of all concerned to eliminate
waste is an important element, and this will depend partly on goodwill, and
perhaps also on methods of remuneration, a matter which will be referred to
in Chapter 7.
For instance, among the time-wasting occurrences not already mentioned,
a survey conducted by the Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority in the
loading of wool for export lists the following :
•

holding the empty hook below when it is safe and clear to be taken out ;

•

holding the full hook on deck when the square is clear for the sling to be
taken in or when the sling could be taken in if the holders were warned to
stand clear;

•
•
•

holders not meeting the hook within a reasonable time ;
improper unsnottering of bales ;
leaving bales in the square to prevent the next sling being landed when there
is space to roll them clear;

•

slow winch driving and inattention of winchman and/or hatchman.2

1
Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority : Report and Financial Statements for
the Year Ended 30 June 1966, op. cit., p. 33.
«Ibid., p. 35.

114

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

The survey team came to the conclusion that the hook was only in productive use for about 70 per cent of the productive time, or about 35 per
cent of the gross time.1
Close investigation of many other conventional port operations might
well disclose other cases in which work could be speeded up without undue
pressure on the dockers and without in any way increasing risks.
Strength oj Gangs
One of the practices most likely to be affected by new methods of cargo
handling is the number and composition of gangs. In many ports these factors have been fixed on the basis of tradition and have been only imperfectly
adapted to changed circumstances.
It is difficult to lay down what a minimum gang should consist of for
various types of cargo, and there is room for marked differences of opinion.
This was one of the issues referred in 1967 to a Commission of Inquiry
in Montreal with a view to arriving at a comprehensive settlement of a longstanding dispute, and the question was fully investigated. The expert advice
tendered to the Commission showed that a very large number of variables
were involved, depending on the type of ship's gear, ship, cargo, quayside
facilities and sheds used. This fact, in the view of the Commission, makes
it impossible to use a conventional method in determining the number of
men per gang. Recourse to time and motion study was found unsuitable for
the purpose. The approach used was therefore the analysis of the various
tasks to be performed. When ship's gear is used there is work for two
winchmen, a deck-hand (called hatchman), slingmen on the dock, fork-lift
truck operators on the quay and in the hold, other holdsmen and their helpers.
Allowing for the necessity to provide for replacements and relief men (the
need for which was discussed above in connection with rest periods), the
Commission concluded that 16 men plus a foreman were the minimum
required.2
In the United States Pacific Coast Agreement of 1960, the basic gang
for break-bulk cargo was defined as follows: a gang boss (where such are
used), a winch driver (two on single winches), a hatch tender, two slingmen
or front men, and four holdsmen. This is the gang on board, and does not
cover quayside workers. The number of men may be increased when cargo
has to be hand-pulled or when necessary to guarantee against an "onerous
1
Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority : Report and Financial Statements for
the Year Ended 30 June 1966, op. cit., p. 34.
2
Canada Department of Labour: Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St.
Lawrence Ports (Ottawa, 1967) (mimeographed), pp. 64-73.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

115

individual workload", or to maintain safety standards. The employer can
ask for a reduction in existing scales when he considers that a gang is too
large for his requirements. For operations other than break-bulk cargo, the
minimum set out above may be waived. When new methods of operation
are introduced the size of the gang is to be discussed between the parties and
determined, in case of disagreement, by the machinery provided for the settlement of disputes. In the 1966 agreement, gang sizes are reduced as a
result of the provision that two men out of every specified basic gang be
skilled men, which means that it is no longer necessary to have the basic gang
supplemented by one or more additional skilled men, as formerly. During
the 1966 negotiations, there was considerable discussion of the implications
of the use of the "robot", a lifting cage attached to the ship's gear on to
which a fork-lift driver can deposit a unitised load, which can then also be
removed by fork-lift. Though by this system the number of men could in
theory be reduced, the agreement still provides for the basic four holdsmen
per gang.1
In New York the basic gang was retained, even for container handling,
but reduced by two men in April 1966 and by a further man in October 1967,
bringing the level down to 17 men, plus a foreman.
In Finland the constitution of "bale-units" of cellulose and wood pulp
enabled the strength of gangs to be reduced from 9 or 11 men to 4 or 5.
In Madras, in 1966, the strength of the standard gang was reduced from
15 to 11 men because "it was found that with the use of fork-lift trucks,
pallets and other mechanical aids, the scale was too high and most of the
men remained idle".2
In Singapore the strength of the stevedoring (ship) gang was reduced in
1964 from 17 to 13 men, comprising 1 serang (foreman), 3 winchmen/
signalmen, and 9 holdsmen. Explaining this change, the Chairman of the
Port Authority stated that "after intensive study it has been found that the
old gang of 17 men cannot work effectively owing to conditions in the hatch
and other reasons. A gang of 13 men will be able to cope with all normal
conditions of work." 3
The above figures are given only by way of example, it being understood
that no attempt should be made, for the reasons stated, to compare the position between one port and another.
1

KOSSORIS, "1966 West Coast Longshore Negotiations", op. cit., p. 1071.
Statement by Mr. JAYWANT, Traffic Manager, Madras Port Trust, at a Symposium
on Palletisation held in Calcutta, August 1966.
' T h e Port of Singapore Authority: What Is Shift Work at the Wharves? (Oct.
1964), p. 6.
2

116

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

With the advent of new methods of cargo handling, there will be a drive
to review existing manning scales. Roll-on/roll-off ships can be handled by
fairly small gangs, depending in part on the space available in the hold.
Special gang strengths have in practice been fixed for various types of bulk
cargo. Whether or not gang strengths can be reduced as a result of palletisation of cargo depends on whether the cargo remains palletised or strapped
on the ship's voyage, or whether, and if so at what point, unit loads are
broken up or assembled. Obviously the pressure to adapt the gang strength
to real needs will continue. As a rule, gang strength will be the subject of
negotiation between the parties and the outcome will be arrived at by agreement, unless there is already agreement to let the operator decide how many
men are needed, subject to certain safeguards.
There is therefore a great deal to be said in favour of not fixing gang
strengths too rigidly in advance, but enabling them to be adapted to real
needs. This may be done, as will have been noted, by determining the composition of a basic gang for the handling of general cargo by traditional
methods, with the possibility of adding extra men as needed.
Reference has already been made to the provision that no unnecessary
men need be employed (subject to various reservations and procedures
already referred to) under the United States Pacific Coast agreement. The
reduction in gang sizes is one of the matters which came up for examination
by the modernisation committees under the changes coming into effect in the
United Kingdom for the abolition of all restrictions on the effective utilisation
of manpower and facilities, including the fullest possible economic use of
mechanical aids.1 In France the Government reports that the strength of
gangs is fixed in each port in the light of the nature of the cargo to be handled
and of local custom. In Buenos Aires recent regulations provide that the
strength of the gangs should be adapted to needs. There would therefore
appear to be in many countries an increasing de jacto adaptability to changed
conditions.
A few examples of container gangs may be given. In Bremen the gang
consists of 13 men: 1 crane driver, 4 truck drivers, 3 helpers on land, 3 on
board ship, 1 foreman and 1 watchman. At the Bellport terminal in Wales
only eight employees are necessary to operate the new gantry crane and no
dockers in the traditional sense are used ; a ship's cargo of 2,450 tons can be
discharged in four to five hours. To handle a traditional vessel of comparable size 12 to 20 dockers would have been required for 12 hours.2 The
1
National Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry : National Policy Directive
on the Modernisation of the Docks Industry, September 1965.
2
Report on Marine Containers, op. cit., p. 15.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

117

New York employers also claim that eight men are enough for container
operation.i
One of the difficulties of the present stage of transition is that operators
would like to know what gang strength will be acceptable to the unions before
they commit themselves to what may be quite substantial capital investment ;
on the other hand, the unions often ask for a trial period to see how the new
equipment works out in practice. They often suspect that the claims of the
manufacturers of the equipment, which the operators quote in support of a
reduction in gang strength, are over-optimistic.
A partial solution might be more controlled experiments on new equipment carried out jointly by the operators and the unions, or by an impartial
body with the participation of the organisations concerned; the results of
such experiments would be widely publicised. This may, however, be too
much to ask for in an industry which is, in many ports, still highly competitive,
and in which operators often prefer to keep their productivity results to
themselves.
Two conditions of a social character should, however, be respected : the
need for reasonable rest periods during working time, and the avoidance of
any pressure to speed up the work in a manner prejudicial to the safety and
health of the workers.
Sling Loads
In some cases the weights of sling loads are fixed by safety regulations.
In others, they are limited by the lifting capacity of the cranes or other
hoisting appliances. However, in spite of such regulations, in some cases
the dockers have imposed their own limits, and these have had the effect of
restricting throughput.
Larger and heavier sling loads become safely possible with better hoisting gear and better slings, and the limitation of sling loads imposed by the
dockers is one of the restrictions which the dockers are expected to give up
under "new deal" type of agreements. Nevertheless, considerations of safety
must remain dominant, as it is in nobody's interest to create additional risks
by handling loads for which the lifting gear is not designed.
SUPERVISION

Practically every investigation of port work, and all expert advice to
governments and others concerned on the subject, stresses the very great
importance of adequate supervision in increasing port efficiency.
1
Philip Ross : "Distribution of Power between the ILGW and the ILA", in Monthly
Labor Review, Jan. 1968, p. 6.

118

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

The gang foreman cannot as a rule be expected to be responsible for
supervision. He is in most cases one of the dockers ; he has to defend their
interests. Supervision is primarily the function of management as such. It
is important in regard to many aspects of the work : time-keeping, proper use
of equipment, safety, co-ordination of operations, damage to cargo, pilfering,
to mention but a few. A great deal of the responsibility for cases of inefficient work in ports is attributed to lack of proper supervision.
One of the points made is that supervision is often particularly slack, or
even virtually absent, during overtime hours and night shifts. This points to
the need of having a number of supervisors sufficient to enable them to be
on duty, watching the work rather than sitting in their offices, whenever
work is being performed.
The question of the training of supervisory staff will be referred to later
in this chapter.
CO-ORDINATION

Much of the unproductive time in cargo handling occurs because the
docker has to wait for somebody else to take some action. This has been
shown by the analysis given earlier in this chapter.
Arrangements before Berthing
Arrangements for the discharge of cargo are sometimes delayed by the
failure of the ship to give adequate previous notice of arrival. It might be
thought that in these days of rapid telecommunications such a contingency
would not arise. Curiously enough, it still does, and absence of notice of
arrival or uncertainty as to the time can result in the failure to ask for labour
in time (where allocation is from a pool), or else in keeping men waiting.
Delays in berthing may be accentuated by failure to co-ordinate with pilots,
tugs, health clearance and customs.
Pre-planning of unloading activities is greatly helped if the agent has a
stowage plan in advance. This enables the operator to decide on the number
of gangs to allocate and on the possible need for extra men. While this is
standard practice for some, there are still too many instances in which
stowage plans, or at least adequate indications of the cargo to be unloaded
and its positioning on the ship, are not received at all, or at any rate not in
time for advance planning.
Co-ordination between Ship and Shore
Much time is often lost because holdsmen are awaiting cargo, or find
that the quay is so congested that they have to wait before getting any more

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

119

out. Often this is simply a matter of lack of co-ordination of movement
between warehouse and ship's side. One of the methods commonly used to
reduce these delays is to hold at all times some reserve of cargo ready for
loading, perhaps pre-slung or on pallets. The cost of extra slings and pallets
is insignificant in comparison with the saving of time. In many cases, the
reasons for delays are much more far-reaching and result from inadequate
co-ordination with the shippers of goods.
In cases where through-movement from land vehicles to ship's side or
conversely is being carried out, the difficulties are much greater.
Vehicles have to be called forward in the right order. Assuming that the
vehicle arrives at the port in time, various devices are used for this purpose.
In some ports, arriving road vehicles are first parked away from the congested area (where that is possible) and the drivers clear documentation.
The latter are informed of the approximate time they will be called forward,
and they move to ship's side on instructions given by loudspeaker or some
other means. The planning of the shunting of railway wagons is not so easy,
and shunting is quite often a cause of unproductive time.
I n the case of a modern container terminal, such as that at Port Elizabeth

opposite New York, every precaution has to be taken to avoid holding up the
rapid loading cycle of the container ship ; at the same time, every effort has
to be made to avoid keeping containers in the port area longer than necessary. At the "sea-land" terminal the driver presents documents to a receiving
clerk on arrival. The papers are sent by pneumatic tube to the truck operation building, and in return the driver receives a card bearing a numbered
parking slot in a carefully marked-out 52-acre parking area. This is determined by a computer on the basis of the gross weight and destination of the
van. Any van wrongly parked is picked out visually by radio-equipped scout
cars, which report its location so that the misplaced van can be given its
correct loading sequence. The destination of vans on inbound ships is analysed within hours of the departure of the ship. *
One rather exceptional kind of failure to co-ordinate activities on ship
and shore has occurred where the working timetables of the two groups did
not coincide. This was simply due to failure to co-ordinate the result of
separate negotiations with different unions. In other cases, there has been a
failure to synchronise the activities of the dockers with those engaged in
related inland transport work.

1
"Prototype for Progress", in Via Port of New York (Port of New York Authority),
Special Issue: Transatlantic Transport Prévue, Vol. 17, Oct.-Nov. 1965, Nos. 10-11,
pp. 3-5.

120

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

WORK STUDY

Improvements in the co-ordination of the movement of cargo can often
result in the application of work study methods to cargo handling. This is
being practised to an increasing degree in many ports.
Without going into a description of work study methods, which could not
be undertaken within the compass of this report 1 , attention may be drawn
to some of the main questions which should be raised in connection with any
study of efficiency in ports.
The first, already mentioned, is: "How often is a given unit of cargo
lifted, lowered, transported, otherwise handled, or left standing?" Answers
to this question will probably bring out the advantage of containers or other
unit loads over traditional methods of handling. They will also show up
the advantages of leaving the unit load unbroken for as long as possible on
its travels from consignor to consignee, and of loading or unloading direct
from inland vehicle to ship where that can be done. While the organisational
difficulties are obviously great, analyses of cargo movements will encourage
those concerned to seek ways and means of overcoming them. The increasing enthusiasm for containers, unit loading and roll-on/roll-off techniques is
readily explained in terms of movement analysis, in spite of other considerations such as organisational difficulties, the loss of shipping space, the cost
of movable equipment and investment in new handling gear.
Another question, which goes beyond the simpler issue of frequency of
handling, is: "Is there unnecessary movement of cargo, men or equipment?"
Here the layout of the port, warehouses and storage or parking areas plays
a big part. It is often very difficult to alter existing facilities, and studies of
this nature have led to the development of new facilities, with a suitable
layout, for the handling of new types of traffic such as containers, and sometimes to the abandonment of other docks.
"Is the cargo unnecessarily held up at any point? If so, why?" Some
delays in warehouses are often inevitable, especially with shippers unable to
take delivery or not having the right documents in time, or because of customs clearance. But when the cargo starts moving, is there an undesirable
hold-up that leads to unproductive time in cargo handling? This is
obviously a problem that needs constant watching, and the critical points are
usually the "nodal points" where cargo passes from one mode of transport
to another or from the responsibility of one operator to that of another.
"Is the equipment used as constantly as it should be?" On this point,
where cargo is loaded by ship's gear or crane, the key position which is
1

Introduction

to Work Study, op. cit.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

121

watched is the hook. For what proportion of the time during which it could
be used is the hook idle and unloaded? Is this because cargo does not
arrive in time, or cannot be cleared ? Are slings or pallets not loaded quickly
enough? If so, why? For how much of the time is the load kept hanging
on the hook, waiting to be received? What prevents quicker clearance under
the hook?
A number of studies of this nature have been, and are being, carried out.
Because of the complexity of port operations and the number of factors which
have to be taken into account, a straight analogy with similar analyses undertaken, for instance, on the factory floor cannot be made, and the principles
involved have to be adapted to the special circumstances of the inquiry. The
only point in mentioning the matter here is to emphasise the value of work
study as a tool for improving efficiency in ports.
MANAGEMENT DEVELOPMENT

Improving efficiency in ports is primarily the responsibility of management ; the staff concerned need to be prepared for their task.
It is, therefore, generally recognised that facilities are required to enable
the management staff to cope with its responsibilities and with the "new
look" in cargo handling.
It would, however, be going far beyond the scope of this report to attempt
to cover the training and development of management for port administration in general, important though that may be for a nation's economy. The
observations below aim at raising certain questions which bear on the work
of the dockers.
There is little doubt that incompetent or inadequate management can
have very harmful repercussions on efficiency in the industry, on labourmanagement relations and on the morale of the dockers themselves. Writing
about the situation in East Africa, an expert comments that "labour has a
well-developed instinct for defects in competence of direction and supervision and quickly exploits such shortcomings to the detriment of productivity". * The same might perhaps be said for regions of the world other than
East Africa'
The Training of Supervisory Staff
There is scarcely a report on the situation in ports in developing countries which does not stress the need for better supervision over the work of
discharging cargo from ships and loading them. Referring to West Africa,
an expert writes: "The reasons for the prevailing deficiencies are in most
1
Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in the
Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, op. cit., Part IT, para. 398.

122

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

cases not so much due to poor quality of labour, as is frequently asserted, but
caused by inferior standards of supervision...." 1 In East Africa an adverse
factor referred to is "the alarmingly declining quality of supervision and
organisation of work with the resulting deterioration in work discipline".2
The same story is told of many ports of Asia and Latin America. There has
been criticism of inadequate supervision in certain industrialised countries
also, and comments relating to the extent of unproductive time, to which
reference has been made above, indicate that it is in better supervision that
part of the remedy must be sought.
In certain developing countries governments have been advised by experts
to start with the training of supervisors, just as soon as the necessary instructors are trained. Some assistants, such as gang bosses and foremen, should
also be trained. The purpose of training should be to raise the standard of
supervision by increasing the technical knowledge of the supervisors and their
understanding of organisation and methods in cargo operations and of the
need for constant observation and control of the work.
The problem of supervisor training arises, however, in other countries
also, even if in a different form. Thus the Australian Stevedoring Industry
Authority expresses the view that "the full benefit of any form of training
will only be realised if the concept of labour training is extended to supervisory staff".3
The increasing awareness of the need for training supervisory staff has
led to new courses being started. For instance, in the United Kingdom, the
National Association of Port Employers has for some ten years sponsored
two-week residential supervisory courses, as well as week-end conferences.
There have also been a certain number of internal courses run by some port
authorities. The National Ports Council decided to supplement these by a
new scheme designed "to provide a comprehensive introduction to modern
methods of supervision and their application to dock work".4 The new
courses which started in 1966 are intended to cover not less than 240 hours
within a period of three years. They should cover all newly appointed supervisors and between a third and a half of the existing supervisors. They
include subjects such as work study, safety, industrial relations, communications and port economics.5
1
A Report on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to Level of Freight
Rates in the Seaborne Trade of Africa, Part I, para. 100.
2
Ibid., Part II, para. 398.
8
Report and Financial Statements for Year Ended 30 June 1966, op. cit., p. 45.
4
National Ports Council : Training Schemes for the Port Transport Industry
(London, 1967).
6
P. J. POWRIE, Director of Training, National Ports Council : A Summary of Training in the British Port Transport Industry, paper submitted to the Eighth Technical
Conference of the International Cargo Handling Co-ordination Association, 1967.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

123

The Organisation of Training
Training Dockers.
The importance of training the docker has already been emphasised in
Chapter 3. In order that this can be done, there must be some organisation
to plan the training, and instructors to carry it out. Though as a rule
instructors can be found readily enough within the industry, they may need
some guidance as to the nature of the courses and in teaching methods. Too
much classroom study and book work is clearly to be avoided.
In countries and ports where no training scheme as yet exists, the recommendation which is usually made is that a chief training officer should be
appointed, who would be charged with planning the various forms of training, selecting instructors and giving them the necessary guidance. As this
task is usually enough for one man, it is probably best if he does not undertake any actual instruction work himself.
A chief training officer, however, will achieve little if he does not have
the support of the authorities, the employers and the unions. The ground
must be therefore carefully prepared in order that maximum support may be
obtained from all concerned. It may be useful to set up a tripartite training
advisory council, both to ensure co-operation and to see that the programmes
are on the right lines.
As already pointed out, in some countries the training of the docker is
undertaken by a dock labour board or similar authority.
The training of the docker is, however, not an isolated problem, even
though it may present special characteristics. Where a national scheme for
the training of workers exists, it is of course important that the arrangements
for dockers should be made in consultation with those responsible for the
more general scheme, and that they should fit into it as far as possible.
Training Higher-Level Management.
Higher-level management has every opportunity of sending staff to participate in management courses, and it sometimes does so. Though the techniques of management acquired by this means are valuable, they need to be
applied to the special circumstances of port work and, as far as the docker
is concerned, to the solution of the problems arising out of irregular employment. Exchanges of views also take place at week-end conferences and at
international gatherings, of which an increasing number are being held.
However, the programmes of many of these gatherings are often concerned
far more with technical, engineering, operational and commercial problems
than with labour problems. Yet, as this report will have shown, much more
consideration should be given to regularising employment and achieving effi-

124

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

ciency in the use of manpower coupled with better labour-management relations and conditions of work.
A couple of examples may serve to show how attempts are being made
to solve the problem.
In Amsterdam a programme for the development of management personnel was started in 1962 with the help of the Institute for Management
Education. Conferences were held first at managing director level, and then
at the level of pier or dock managers. These continued over the years, and
the nature and content of the discussions evolved. In 1967 a "management—
new style" project was started with a view to improving co-operation and
organisation in the port. A number of managing directors meet for a day
every ten weeks ; in the following four weeks, there are four one-day meetings
of groups of managers ; this is followed by practical work in the undertakings
by the managers, in consultation with their managing directors and with the
help of experts. It is hoped to hold several cycles of this programme a year.
Over the years discussions have gradually changed from "how to attract
labour" to "how to keep workers" and "how to motivate employees". Discussions left aside short-term problems to take the longer view on the formulation of personnel policy and the reconsideration of management's objectives.
Among other activities resulting from the whole programme since 1962
may be mentioned the practice of regular meetings of foremen, to be conducted by the pier managers, in which current procedures and methods of
work were studied and discussed. A productivity survey was also carried
out, the trade unions giving their support.1
In the United Kingdom the National Ports Council initiated a middle
management course, involving three or four periods of residential study of a
week each, a long period of private study, a visit to a continental European
port, and work on a personal project using applications derived from the
course. Among other matters, emphasis is laid on the human aspects of
management, including motivation, communication and the problems of
decasualisation, and management services, including work study and organisation and method techniques.2
The above are but isolated examples of û e work that is being done to
provide management with facilities for improving industrial relations and
meeting the challenge of new techniques. Though a certain amount of work
is being done in this field in some countries, it is still rather limited and is
mostly of very recent date. It is still largely in a pioneering stage, and it is to
1

Promoting Personnel Management (Amsterdam, 1967) (mimeographed).

POWRIE, op. cit.

EFFICIENCY IN PORTS

125

be hoped that new and valuable experiments will be launched in the near
future. There is certainly a need for them.
Other Aspects of Training.
The activities just mentioned are, however, only part of all the training
needed in a port, and in some cases the same administrative unit has to
handle the lot.
Apart from the promotion of stimulating discussions among the higher
echelons of the management, to which reference has been made above, what
would appear to be the greatest needs?
As already indicated, probably the most immediate problem in many
ports, particularly in developing countries, is to improve the quality of supervision.
Another aim, which can also be achieved partly through training, is to
improve in many ports the climate of labour-management relations. Some
of the aspects of this problem will be mentioned in Chapter 6.
The biggest task, however, is to set all the echelons of management thinking about how best to cope with the container and other methods of cargo
handling for achieving a rapid throughput of cargo, usually in unit loads.
This calls for an over-all approach often involving many different undertakings, engaged not only in port work, but also in shipping, inland transport,
forwarding agents' and customs agents' work. There should be full discussion between all interested parties, and those concerned should be trained
or retrained, if necessary, so as to make sure that the best methods are followed and that all co-operate.
In addition, there are of course all the problems of training staff for the
proper administration of the businesses of port authorities and port operators, including their economic and promotional aspects. Although these
organisations employ a very large staff other than those directly concerned
with the handling of cargo, they are outside the scope of the present report.
Where this has not yet been done, it would be desirable that each country
or port ascertain what facilities for training are available to cover the cargohandling aspects of port operations and then consider the priorities for the
setting-up of further facilities.
The example of such a survey undertaken in the United Kingdom in 1966
may be of interest.
At the planning level, the National Association of Port Employers
appointed at about that time a Training Development Officer whose job it is
to assist members to assess their training needs. The National Ports Council
has a Director of Training and two full-time Training Development Officers
who help to run some of the courses and provide an advisory training service

126

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

for port authorities. The British Transport Docks Board, which covers
largely the railway packet ports, appointed a Training and Education Officer
in 1965. Two port authorities only have a full-time training officer, although
many of them make training one of the express responsibilities of a senior
manager. Of the 480 private employers who replied to a questionnaire, only
two, in January 1966, had full-time training officers.
To give an idea of the staff involved, the Dock Labour Board, engaged
in the training of dockers, had 39 full-time training staff, the British Transport Docks Board had two full-time teaching staff, to which three were to be
added, and all the various port authorities between them had five full-time
and 27 part-time instructors for such jobs as safety training, crane driving
and police instruction. The private operators employed, in addition to the
two full-time officials mentioned above, 16 part-time instructors and training
officers.1

'POWRIE, op. cit.

5. PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION
New methods of cargo handling call for extensive measures of planning
in order to ensure their smooth introduction and operation ; there must also
be co-ordination between a number of various interests. Failure to work out
ahead of time the best methods of handling cargo and inability to visualise
their consequences can have serious repercussions on the docker, especially
in respect of his job security. Further, the docker cannot be expected to
make efforts and sacrifices to improve productivity if he finds that they are
all in vain because the through-movement of cargo has not been organised
properly. These are the reasons why we shall now deal with some of the
main aspects of planning and co-ordination, though it will be clear that it
would not be reasonable to attempt to deal, however briefly, with all of them.

RESEARCH

Research at National and Port Levels
Methods of Handling.
In most countries today no one really has a clear vision of the shape of
things to come as regards methods of handling cargo. No one knows whether
containers will come into general use, whether they are necessarily the best
solution in all cases, which routes will be affected by their introduction, or
how soon they will be adopted. The consequences of the demand for dockers
on the need for specialised equipment must also be assessed. To a large
extent, these questions are not answered at all, or only in rather vague terms.
It is clear that more information and research are needed.
The first question to ask is : "What is the best method of handling different types of cargo in the country concerned ?"
Many factors have to be taken into account. The first is the nature of
the cargo mainly handled at present and likely to be handled in future. Some
of it may be best handled in containers, some in smaller unit loads, and some
by specialised equipment such as the conveyors and bucket elevators for
standardised cartons, bananas and sides of meat. Naturally, the decision in
this matter will be influenced by the probable method of handling the same
cargo at the other end of its journey.

128

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Another factor, which has already been referred to, is the relationship
between the supply of labour and the level of labour costs on the one hand,
and the supply of capital, especially foreign exchange for buying equipment
abroad, on the other. These considerations will assist in determining whether
or not it is best to aim for a highly capital-intensive technology or rather for
what is often termed an "intermediate technology". It is largely a problem
of balancing investment costs, the need for the greatest possible efficiency
measured partly in terms of cost but largely in terms of the turn-around time
of ships, and the desire to preserve or create as many job opportunities as is
reasonably and economically possible in the circumstances.
International shipping connections have to be taken into account and may
in fact dictate the final answer. If the pressure towards the use of container
ships in a particular trade coming from one of the trading partners is very
great, this fact may force the issue for the other. It is this factor which is
leading to the race to set up facilities for receiving containers in some areas.
The problem of inland transport obviously enters into the picture because
if a particular method of handling cargo, such as containers or pallet loads,
is adopted for shipping, it is desirable that road, rail and, where relevant,
inland water transport adapt themselves to the same methods.
These problems will, of course, have to be considered separately in respect
of each main type of cargo. Bulk handling may have to be introduced for
some of the cargo now handled in small consignments (for instance bagged).
It is probable that a variety of methods of handling, from conventional
stowage to the latest container ships, will be in use at the same time in many
trades, and research may have to be made to evaluate the proportions in
which these different methods will be used.
Unfortunately, what is best may not always be possible, and views will
have to be reached on what the practical possibilities are even after all efforts
have been made to remove obstacles to using the best methods. These
obstacles arise out of external pressures which push a country into adopting
capital-intensive methods when they may in fact be premature in the light of
its economic development. There may be internal physical obstacles, such
as those arising from load limitations on inland transport media. There may
be resistance on the part of the dockers, which it may only be possible to
overcome by some deal involving guarantees of income or employment and
improvements in conditions of work such as those described in this report.
The problem of overcoming certain institutional obstacles, and particularly
customs procedures, may prove rather intractable. Last, but not least, consignors and consignees may not show much desire to co-operate in the new
methods of cargo handling, especially the preparation of unit loads and the
packing of goods into containers, and consideration will then have to be

PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

129

given to the incentives which will make it more worth their while to use these
methods.
Finally, and most important, the researchers should seek to make an
assessment of what is in practice likely to happen. It may take a long time
to achieve what is desirable, even when it is possible to do so, and the element
of timing is vital in any forward planning. This is in fact probably the
greatest unknown in any attempt to forecast the impact of new methods of
handling cargo.
Information Needed.
Any attempt at trying to determine the size and seriousness of the turnaround time for ships in port is hampered by a complete and utter lack of accessible factual data. What little information is available is usually in a form that
renders it quite meaningless. Shipping companies are usually loath to make
available their own operational data because of competition and ports cannot be
expected to readily make available information which would highlight their
inadequacies and shortcomings; thus it is extremely difficult to obtain1 precise
data of a general nature for comparison and other analytical purposes.
These remarks are confirmed by the difficulties encountered by national
bodies which have attempted to assess the situation.
Some indications of the type of information which would be relevant to
the research suggested have been given earlier in this report, especially in
connection with attempts at forecasting the number of dockers needed in
future. These suggestions, together with some others, may perhaps be
brought forward here.
As regards trade, the most important element is the forecast of maritime
trade for the years ahead. This task involves the assessment of many
unknown quantities, and will no doubt in most countries have been undertaken in connection with the preparation of national plans. Then it will be
important to effect a first breakdown into liquid (or tanker-borne) cargo, bulk
cargo flow chart, which would show the respective origin and destination of
the main import and export cargoes in the country concerned. This would
probable methods of handling on the lines of the work carried out by the
New York Port Authority study described in Chapter 1.
It would, of course, also be useful to evolve an internal and maritime
cargo flow chart, which would show the respective origin and destination
of the main import and export cargoes in the country concerned. This would
assist planners in ascertaining how much cargo might travel from point of
origin or to final destination in container-sized lots and how much of it, if
containers were used, would have to be assembled or broken down. Where
1

The Turn-Around

Time of Ships in Port, op. cit., para. 12.

130

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

container lots are not assembled or dispersed at the ports flow charts or maps
would help to show the best locations for inland depots.
Information is also badly needed about the manpower which may be
required for different methods of handling cargo. Here more data are necessary on the number of men needed to handle given tonnages of various types
of cargo by different methods. This is still a very controversial topic. To
any total figure of manpower needed arrived at on a tonnage basis there
would have to be added a percentage to allow for a reserve to meet fluctuations in traffic. This will involve consideration of the probable extent of
shift work and week-end work. Other factors which enter into the picture
are the probable turnover among dockers, based on past experience, the age
structure of the labour force, recruitment policy and measures taken or contemplated for the pensioning-off of older dockers.
As one of the criteria of efficiency, especially when viewed from the
shipowner's point of view, is the turn-around time of ships, information on this
subject is of special importance. The data so far available are difficult to
interpret and can in fact be misleading. It would seem that two sets of data
are particularly relevant. The first is the time the ship has to stay in port to
load or unload a given tonnage of a specified type of cargo by various
methods: containers, roll-on/roll-off, handling of certain cargoes by ad hoc
equipment, conventional general cargo operations, etc. This would show up
the advantages—seen just from this particular angle—of the newer methods
now gaining ground. The second type of information should relate to delays
to ships. The mere indication that a ship on average spends so many days a
year at sea and so many in port proves little : some time in any case has to
be spent in port whether loading and discharging operations are going on or
not. What is relevant is the time a ship is kept waiting to berth, the time she
spends in port during which cargo loading and unloading operations could
be carried on but are not (because of shortage of labour, single-shift work, no
work during week-ends or public holidays), and the time taken to carry out
the work in excess of the time it should take if the job were carried out with
average efficiency. These are all factors which it is hard to evaluate and in
regard to which opinions differ.
As has been suggested earlier, in examining the cost element there is need
to distinguish between the cost to the consignor or consignee of the goods, to
the port operator, and to the shipping company, on the basis of current
methods of charging for transport services. The differences in regard to who
pays for what to whom between one port and another and one trade and
another are considerable and make cost comparisons difficult. The simplicity of the door-to-door billing offered by some container operators is one of
the attractions of the service. From a broader point of view, it is necessary

PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

131

to look beyond shipping costs. What is needed is a genuine cost-benefit
analysis which would take an over-all view of the whole transport operation,
bringing in all the various economic and social factors involved. A calculation of the discrepancy between the real costs of transporting cargo on any
segment of the through-handling operation, as revealed by cost-benefit analysis, and the charges incurred for that particular part of the service might
permit adjustments in rates which would encourage all concerned to use the
most economic methods of handling. The picture is at present often distorted by the fact that a course of action may be in the best interests of the
shipowner but may not yield sufficient advantage to the port operator to
make it worth his while to take unusual steps to further that particular course.
In other cases, those who are paying for the freight are not given enough
financial encouragement to use more modern methods of packing or handling.
These situations are now being keenly discussed in many quarters and adjustments are being made, which is one reason why a fuller analysis of real costs
as compared with charges made is called for.
Research Agencies.

In deciding who should carry out the research there are two main considerations.
The first should be that the actual research work should be carried out
by persons who are strictly impartial and not in the pay of an interested
party. They should not be seeking to promote container traffic in circumstances where it may not provide the best answer, nor to sell the advantages
of any particular form of port equipment or the facilities offered by a given
port. So far, such information as is available has often been issued by parties
interested in a certain form of cargo handling or in a certain port. Such
material obviously needs to be handled with care. The research team should
also, of course, be perfectly familiar with all the factors involved in shipping,
port operation and related inland transport, as well as being trained in analytical work. Sound judgment is also needed, as value judgments based on
general expressions of opinion and on experience will have to compensate
for the shortcomings of statistical material, at any rate in the critical days
of the near future.
The second requirement is that data collection and research should be
under the direction of a body on which all the interested parties are represented : the government, customers, shipping companies, port authorities and
operators, inland transport agencies, organisations of employers and workers
and no doubt others. There would be considerable advantage in having an
independent chairman of high standing and authority.

132

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

A report prepared for the European Free Trade Association suggests
that, where a port authority exists, it should take the initiative. Such an
authority "should ideally incorporate representatives of shipowners and port
users as well as experts in other relevant fields. No one group should be
dominant."1
Research at the International Level
Information Needed.
Parallel developments are needed at the international level. It would be
useful if agreement could be arrived at regarding the forecasts of international trade and on the methods of breaking down statistics of maritime
trade according to type of cargo (liquid, bulk, general) and methods of
handling. From this flow charts of different types of cargo for the main
trade routes could perhaps be derived.
In addition, data on the relative efficiency of handling would be valuable.
So far, experience has proved that it is very difficult to obtain from different
countries data of throughput per man-hour or per gang-day for the same type
of cargo under comparable conditions, mainly because it is difficult to find
ports where the same cargo is handled in the same way and also because of
the reluctance of operators to provide such information.
Information should also be gathered on (a) new technical improvements
and methods, and (b) developments in the way of the construction of new
ships, the opening of new terminals, port improvements, etc.
There has been much research work that has been devoted by shipowners and
others in the developed areas to improving the ship's ability to handle its cargo
as rapidly as possible. There is need for a programme for the gathering together
and impartial technical and economic evaluation of all this material to define its
suitability for application to various transport situations throughout the world.2
The United Nations seminar referred to earlier proposed the establishment of a central clearing-house where transport technology and transport
experts may be assembled and made available to any country or region.
"The United Nations", the report recommended, "should organise and administer such a clearing-house, make technical assistance available, and sponsor
and conduct research." s
1
European Free Trade Association : General Cargo Handling in Three EFTA Ports
(Geneva, 1968), p. 45.
* The Turn-Around Time of Ships in Port, op. cit., para. 83.
' Report on the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other
Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight, op. cit., para. 125 (b).

PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

133

The diffusion of up-to-date information on the labour aspects of the
problem, including arrangements for the allocation of dockers, important new
agreements, guarantees of income or employment, methods of training and
safety problems, is also desirable.
Organisations Concerned.
There was agreement by governments, employers and workers in the
Inland Transport Committee at its Sixth Session in 1957 that "It is desirable
that the technical and administrative aspects of cargo handling continue to
be examined at the international level through appropriate organisations".1
Although it is not for this report to indicate which organisations should
undertake such an extensive task at the international level, it is worthy of
note that at present the United Nations and its specialised organs and agencies are concerned with many matters relating to shipping and ports and has
been assisting by organising meetings such as the United Nations Interregional
Seminar on Containerization and Unitized Methods for the Intermodal
Movement of Freight, which met in London in May 1967. The transport
committees of the Regional Economic Commissions also often deal with
various aspects of port activities and with the development of new methods
of carrying cargo.
The International Labour Office has the task of following developments
in labour matters. It was asked by the Inland Transport Committee at its
Third Session in 1949 to continue its examination of the problem of the
stabilisation of dockers' earnings.2 It has centralised services collating and
making available information on training schemes and work accidents.
There are numerous meetings and congresses on particular aspects of the
questions considered in this report, and notably those held under the auspices
of the International Cargo Handling Co-ordination Association and the
International Association of Ports and Harbors. The periodicals of these
organisations and an extensive technical press regularly publish information
on new developments. Special national reports and inquiries into various
aspects of port work, and notably the labour aspects, are often of the greatest
interest. However, it is not easy to digest and collate all this information in
a systematic manner and many gaps remain to be filled.
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 45.
2
Resolution concerning the régularisation of employment of dockworkers, paras. 10
and 11.

134

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

CO-ORDINATION OF ACTION

Co-ordination at National and Port Levels
New methods of handling cargo involve the co-operation of a wide range
of different organisations in each country: port operators, inland transport
operators, shipping companies, customs services, in some cases banking,
commercial and insurance firms, the users of the transport services, and of
course the employers and the workers' organisations.
The cost of labour, financing and other factors involved in transport were
individually related to the separate and usually dissociated segments of commerce.
Intermodal unitised transport was shown as joining them into an intimate, continuous,flowingrelation. The conventional pattern of commerce had been suddenly confronted with a new concept of transport that would require imaginative,
courageous adjustment.1
How is this co-operation to be secured? There would appear to be a
need for one or more co-orcinating bodies in each port whose aim it should
be to ensure that all necessary steps are taken to facilitate the throughhandling of cargo.
It had at one time been thought that container traffic would not be economic between Europe and Australia. Rather unexpectedly, arrangements
were made for container ships and a number of them have been built and are
already in service. The Australian Department of Trade and Industry, when
it became clear that container ships would be introduced, called a nationwide conference of all sections of the maritime industry, the National Stevedoring Industry Conference, at which local and overseas shipping companies,
shippers, port authorities, road hauliers and other interested bodies were
represented, to discuss this new concept of cargo handling and to ensure that
all concerned were fully aware of the problems which would need to be
overcome. Discussions also proceeded on a scheme to deal with possible
redundancy among the dockers, which it was hoped would be in force before
the container ships began to arrive. Owing to shortage of time ports had to
go ahead with tentative plans regarding the provision of facilities even before
firm proposals had been made by the shipping operators, although the plans
had, of course, to be kept open to alteration if necessary.2
In Japan also the question arose of whether it was desirable to go in for
container traffic. A working group was set up in 1966 within the Shipping
1

Report of the Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized
Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight, op. cit., para. 15.
2
V. G. SWANSON, op. cit., pp. 3-4, and Peter D'ABBS : "Australian Shipping Faces
Rapid Change", in Shipping World and Shipbuilder, 19 Jan. 1967, p. 202.

PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

135

and Shipbuilding Modernisation Council, which is an advisory organ to the
Minister of Transport, to study the matter. The Council made recommendations to the Minister which dealt with the progress of containerisation ; the
standardisation of containers; container ships; container terminals; related
inland transport; the operating system for container transport, including
relations with foreign industries and shipping conferences ; government subsidies ; the customs system, both for the containers themselves and their contents; and the enactment of new regulations regarding the responsibility of
carriers and insurance. On the strength of this recommendation the Government has expressed the intention of creating a public corporation to finance
the construction of piers used for the export trade and to shoulder part of
the costs of pier construction projects. The business circles concerned,
including shipping, are pushing ahead with their plans for setting up a container system.1
In Italy, at Genoa, a committee has been set up for the study of container
traffic, with a subcommittee on internal terminals.
In New Zealand the Minister of Labour in 1967 appointed a "Waterfront
Conference" with wide terms of reference covering the whole field of the

efficient utilisation and remuneration of the workers in the ports of that
country.
In the United Kingdom, the National Ports Council, one of whose duties
is "formulating and keeping under review a national plan for the development of harbours in Great Britain", has been giving consideration to the
effects of containerisation and other new transport systems, realising that
planning decisions have to be taken far in advance. It has commissioned
studies by research bodies on projections of import and export traffic and on
problems of unitisation.2
Developing countries are also concerned. Thus in the Malagasy Republic, the Division of Economic and Financial Studies and of Co-ordination
of Transport at the Ministry of Transport is studying the possible advantages
of container traffic between the Malagasy Republic and France and the form
it should take.3
In Argentina legislation passed in 1965 has set up in each port co-ordinating committees having wide responsibilities, including the harmonisation
of the activities of the different government and private bodies operating in
ports, the expeditious settlement of disputes arising in connection with
modernisation and the enactment of regulations aiming at improving working
1

YONEDA, op. cit., pp. 6-7.

National Ports Council: Annual Report and Statement of Accounts 1966, op. cit.
Journal de la Marine Marchande, 20 July 1967, p. 1636.

136

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

methods for the loading and unloading of vessels. They are also responsible
for labour inspection in ports, for administering certain social security
schemes for dockers, providing better methods and conditions of work aiming
at improving safety, welfare and hygiene of dockers, and promoting their
training.1 Considerable authority to act in labour matters was also vested
in the "port captains" appointed in each major port under legislation of 1966.
The above developments point also to the desirability of integrating plans
for modernising ports and cargo-handling methods with national development plans, where these exist. As the United Nations seminar pointed out,
there is need for—
A conscious and thorough effort to relate transport planning to the over-all
economic planning of a country (and often a region). Such integration of planning is essential not only to ensure practical success in the ventures, but also to
induce national or international sources of capital to make available the funds
required to translate plans into reality.2
Co-ordination at the International Level
Various countries find themselves in competition as regards their ports
within the same region. Several of them may be planning to undertake the
necessary investments for new methods of cargo handling, and if all of them
were carried out there might well be over-investment. Some consultation, at
the least, would therefore appear to be desirable in this fìeld, especially
among developing countries which are short of capital. This issue was raised
for the Asian and Far Eastern Region by the representative of the Port of
Singapore at the Tokyo Conference of the International Association of Ports
and Harbors, and a spokesman for the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development also suggested that it was necessary to approach the
problem of containerisation through national and international co-operation,
in order that it might be a success and not a financial burden for one or
another country.3
INTERNATIONAL THROUGH-HANDLING

There are still a substantial number of issues that have to be settled, or
generally accepted, if through-handling of cargo is to be expedited across
international boundaries. The United Nations Interregional Seminar on
1
ILO : General Report—Effect Given to the Conclusions of the Previous Sessions,
Report I, Item 1 (a) and (b), Inland Transport Committee, Eighth Session (Geneva,
1966), p. 43.
2
Report on the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and
Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight, op. cit., para. 125 (a).
3
International Association of Ports and Harbors, Fifth Conference, Tokyo, 1967,
Minutes of Sitting of 12 May 1967.

137

PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

Containerization and Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement
of Freight concluded that—
If unitisation was to be economically successful (namely, through intermodal
movement and speed), its characteristics required the highest possible degree of
international standardisation of equipment and of related service facilities, such
as documentation and customs procedures. The barriers to rapid through-movement of goods could 1be destroyed only if substantial uniformity and standardisation were achieved.
It is fortunate, however, that several bodies have been at work on the
questions involved.
Standardisation of Unit Loads

"Standardised containers represent the homogeneous unit that is prerequisite to the full automation of the industry." 2
Agreement has been arrived at through the International Organization
for Standardization as regards the outer dimensions of the larger types of
containers. The main containers are to be 8 feet wide, 8 high and 10, 20,
30 or 40 long. There are also three smaller sizes.3 The corner fitments
for lifting are also being standardised.4 Strength and safety aspects have
been covered by other bodies, including Lloyds. A number of shipping
firms, particularly American ones which were in the field early, are, however,
using containers conforming to other standards.
The International Organization for Standardization has also made recommendations concerning the size and construction of cargo pallets.
Customs
The customs régime applicable to containers is based on the Geneva
Customs Convention on Containers of 1956 (which came into force in 1962),
drawn up under the auspices of the United Nations Economic Commission
for Europe. A number of the provisions of the Convention are, however,
being reconsidered in the light of more recent developments.
Special arrangements known as the Transports internationaux routiers
(TIR) system exist among most European countries for the passage of motor
trucks and trailers in transit: the customs authorities of the transit countries
1
Report on the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and
Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight, op. cit., para. 123.
2

MCKINSEY and Co., Inc., op. cit., p. 7.

International Organization for Standardization : ISO Recommendation R 668—
Dimensions and Ratings of Freight Containers (Geneva, Feb. 1968).
4
Idem: Draft ISO Recommendation No. 1019—Specification of Corner Fittings
for Series 1 Freight Containers 1A, IB, 1C and ID (Geneva, Jan. 1968).

138

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

allow passage under seal, and the country of destination permits customs
examination either at the entry point or at any of a number of agreed inland
customs clearance points. In some countries customs examination may be
made at the consignee's premises by arrangement. Such arrangements, which
are embodied in an agreement drawn up through the Inland Transport Committee of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, also apply
to containers. There are similar facilities for the transit of loaded railway
wagons, which have been applied by analogy to containers transported by
rail. It has further been recommended that where a container journey by
rail is subsequently completed by road, similar facilities should be granted.
An extension of the system is the subject of a recommendation to governments. l
There is a further Customs Convention on Pallets, drawn up by the United
Nations Economic Commission for Europe, which was opened for signature
in 1962.
Transport and Insurance Documents
Documentation is still a cause of difficulty and delay. As the United
Nations seminar already referred to has pointed out, arrangements in this
matter have—
. . . lagged behind in efforts tc develop uniformity and simplification
Now
that unitised surface traffic [is] moving more rapidly, the documentation associated with it must break away from the ponderous, complex and slow-moving
practices of the past. Carriers and users of the services simply [will] not tolerate
unnecessary barriers to the accomplishment of lower-cost, efficient transport....
Without proper co-ordination between supplier, packer, container operator, forwarding agent or broker, steamship line, customs and banker, the whole efficiency
of containerisation [will] break down. The documents must be speedily produced
and transmitted to destination in order to arrive before the vessel.
Ships are
becoming ever faster and documentation work must keep pace.2
The International Chamber of Commerce, with the assistance of the
International Institute for the Unification of Private Law (UNIDROIT), has
been examining the transport documents needed for international and intercontinental movement of goods in large containers, from inland origin to
inland destination. Like the bill of lading now used only for traditional sea
transport, any new document should possess three features: (1) a document
of title, with the legal characteristics of negotiability ; (2) a receipt for iden1
United Nations Economic Commission for Europe, Inland Transport Committee,
Working Party on Customs Questions Affecting Transport: Report of the Working
Party on Its Twenty-fifth Session (December 1967) (mimeographed) (New York, 1967),
Annex 4.
* Report on the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and
Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight, op. cit., para. 99.

PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

139

tified goods; and (3) a contract of carriage. Each of these features gives
rise to some problems. The view was generally held that a single document
was needed, and that it should be issued by a combined transport operator.
The question of how an operator can give a description and statement of
condition of the goods, how he can nominate the ship carrying them, and
problems of determing who is liable have still to be further discussed.
Preparatory work is proceeding on a draft convention.1
Work is also proceeding under the auspices of UNIDROIT on the limitation of carriers' liability in combined transport.
In the meantime, two United Kingdom shipping consortia in September
1968 introduced a new combined transport bill of lading and certificate of
insurance. This document covers the container and its contents from door
to door, replacing the various bills presented and receipts given by road
transport operators, railways, docks and shipping companies, as well as previous certificates of insurance, on the basis of which credit could be granted.
These arrangements will be most useful, but there is still some opposition in
certain quarters, for instance from some insurance underwriters.2
COMMON SERVICES

Quite apart from the organisation needed at national or port level to
plan new developments and co-ordinate the action required to enable use to
be made of new methods of handling cargo, there are a number of services
relating to labour which it may be expedient to organise on a common basis
for all operators in a given port or even in all the ports of a country. Some
of these have been referred to in earlier chapters.
Allocation of Dockers
Unless all dockers are in regular employment, the problem of allocation
may be best handled on a port-wide basis, with, in certain cases, possible
arrangements for inter-port transfers. It will have been noted from Chapter 2 that such systems are widespread, applying either to all workers or to
those who are in a reserve pool for allocation to various operators as required.
Payment of Wages
Where dockers may work for a number of different employers during the
same pay period, and possibly have to be credited with attendance money or
1
2

International Chamber of Commerce: news release of 24 November 1967.
The Economist, 14 Sep. 1968, Supplement on Moving Goods in the 1970s, p. xxi.

140

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

have their earnings made up to an agreed guaranteed sum, some central pay
arrangements are essential. These may be run by a dock labour board or
similar institution, or by an employers' association. In London, for instance,
under the previous allocation system, each operator sent in to a central office
all data on the money earned by the men who worked for him. A computer
made up the weekly pay slip of the docker, adding in attendance money or
make-up pay if necessary, subtracting income tax, social security and agreed
deductions, and preparing the pay envelopes. The operation, involving many
calculations, took four seconds for each docker. The same computer
accounting machine also kept the wage accounts of the operators, dealt with
tax and social security contributions, and wi± holiday pay. Such arrangements are not appropriate to the circumstances of all ports, but they can
clearly be very useful in many cases.
Training
Even where dockers do not move much from one employer to another,
there would appear to be considerable advantages in centralising many, if not
all, training activities in a port, although this does not preclude an individual firm from having its own training officer, who might have to receive the
new entrant and watch his progress at work, supervising that part of the
training which is carried out on the job. Where there are a number of
separate employers, it may be difficult for each of them to organise the
necessary induction and further training courses. Further, higher-level and
specialist courses applying to a limited number of men at any time can often
be planned only on a national basis.
Welfare
A wide variety of welfare activities has been described in the preceding
chapter. Some of the matters dealt with may concern only the premises
of a given employer, and will be managed under his sole responsibility. Many
will, however, often be shared by dockers working for different operators,
or employed on a pool basis. Here again, the need is felt for a body at port
level (or higher) on which the employers' and workers' organisations are
represented.
Safety
The same considerations apply to safety, where, quite apart from joint
committees within individual port undertakings, there is often need, where
there are many such undertakings, for joint planning of activities and joint
carrying out of training or provision of equipment at port level, sometimes

PLANNING AND CO-ORDINATION

141

with comparison of results and consideration of some of the more important
problems at national level.
Repair of Equipment
In some cases, especially where there is a marked shortage of skilled
labour, especially mechanics, there is need for centralised arrangements for
the repair of port equipment. This point has also been raised in connection
with containers, as there are as yet in some ports no facilities for the repair
of damaged units.
*
*
*
The need for efficiency in ports and some means of improving it has
been described; efficiency, however, depends primarily on the will of both
parties, workers as well as port operators, to improve it, and not much joint
effort will be made unless a climate of confidence has been established. The
next chapter therefore examines the problems of labour-management relations in ports and related problems.

6. LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS
When new methods of cargo handling likely to affect the jobs of many
dockers and to change well-established practices are being introduced or are
under discussion, there is naturally much anxiety among the workers concerned. Exaggerated versions of the extent of the changes are apt to get
around. If relations between the dockers and the employers happen to be
not very good, it is all too easy to find anxiety mingled with distrust. In
these circumstances it is understandable that there may be reluctance on the
part of the dockers to operate the new equipment or adopt modern methods
of handling. They may lay down conditions which may prevent its introduction being economic, seeking—understandably enough—safeguards against
redundancy, speed-up or new physical hazards. At the worst, an explosive
situation arises in which strikes—often unofficial ones—take place spontaneously, and sometimes for apparently trifling and even irrelevant reasons.
A situation of this kind may make operators hesitate to undertake the
investment required for fixed equipment, which may not pay if difficulties

arise. They may also prefer not to provoke trouble. Progress is held up.
One result is that shippers seek, wherever this is possible, to have recourse
to other modes of transport, such as inland transport.
In practice, no method of handling cargo can be introduced if the dockers
are not willing to work it. Such opposition has arisen in the past and still
occurs today. For instance, a ship operator who tried to introduce a container ship between New York and Venezuela was unable to do so, the ship
being laid up for three years. A roli-on/roll-off service was accepted only
after a strike and a new agreement. There has in places been opposition
even to the introduction of fork-lift trucks. The New York dockers have
been seeking new terms for the handling of containers, and tallymen in Australia threatened to "black" containers unless they were given the right to
tally their contents, which would have defeated the very purpose of this traffic. An expert writing of Africa mentions as one of the factors making for
low labour productivity the refusal to use labour-saving tools.1
Any attempt to coerce dockers into working new methods or machines
will only engender opposition, overt or disguised, and will certainly not pro1
Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in the
Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, op. cit., Part II, para. 398 (e).

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

143

duce a climate propitious to an increase in the throughput of goods. The
objective must therefore be to win acceptance by the dockers of means to
increase efficiency and of the adoption of new methods of cargo handling.
This calls for a sound basis for relations between management and labour in
a climate of confidence.
As the Chairman of the New York Shipping Association said when speaking to the American Association of Port Authorities, "Sound, dispassionate
and skilful labour relations in our maritime industry are more essential than
ever if we are to prevent strike-bound piers, locked-up ports, or general
opposition handcuffs on progressive changes from becoming a frustrating
climax to [our] efforts".1
If such situations are to be prevented, the least that is required is that
the parties recognise each other, that they are willing to negotiate, and that
a spirit of mutual confidence prevails. Only thus can anything like the "new
deals" described in Chapter 9 be brought about. Certain basic principles
will first be referred to.
BASIC PRINCIPLES

Discussions cannot proceed if there are no workers' organisations. The
first essential is therefore that the workers should have "the right to establish
and, subject only to the rules of the organisation concerned, to join organisations of their own choosing without previous authorisation".2 This right is
well established by an international labour Convention which has been widely
ratified and by national legislation in the great majority of the countries of the
world. Nevertheless, there are countries with substantial ports in which,
even today, there are no labour unions for dockers. This may in one or two
cases simply reflect the general situation in the country concerned as regards
the trade union movement ; in other ports it may simply mean that the dockers
have not organised themselves. Whatever the reason, the situation calls for
remedy. The Technical Meeting on the Rights of Trade Union Representatives and Participation of Workers in Decisions within Undertakings
expressed the view that—
. . . under any type of industrial relations there was a need for representatives
of workers' interests at the level of the undertaking or plant, provided it reached
a certain minimum size, and that the effective functioning of such representatives
was in the interest not only of the workers but of the management as well.3
This would also be true in the case of dockers at port level.
1
Alexander P. CHOPIN, reported in American Association of Port Authorities, Inc. :
Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Meeting (Long Beach, 1961), pp. 51-52.
8
Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise Convention,
1948, Art. 2.
3
ILO : Technical Meeting on the Rights of Trade Union Representatives and Participation of Workers in Decisions within Undertakings (Geneva, 1967), Report, document TMRTU/1967/D.6 (Rev.) (mimeographed), para. 20.

144

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Another problem arises where public servants are not allowed to be
members of a union. For instance, in the Republic of China crane drivers
and drivers of some of the mechanical equipment (not, however, fork-lift
truck drivers) come under this ban. It may be mentioned in this connection
that the Freedom of Association and Protection of the Right to Organise
Convention, 1948, does not exclude public servants from its scope.
It is also essential that the workers should "enjoy adequate protection
against acts of anti-union discrimination in respect of their employment".1
In the same way, the workers' representatives should enjoy protection in their
status, and they may need to be granted certain facilities2, particularly in the
presentation of grievances, to which reference is made later in this chapter.
There should also be a possibility of genuine negotiation. Again, this is
generally recognised in most countries, but there are cases in which the
operators or employers refuse to recognise or negotiate with the unions of a
particular political tendency, ideological trend or affiliation, even though
these unions may have a substantial membership among dockers.
Mention must also be made of the scope of subjects covered by collective
bargaining. Traditionally this method has been used for the determination
of normal hours of work (when not fixed by law), times of starting shifts,
and minimum rates of wages. However, even in these cases, the extent of
overtime is seldom covered by bargaining; many rates of wages, especially
piece rates, are settled by informal agreement or on the basis of precedent
and custom, and not necessarily embodied in formal agreements. The determination of the number of men needed in the port is often not formally the
subject of bargaining, in that no provisions on the subject are to be found in
most collective agreements ; in many cases, however, changes can be effected
only through procedures in which the trade unions take part, as in France,
the Federal Republic of Germany and the United Kingdom, or by arrangement involving at any rate consultation of the parties. In quite a few ports,
as for instance in New York, decisions in this matter are dealt with by regulations outside the framework of collective bargaining.3
Finally, the need to establish a climate of mutual confidence is also
widely accepted. It has often taken a long time to develop in ports, partly
because of the agitated past of labour-management relations in many countries and partly because of the large numbers of casual workers employed. It
is, however, an essential element in arriving at any "new deal" by which
'Right to Organise and Collective Bargaining Convention, 1949, Art. 1.
Technical Meeting on the Rights of Trade Union Representatives and Participation
of Workers in Decisions within Undertakings : Report, op. cit., paras. 25-38.
3
JENSEN : Hiring of Dock Workers, op. cit., p. 289.
2

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

145

modern methods of handling cargo can win acceptance in exchange for
reasonable guarantees to the dockers. Part of the problem is that it is essential to place all the facts before the workers' leaders, so that both parties can
consider the situation in full knowledge of impending changes and of their
potential consequences. Even when the leaders are properly informed, it
may well be that lack of information among the rank-and-file members about
what is being planned can give rise to anxiety and mistrust causing dissident
groups to foment strikes and disturbances.
PATTERNS OF LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

The relations between port employers (or operators) and dockers are in
many countries greatly influenced by two characteristics of port work, namely
its casual character and its physical dispersion.
The National Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry in the United
Kingdom found that the casual character of the employment had developed
a "casual attitude towards the observance of agreements and consultation
procedures, as exemplified by the industry's experience of strikes. Strikes
mean interruptions of earnings as well as of port operations ; failure to adopt
modern methods in this key section of transport damages the nation's economy—and dockers in the major ports are now experiencing the effects of
economic stricture. Irregularity of earnings breeds discontent, opportunism
and suspicion—in short, it is the core of our industry's troubles. " 1
When, however, schemes for the régularisation of employment have been
introduced, what is the pattern which emerges as regards relations between
management and labour?
Where a docker is regularly employed by a given operator or is permanently allocated to him, there is no reason why a normal relationship should
not exist. The situation is similar when there are only a limited number of
employers (perhaps large port authorities) and no allocation scheme exists.
It is also likely to apply to those workers who are permanently allocated,
even though other dockers in the same port are in a reserve pool. In all
these cases, there is no particular reason why the problem of relationships
should be markedly different from the normal pattern found, for instance,
in a manufacturing undertaking in the same country.
A complication arises when a docker regularly employed by one operator
is temporarily "loaned" to another. The first or principal employer is normally responsible for the contacts with that docker and for dealing with any
1

Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Major Ports of Great Britain, op. cit.,
Appendix N, National Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry: Policy Directive
to All Local Committees—Decasualisation, October 1961, pp. 262-264.

146

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

general grievances he may have. Nevertheless, when that docker is in fact
working for the second employer, he will be under the orders of the latter
and, if a difficulty arises, will take it up with the latter. Problems can
obviously arise in such cases, but the practice of having dockers employed
by one operator working for another is exceptional. In the United Kingdom,
where this practice has recently been introduced, the National Dock Labour
Board is still formally the employer, and it would be to this body that disciplinary cases would be referred. In Montreal, where transfers from one
employer to another are provided for, detailed machinery has been established
by agreement for dealing with grievances and disputes.
Another situation arises when dockers are employed in a pool : in such
cases loyalties are divided and responsibilities are ill-defined. The docker
works for one operator for a few shifts and then for another; under some
schemes he may in theory work for 11 different employers in a week, though
in practice nearly all schemes provide for some continuity once a docker is
allocated to a particular ship or job. The "employer" may be a dock labour
board, some other tripartite or joint body set up to administer the pool, or an
employers' association. In some cases there is no single permanent employer,
each operator the docker works for being the legal employer for the time
being. Whatever the system adopted, the pool docker works under the
orders of a number of different operators in succession. He may work often
enough for the same one to develop some loyalty towards him ; and operators
may have the same gang often enough (where they can select gangs, for
instance) to know the men. In these cases some personal link can be established. However, in practice, the docker has all too often no feeling of
attachment to any particular operator, and the operator has little feeling of
responsibility for the men in a personal sense beyond his obvious responsibility as regards safety. The relationship remains impersonal.
As the Devlin Committee commented in the United Kingdom,
It would indeed be surprising if the casual system of employment in the docks
did not induce a more irresponsible attitude than in industry generally. Casual
labour produces a casual attitude. If the employer does not provide work unless
he wants to, why should the employee go to work unless he wants to ? If a man
is used to having work one day and none the next, is there anything very wrong
about taking a day off of his own choice, whether for his own pleasure or to air
a grievance by a token strike ? *
A somewhat different picture arises when the docker is employed by a
tripartite or bipartite board, as for instance is the case with the National
Dock Labour Board in the United Kingdom. Though conditions of work
1
Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin
Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, op. cit., para. 19.

into

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

147

are in this case determined by collective bargaining machinery outside the
Board, the determination of the strength of the register and the right of suspension or dismissal for disciplinary reasons rests with the Board. Though
in principle it is highly desirable that the workers' organisations should participate in the management of a labour pool and in the determination of the
size of the register, it must be admitted that this can give rise to some
awkward situations. The Board being the employer, it tends to become
associated in the minds of many dockers with "management". This may
place the union representatives on the Board in an invidious position, particularly when they have to participate in adjudicating on a contested case of
disciplinary suspension or dismissal, since it is the duty of all the members
of the Board to apply strictly the regulations under which the scheme operates
and which have to be observed by the dockers if it is to work. In the United
Kingdom quite a number of unofficial strikes have been directed against
decisions of the Board in most of which the members nominated by the
unions will have concurred.
The system of divided responsibility for employment often creates some
confusion in the mind of the docker as to who his employer is. Thus, when
the dockers in Manchester were asked who their employer was, about onehalf thought they were employed by the Manchester Ship Canal Company,
which is the only operator there, one-third thought that they worked for the
National Dock Labour Board (the legal employer), and the remainder could
not make up their minds. *
Under systems of divided responsibility, operators sometimes hesitate to
enforce discipline. As has been pointed out, they may, under certain allocation schemes, give themselves a bad reputation and find it difficult to get
the gangs they want.
Finally, there are the cases where the dockers are their own employers,
through co-operatives, or, as in Italy, dockers' corporations. These contract
to do the work and employ their members. The corporation thus assumes
the responsibilities of the employer, for instance for the payment of wages
and social security contributions. The operator who uses the corporation
has in such cases no effective relations with the men, nor power to enforce
discipline, beyond reporting cases to the corporation.
This brief review of the different patterns of labour-management structures shows up the difficulties inherent in casual employment and brings
home the advantages of establishing, where possible, more or less normal
patterns of employer-worker relationships. This has been among the aims
of some of the schemes which have sought a new approach to port work.
1

The Dock Worker, op. cit., p. 86.

148

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Even where, as in the United States Pacific Coast scheme, the docker still
moves from one operator to another, many of the problems are solved by the
close relationship established at the level of the whole coast, and more particularly at the level of each port, between the Pacific Maritime Association
and the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union, with
extensive machinery for joint consultation and procedures for dealing with
grievances and disputes as they arise.
MACHINERY OF LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

The actual machinery of labour-management relations, and the level at
which different activities take place, will naturally depend on the structure
of the port transport industry in the country concerned, on the extent of
regular employment and on whether an allocation scheme exists.
Negotiation
It is only in exceptional cases that it will be possible to conduct negotiations separately for individual firms, unless a single employing unit is in fact
responsible for the greater part of the activities of a given port. Situations
do exist in a few ports where, for instance, a number of stevedoring firms
recruit their own workers and determine the rates of pay separately. However, such a practice is likely to run into difficulties.
The usual levels of negotiation are therefore either national, which is
frequent, or regional, as for instance in the case of the agreements covering
the West Coast of the United States and the New York area, or on a port
basis. In many cases there may be an over-all national agreement, as in the
United Kingdom, France or the Federal Republic of Germany, but a number
of matters affecting remuneration, shift work, starting times, etc., are dealt
with on a port-by-port basis. In the United Kingdom, for instance, although
the general principles of the new deal were worked out at national level and
there is a national modernisation committee, the detailed agreements on
changing traditional ways of carrying out the work (under the general agreement to abandon certain restrictive practices) are worked out by the local
modernisation committees set up in each pori.
Some of the problems of negotiating machinery may be briefly referred
to.
In countries where there are no dockers' unions it may nevertheless be
possible to set up joint industrial committees or wages councils either for the
port industry as a whole or for particular ports. This course of action has in
fact been recommended by experts advising governments in such cases, pend-

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

149

ing the development of unions. The question of how to select the representatives of the dockers is obviously a difficult one. It may be that men pushed
forward by their mates will be appointed by the government or accepted as
spokesmen by the employers. If not, some form of election may be resorted
to. In some countries the procedures applicable to the setting-up of wages
councils may be used, the final appointment of the members being in the
hands of the government authority. If any such system is to work, however,
it is essential to ensure that the nominees representing the workers have the
confidence of the dockers themselves. Joint or tripartite bodies of this nature
are a familiar feature in many countries, and are one of the main means of
determining conditions of work, especially where the unions are weak.
Difficulties have arisen in countries where there are a large number of
unions. Here also it is desirable that joint negotiating machinery be set up,
if only to ensure sufficient uniformity of conditions of work between the different groups. Joint industrial committees or tripartite bodies such as wages
councils would appear to provide a suitable solution in such cases as well
and they are, in fact, frequently resorted to. Even where a distinction is
made only between dockers who work on board and those who work on
shore, it is desirable that there be agreement, if only on hours of work, as
the work of the two groups is closely linked. Any divergence in their conditions of work limits the possibility of transferring them from ship to shore
and vice versa.
Operation of a Régularisation Scheme

A controversial question is whether the same machinery should be used
for the negotiation of conditions of work and for the operation of a scheme
for the régularisation of employment.
There are strong grounds for keeping the bodies dealing with these two
matters distinct, even if in practice their memberships overlap. The body
which has to determine the numbers on the register, whether it be tripartite
or bipartite in character, has a task to fulfil which calls for an objective
approach. The task should be that of aiming at the correct figure on the
basis of the best statistics and informed forecasts available as to the future
trends in the demand for manpower in the port. Differences of opinion may
arise as to the decisions to be taken, but these should be differences based on
varying interpretations of the facts and their consequences. This is quite a
different approach from the discussions on wages, tonnage rates, overtime
rates, hours of work and fringe benefits which enter into the bargaining picture. The number of dockers needed should be kept out of the bargaining,
even though a pledge of no dismissals on economic grounds, or how to deal

150

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

with redundancy if it arises, may well be part of an over-all agreement on
how to deal with the impact of new methods of handling cargo of the kind
described in Chapter 9.
In the United Kingdom, for instance, negotiations are undertaken by the
Joint Industrial Council for the Port Transport Industry, a bipartite body.
The Dock Labour Board is an independent tripartite body, the constitution
of which has already been described. In France the port labour offices are
run by government authorities, with participation of representatives of employers and workers, but conditions of work are determined partly by legal
regulations and partly by collective bargaining, which takes place outside the
framework on the port labour offices, although the latter may intervene in
disputes.
The question also arises as to whether a dock labour board, which has
the responsibility for determining the strength of the register, should also be
the body which has the responsibility of taking decisions regarding the
removal of a name from the register on disciplinary grounds or whether it
would not be preferable for this latter function to be carried out by some
other bipartite or tripartite body, which might be part of the machinery for
the settlement of grievances.
Other Relations
In many countries it has been found that there are few, if any, port
undertakings, whether public or private, which have a personnel department
or even a personnel officer, although experts advising on port matters have
on occasions recommended that this gap should be promptly filled.
In some cases the reason may be that many of the usual personnel
functions do not arise at the level of the undertaking : negotiations take place
at a higher level, recruitment is through a dock labour board or pool, the
payment of wages is centralised. The fact remains that poor labour-management relations and the low level of productivity may well be in part the
result of inadequate attention to the day-to-day problems of port labour by
the employer, because no staff has been detailed to pay full-time attention
to their solution.
CONSULTATION AND PARTICIPATION

The observations made above on the separation of the bodies dealing
with the registration and allocation of dockers from those negotiating conditions of work does not in any way detract from the principle that employers'
and workers' organisations ought to participate fully in both these types of
bodies and be brought in on all matters affecting the conditions and welfare
of dockers.

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

151

It is particularly important that both the parties should be associated
with all studies and discussions leading to any major reform and that they
should be called upon when technical studies, relating for instance to new
equipment, are undertaken. Mere consultation is not enough. "Consultation helps, but a joint approach, even to the extent of attaching dockworkers
to study teams, would, I think, be likely to produce results with a better
chance of implementation."1
Reference has already been made to various types of dock labour boards
or reserve pools. It will be noted that in nearly all of them there is full
participation of employers' and workers' organisations, with or without
government participation. Where the pool is run by an employers' association, as for instance in the Netherlands, the terms of the income guarantee
have been agreed with the union and any reduction in the register involving
substantial dismissals has to be agreed with the Ministry of Labour, which
consults the organisations concerned in regard to any problems raised.
If success is to be achieved in any modernisation scheme, therefore,
participation of the workers in the operation of a decasualisation scheme, or
at any rate the full consultation of those concerned in advance of any measures which might appear to adversely affect their interests, is essential. This
position is, however, by no means universally accepted, as in some countries
management considers it has the prerogative of determining the equipment
and the methods of operation it will use. While this position of principle
has often been maintained in industry—and there also it has been challenged—it is becoming increasingly recognised that in an industry where
employment has been of a casual nature the position can only be maintained
if adequate guarantees are given as to how the industry proposes to cope
with the consequences to the workers of new equipment or methods. Thus,
in the United States agreements, the right of management to introduce new
methods, subject to certain reservations, is recognised by the unions, but this
recognition is part of the whole agreement on modernisation funds and other
benefits to the dockers to be described in Chapter 9.
Consultation of the parties concerned is in line with the Co-operation at
the Level of the Undertaking Recommendation, 1952, which provides that—
Appropriate steps should be taken to promote consultation and co-operation
between employers and workers at the level of the undertaking on matters of
mutual concern not within the scope of collective bargaining machinery, or not
normally dealt with by other machinery concerned with the determination of
terms and conditions of employment. 2
1

P. D. ARNEY, Chairman, Standing Committee on Research of the British National
Ports Council, in Journal of Commerce and Shipping Telegraph, 10 Feb. 1967.
2
Para. 1.

152

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

It is also supported by the Consultation (Industrial and National Levels)
Recommendation, 1960, which calls for the promotion "of effective consultation . . . at the industrial and national levels between public authorities and
employers' and workers' organisations, as well as between these organisations . . . on . . . matters of mutual concern".1 Such consultation and cooperation should aim, in particular, at ensuring that the competent public
authorities seek the views, advice and assistance of employers' and workers'
organisations in an appropriate manner on such matters as the establishment
and functioning of national bodies, such as those responsible for, inter alia,
the organisation of employment. The ILO Inland Transport Committee
has also made it clear that "In drawing up and applying schemes for the
régularisation of employment in dock work, provision should be made for
close co-operation between the employers and the workers concerned".2
It is not only a question of consultation. There is "at present in various
parts of the world an increasing interest in the idea of workers' participation
in decisions, whatever the form of their participation might be in different
countries and situations".3 At the meeting of experts held in 1967 which
dealt, inter alia, with this matter, it became evident—
that there was a clear evolution towards an increasing participation of the
workers and their representatives in decisions at the undertaking level which
affected their working life. Several experts pointed to the fact that many questions which in the past had been a matter for unilateral decisions taken by management, often without prior consultation
with the workers, were now the subject
of joint discussions or even negotiation.3
This is certainly true of many of the problems arising out of the introduction of new methods of cargo handling, though discussion is more likely
to be at the level of the port as a whole than at that of an individual port
undertaking.
In. the matter of safety also, the International Labour Conference has
suggested for the consideration of those concerned the establishment of joint
safety committees4, and the ILO Code of Practice on Safety and Health
in Dock Work also urges that serious consideration should be given to the
formation of such committees.5
1

Para. 1 (1).
Resolution concerning the régularisation of employment of dockworkers, para. 13.
* Technical Meeting on the Rights of Trade Union Representatives and Participation
of Workers in Decisions within the Undertaking: Report, op. cit., para. 45.
4
Prevention of Industrial Accidents Recommendation, 1929, Para. 8; ILO: The
International Labour Code, 1951 (Geneva, 1952), Art. 504.
'Idem: Safety and Health in Dock Work (Geneva, 1967), para. 684.
2

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

153

Similarly, as regards welfare facilities for dockers, the ILO Inland
Transport Committee at its Fifth Session urged that the employers' and
workers' organisations concerned and existing bodies should be closely associated with their provision and operation.1
DISPUTES AND GRIEVANCES

Causes of

Disputes

In some countries disputes in the docks have been rather frequent. One
reason for this is to be found in the great diversity of conditions in which
cargo is handled and the virtual impossibility of providing for every case in
agreements or in wage schedules. There are in some ports a large number
of different tonnage rates. In London, for instance, it is reported that—
Although there are in most trade groups in the port agreed schedules of rates,
the number of commodities is so great that differences are always liable to arise
in interpreting the schedule in any given case. Claims for increases in agreed
rates may be made according to the method of stowage,
the state of the cargo
after a sea voyage, or handling difficulties in the hold.2
Other reasons for the frequency of disputes may well be due to the illdefined relationship between the employer or operator and the worker, to
which reference has already been made, to the conditions under which work
often has to be carried out and, of course, to the clash between new methods
of cargo handling and established practices, including "make-work" rules.
Many work stoppages are unofficial. An analysis made in the United
Kingdom covering the period 1960-64 showed that, of the 421 strikes which
took place, 410, accounting for 94 per cent of the days lost, were unofficial,
a percentage substantially higher than that in most other industries. Nearly
43 per cent of the days lost arose out of ordinary industrial causes, such as
disputes over manning scales and wage claims. Approximately 32 per cent
were due to unpopular decisions by the Dock Labour Board affecting
discipline or the size of the register, and about 25 per cent to inter-union
disagreement and conflict.8
1
Conclusions and statements concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers, para. 13.
See Appendix 1.
2
Ministry of Labour and National Service (United Kingdom): Unofficial Stoppages
in the London Docks—Report of a Commission of Inquiry (London, HMSO, 1951),
para. 16.
3
Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin into
Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, op. cit., para. 11.

154

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

The introduction of new methods of handling cargo may give rise to new
causes of dispute, at any rate during transitional stages.
In the first place, reference has already been made to the fact that
dockers may be unwilling to work the new equipment or use the new
methods. This can lead to stoppages unless there has been previous agreement to the effect that the operator is free to introduce new methods and
equipment (usually as part of an over-all deal), or unless agreement is secured
in a particular case by previous consultation.
Secondly, stoppages can arise if there is doubt as to the safety of a particular new operation.
Thirdly, problems may arise as to the rates which are applicable when
new methods are introduced.
Finally, demarcation disputes may arise. Dockers have raised objections
to containers being stowed or unpacked in the port by any workers other
than dockers, and the question of who should perform these functions even
outside the port has been brought up in a few cases, as the dockers were
anxious to make sure that work which could be done by them in the neighbourhood of the port was not transferred to others. Demarcation issues
between ship and shore gangs may also call for solution, especially in the
case of roll-on/roll-off ships.
The potentially disruptive effects of stoppages in ports are obvious. Ships
are delayed, inland transport is kept waiting, perishable goods suffer, manufacturers and traders await supplies which may be essential for their work,
exports are held up. In the case of longer stoppages the impact on a nation's
economy can be serious.
Settlement Procedures
The above issues point to the very great importance of having machinery
to settle grievances and disputes in ports which is well adapted to the circumstances in which trouble may occur.
One of the characteristics of the situation in many ports is the frequency
and speed with which disputes can arise. Describing the situation in New
York, a leading employers' spokesman said : "On our waterfront it is a constantly changing set of circumstances which must be dealt with from day to
day before a minor pier incident spreads like a prairie fire into a port-wide
crisis with such complications that it is later sometimes impossible for either
side to determine what caused the origina! spark." *
1
Alexander P. CHOPIN, reported in American Association of Port Authorities, Inc. :
Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Meeting, op. cit., p. 52.

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

155

This kind of situation calls for quick on-the-spot action designed to
prevent the dispute spreading, and if possible to ensure that work is carried
on while a settlement is arrived at.
"As a general rule an attempt should initially be made to settle grievances
directly between the worker affected . . . and his immediate supervisor." * If
this does not succeed, further steps must be provided for. "Procedures for
prompt settlement of grievances and disputes and, in particular, of the rates
of pay and strength of gangs applicable to particular cargoes and circumstances, are an essential part of a good system of industrial relations." 2
Given the dispersion of work in a port, it is important that "Where appropriate, arrangements should be made to enable representatives of the employers and workers to meet at very short notice on the spot for the purpose".2
Arrangements of this kind have produced valuable results in many ports.
Only a few examples will be given. The Australian Stevedoring Industry
Authority employs inspectors who can investigate problems as they arise and
express an opinion on the matter in dispute. They can be called upon either
by the employer's supervisor or foreman, or a delegate of the union. In the
great majority of cases, their opinion is accepted by both parties and the
work proceeds without stoppages. A Committee of Inquiry which reported
on the activities of port inspectors considered that—
. . . this system of port inspectors works satisfactorily and, if sufficiently extensive
and properly used, can do a great deal to prevent disputes arising and stoppages
of work. Their functions have been described as conciliation on the job, and it
has been said that they have been the means of nipping disputes in the bud.3
In the United Kingdom it is agreed in the Port of London that claims
regarding the rates to be paid in particular circumstances must be settled on
the spot.4 In all United Kingdom ports both parties are prepared to send
experts at very short notice to settle arguments which may arise. The union
employs a substantial number of men for the purpose. It is stated that in
Liverpool they can meet within the hour and that they have been instrumental in avoiding a great many difficulties.6 In New York the Shipping Association "dispatches experienced trouble-shooters to pier rhubarbs with alac* Examination of Grievances Recommendation, 1967, Para. 10 (1).
2
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 12.
3
Commonwealth of Australia: Stevedoring Industry Act, 1954—Interim Report
by the Committee of Inquiry (Canberra, Commonwealth Government Printer, 1956),
para. 93.
4
Unofficial Stoppages in the London Docks, Report of a Committee of Inquiry,
op. cit., para. 16.
5
Transport and General Workers' Record (London), Nov. 1954, p. 155.

156

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

rity".1 It is claimed that speed in handling grievances has been an important factor contributing to the reduction of labour disputes. On the United
States Pacific Coast it is stipulated that if grievances or disputes arise on the
job, all men and gangs shall continue work as directed by the employer. It
is understood that where the matter is covered by the agreement the employer
shall abide by its terms. The agreement provides that if a grievance arises
on the job the gang steward (or one of them if several gangs are affected) and
his immediate supervisor are to take the grievance to the "walking boss" or
ship or dock foreman in immediate charge of the operation. If not settled
at this level, it is to be referred for determination to an official designated by
the union and to a representative designated by the employer.2 Arbitrators
are available on a 24-hour basis.3 Further steps are then provided for.
In Buenos Aires, where sudden strikes used to be frequent, regulations
now provide that all disputes should be promptly settled by the competent
authority, work proceeding a the meantime. A tripartite tribunal has been
set up to deal with cases.
Special emphasis has been placed on the initial steps in dealing with a
grievance, namely very prompt action on the spot, because of its importance
in preventing a dispute from spreading and in enabling work to proceed.
It is clear that when recourse is had to special officers, whether they are
persons appointed by the two sides to represent them or independent conciliators, a great deal depends on finding the right men. They must have a
thorough knowledge of all the rates in force, the custom of the port and all
precedents created by earlier settlements. It is also most important that they
should have the full confidence of all concerned, and—in the case of independent conciliators—that they should be above any suspicion of being
improperly influenced by either side. They must be willing and able to give
an immediate opinion. It is not always easy to find men of suitable experience and character.
However, there are obvious limitations to the scope of on-the-spot settlements.
It will be advisable to recognise that any decision rendered in this manner is
only likely to be acceptable for the particular case under consideration. The
decision may then be reported for subsequent confirmation
to any body empowered to interpret agreements and to deal with such cases.4
1
Alexander P. CHOPIN, reported in American Association of Port Authorities, Inc. :
Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual Meeting, op. cit., p. 52.
2
Pacific Coast Longshore Agreement, 1961-66, ILWU-PMA.
3

GOLDBERG, op.

cit.

Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 13.

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

157

It is not proposed in this report to cover the whole range of procedures
for the settlement of grievances and disputes ; in nearly every country elaborate machinery has been established, varying according to the circumstances
of the country concerned. In most countries machinery is available to the
parties concerned to assist them in arriving at a settlement, and in some of
them arbitration is provided for.
However, several countries have arrangements which apply specifically
to the situation in ports. In France, for instance, the tripartite dock labour
offices set up in every major port to deal with the registration and allocation of manpower also have the responsibility for seeking solutions to disputes. The chairman, who is usually the director of the port (a senior
government official), may be called upon to arbitrate.1 In New Zealand,
port conciliation committees, consisting of equal numbers of representatives
of employers and workers, with an independent chairman, settle any local
disputes that arise in connection with waterside work and take such action
as they think fit to prevent such disputes. ' Under the United States Pacific
Coast agreement a special Joint Port Labour Relations Committee has been
set up which has the power and the duty to investigate and adjudicate on any
grievances not settled on the spot, with possible reference to a Joint Area
Labour Relations Committee, and for certain cases to a coast-wide body.
Arbitration is provided for in case of disagreement within the committees,
but only in respect of the application and interpretation of the agreement.
In New York the 1965 agreement provided for machinery for the examination
and settlement of grievances arising out of the agreement, and for the settingup of a special joint committee, known as the Human Relations and Implementation Committee, whose specific functions include the determination of
issues not completely solved by the agreement itself. These include the
review of seniority arrangements, enhancing the mobility of dockers, penalties
for constant absenteeism and lateness, and the definition of the tasks for
which various grades of dockers are to be regarded as qualified.
It should also be borne in mind that the new arrangement in New York
offering a guarantee of income for most dockers and special payments for
handling containers was largely the outcome of arbitration, and that in the
St. Lawrence ports the most important issues concerning the guarantee of
income, manning scales and changes in the safety regulations were settled
through a commission of inquiry which had in fact the powers of an arbitrator, and the conclusions of which were binding.2
1

International Labour Organisation, Inland Transport Committee, Eighth Session,
Report I, op. cit., p. 48.
* Department of Labour (Canada) : Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St.
Lawrence Ports (Ottawa, 1967) (mimeographed).

158

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Position of the Gang Foreman
The ganger or gang foreman often occupies a key position when any difficulties arise. He very often, when work is allocated, stays with his gang,
moving with them from one operator to another. He often attracts the
loyalty of his gang and is in a sense one of them, constituting a fixed element
in a world of changing human relations. His role is, however, a dual one.
He exercises discipline over the members of his gang ; he transmits instructions on the work to be done ; and yet he is more often than not the spokesman of the gang when a grievance arises. The Committee of Inquiry under
Lord Devlin in the United Kingdom points out that the ganger or hatch boss
has been forced into the position of an unrecognised negotiator, because the
union representative cannot always be on the spot to deal with every grievance. In the opinion of the Committee modernisation will require the recognition of the ganger and the hatch boss as an essential part of supervision,
and they ought to be relieved of a task for which they have never been ideally
suited and from which their supervisory status should debar them. The suggestion is made that shop stewards should be elected, one of whose functions
would be to take up with the supervisor any grievance which a docker could
not settle with the supervisor for himself. Full-time officers of the union
would be brought in only if the steward could not settle the matter. *
Patterns vary considerably from one country to another, but in the procedure for the on-the-spot settlement of grievances the dual function of the
ganger, gang foreman or hatch boss in dock work deserves careful consideration.
COMMUNICATION

Many difficulties have arisen in ports ov/ing to a virtual breakdown of
communication between operators and dockers and even, at times, between
the leaders of workers' organisations and their members.
The need for good communication is obvious. If formal channels do not
work, the "grapevine" does. Reference has already been made to the speed
with which false or exaggerated rumours relating to the introduction of
labour-saving techniques and their consequences for the dockers get around,
and how quickly a minor grievance can cause a major disruption.
The difficulties should not be minimised, especially in a large port where
casual work is the rule. The dockers are scattered over a wide area ; they
work at different points at different times; the operator himself has little
1
Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin
Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, op. cit., paras. 287-288.

into

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

159

contact with them. The men can be reached at assembly points, such as
hiring halls, only for a few minutes a day, and an increasing proportion may
not have to report there at all. In many ports of the world the problems
of illiteracy add a formidable obstacle to communication, but even where
nearly all dockers can read suitable reading matter is often not available to
them.
Communication between Management and the Dockers
In many ports the main contacts between management and the dockers
are at the top, where negotiators meet from time to time ; the results of the
discussions do not filter down to the rank and file unless a new agreement is
finalised. There is also daily contact at the lowest echelon, between the
supervisors and the gang foremen or leaders. As a rule no information of a
general character is passed on at this level, the contacts being concerned
with the necessary instructions for the day's work. Any regular contacts at
intermediate level with a view to reviewing current problems and conveying
up-to-date and correct information is the exception rather than the rule.
Communication within the Unions
There are a few unions whose periodical publications intended for the
whole membership supply detailed information and explanations on new
agreements, the working of existing ones and new developments in the
handling of cargo. Far more frequently, however, union periodicals devote
only limited space to these problems and confine themselves to generalities.
In other cases the union prefers to give inside information to its local representatives, branch officials and negotiators, and the news which reaches the
actual membership is usually meagre.
When important changes are being brought about it is, of course, particularly important that the negotiators should be fully aware of the preoccupations of the members they represent, and that they should do their best to
convince them of the advantages of accepting any settlement arrived at. This
may involve a prolonged educational campaign. Before the United States
Pacific Coast agreement was concluded an educational campaign lasting
months was undertaken. The aim was first to convince the "caucus" of the
union that other forms of protection, such as those which have since been
incorporated in the agreement described in Chapter 9, could be exchanged for
the old rules without any sacrifice of security. The educational job had then
to be continued to convince the men. There were a number of meetings of
union leaders and discussions at general union meetings, printed matter was
distributed, and finally a coast-wide referendum was held. The last stages

160

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

of negotiation were carried on with a large nunber of union members listening in. In the United Kingdom there has been criticism to the effect that the
educational work of explaining the new proposals to the men and generally
keeping them informed was not carried though in sufficient depth. Thus, the
Devlin Committee l urged upon the Transport and General Workers' Union
a campaign to explain the new proposals. This might involve dock gate and
lunch-hour meetings and the use of various communication media. The
Committee insisted that the burden of persuading the men of the value of the
reform rested upon the unions. Regular employment should, in any case,
make possible in the long term a permanent reorganisation of communications within the docks trade group of the union. One of the methods advocated was the election of shop stewards, which has already been referred to.
One of their functions would be to act as the main link in communications
between the dockers and the union's full-time officers and representative
committees. Regular employment should provide a sufficiently stable labour
force for shop stewards to perform their work.
Joint Action
It is, of course, also of the greatest value if both parties can agree on at
least some joint communications, though there are obvious difficulties in
doing so when a number of inter-related points are under discussion. Explanatory pamphlets or broadsheets can be of considerable value. Thus, in the
United Kingdom, the National Modernisation Committee (or, in one case,
in the absence of a consensus, the independent members thereof) issued brief
broadsheets explaining the proposed new scheme, replying to current misconceptions or dealing with particular aspects such as welfare amenities or
sick pay. Independent specialised papers may also be useful. Thus, in
London, a new paper, The Port, started up in April 1967, under a Board of
Trustees consisting of persons drawn from both sides of the industry, the
Chairman of the National Dock Labour Board and some independent personalities, including professional journalists, who are to ensure the paper's
freedom and independence. It is significant, however, that neither broadsheets nor any paper were brought out until the new scheme for regular
employment and modernisation was in a critical phase.
Communication Media
The International Labour Conference at its 51st Session in 1967 recommended the following communication media :
1
Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin into
Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, op. cit., paras. 282-289.

LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

161

(a) meetings for the purpose of exchanging views and information ;
(b) media aimed at given groups of workers, such as supervisors' bulletins and
personnel policy manuals;
(c) mass media such as house journals and magazines; news-letters and information and induction leaflets; notice boards; annual or financial reports
presented in a form understandable to all the workers; employee letters;
exhibitions ; plant visits ; films ; filmstrips and slides ; radio and television ;
(d) media aimed at permitting workers to submit suggestions and to express their
ideas on questions relating to the operation of the undertaking.l
Not all these media would necessarily be suitable in the case of an
industry with a scattered workforce, especially if they are employed on a
casual basis, but the ideas set out could be adapted to the special circumstances prevailing in particular ports.
Subject-Matter

Communicated

The subject-matter to be covered is, of course, vast. It was summed up
by the Inland Transport Committee as follows :
[The] main purpose is to inform the docker on all matters relating to his
conditions of employment, trends in the demand for labour, new methods of work
and their impact on the general state of the industry and on the workers, and all
discussions undertaken in joint bodies, where such exist.2

One of the most important elements in labour-management relations is
the determination of conditions of work, a matter which is considered in the
next chapter.

1
Communications within the Undertaking Recommendation, 1967, Para. 13. More
detailed considerations on communication media are set forth in ILO: Examination
of Grievances and Communications within the Undertaking, Report VII (1), International Labour Conference, 50th Session, Geneva, 1966 (Geneva, 1965), Ch. VI,
pp. 62-70.
2
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 16.

7. CONDITIONS OF WORK
If the port industry is to be modernised in terms of the equipment and
techniques used, in many countries it will also need to be modernised as
regards the social conditions it offers to the workers it employs. Efforts are
being made to create a new image of the docker, and if these are to be sincere the earnings and other benefits the docker draws must correspond to
this image. There has been a welcome change in outlook in this respect in
many countries, but almost everywhere much still remains to be done.
It is not the intention of this chapter to describe the conditions of work
of dockers in various parts of the world ; the limitations of space alone prevent this. The object is rather to raise some of the issues most frequently
discussed when the nature of port work and the conditions attaching to it
are under review.
The International Transport Workers' Federation has urged that, where
they cannot be avoided, "reductions in the size of the labour force should
be compensated by higher wages, shorter hours and improvements in working
conditions generally for workers of all categories who continue to be employed
in the port industries".i
APPLICABILITY AND ENFORCEMENT OF LABOUR LEGISLATION

A preliminary issue of a general character arises. In practically all countries certain principles governing the contract of employment and regulations
dealing with such matters as the protection of wages, weekly rest and holidays
with pay are laid down by law.2 In many countries there is also legislation
on certain other aspects of conditions of work, including in particular hours
of work. Such legislation is usually general in character, and covers either
all employed persons or all those in industrial undertakings (including as a
rule transport) or commercial establishments. In such cases, unless there is
an explicit exemption—and this is rare—the legislation applies to dockers.
1
Statement on the Social and Trade Union Consequences of Containerization,
op. cit.
2
The question of safety regulations and their enforcement will be referred to in
Chapter 8.

CONDITIONS OF WORK

163

While in principle dockers are covered by general labour legislation, in
practice it may be found that in quite a few countries this is not the case for
a number of reasons. The casual nature of the work makes the employeremployee legal relationship in many cases rather a short-term one. The
employer may feel a lesser obligation to grant certain rights to a casual
docker who only occasionally works for him than he would in the case of
a permanent employee. The docker may find it more difficult to claim his
rights against such an employer. The interest of the employer in a longterm relationship is lacking. For instance, in the matter of overtime, the
operator using casual labour, thinking of the immediate job to be done, is
less likely to concern himself with the long-term effects of excessive overtime
regularly worked over a long period, and the casual worker is anxious to
earn as much as he can while the opportunity offers.
Another reason lies in the difficulty of inspecting docks. Labour inspection in theory applies to the docks if the relevant legislation does. However, owing to the dispersion of the work over a large area and its varied
nature, it may well happen that the labour inspector concerned, for instance,
with wages and hours of work will neglect the docks unless some difficulty
arises and he is called upon to intervene. Where work is casual, checks on
hours, overtime and wages often present considerable difficulty.
A few countries, for instance the Netherlands, have set up special labour
inspectorates for the ports, and in such cases enforcement is better ensured.
The inspectors know the port's needs and problems intimately and are well
placed to see that the regulations are respected.
In developing countries especially, where labour administration services
are often even more understaffed than those elsewhere and are often facing
a huge task, cases are reported in which the enforcement of labour legislation
which is supposed to apply to port work is inadequate or non-existent, and
inspection does not in fact extend to the ports. Such a situation, which is
obviously unsatisfactory, points to the desirability of having a special branch
of the labour inspection service operating in ports in view of the importance
of ensuring suitable conditions of work there.
REMUNERATION

One of the problems which frequently arises is that of the method of
remuneration.
Divergent views are expressed on the question of whether dockers should
be paid on time rates or on tonnage. Each port has developed its own
practice and this is difficult to change once it is established. However, the

164

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

fact that an increasing proportion of cargo is likely, in the foreseeable future,
to be handled in containers or by other relatively new means, will often
provide an opportunity for reconsideration of the method of remuneration.
Time Rates
In many ports dockers are paid primarily by time rates; these include,
among many others, ports in Australia, Belgium, Ceylon, the Federal Republic of Germany, Malaysia, the Netherlands and the United States, as well as
most African ports.
The great merit of the system is its simplicity. There are few points for
argument, and the possibilities of strife on the interpretation of an agreement
are accordingly greatly reduced.
The number of grades in dock work is relatively limited, so that a small
number of levels in the pay scales suffice. Jobs are usually not difficult to
define. Supplements for hours worked outside usual hours or on overtime
are referred to below.
The main drawback lies in the alleged lack of incentive to increase
throughput, a matter which is discussed in relation to payment by results.
Comparisons of the tonnage handled by different ports are not easy to
make, and differences would have to be ascribed to many factors other than

methods of remuneration. It is therefore difficult to affirm that incentive
payments are necessary to increase output. It is worth noting, however,
that ports where work is based on time rates include ports with a world-wide
reputation for good service and in which the speed of handling is generally
regarded as satisfactory. It is also the case that time-rated ports include
some in which productivity leaves much to be desired.
One form of time rate, found only exceptionally, does, however, constitute a serious setback to productivity, and that is a time rate related to a
norm of work on the achievement of which the worker knocks off for the
day. In Tamatave in the Malagasy Republic, for instance, workers receive
a day's wage for a fixed quantity of about 125 tons of cargo (cement, rice,
etc.) handled per gang-shift in large amounts. When the gang has finished
the job, it knocks off work even it it has been on the job for only four hours.
If gangs continued for a full shift and received pro rata incentive pay for all
production above the daily norm, output would be considerably increased.
So would the earnings of labour, without any additional cost to cargo-handling
operations.1
1
Preliminary Survey of Factors contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in the
Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, op. cit., Part II, para. 405.

CONDITIONS OF WORK

165

Some general issues, however, arise and deserve some consideration in
regard to the fixing of wages for time rates.
Payment of a Living Wage.
In the first place, the wage level should be such as to provide at least a
living wage on the basis of a normal day's work, without overtime or bonus
payments. Referring to the situation in Latin America, the Second InterAmerican Port and Harbor Conference made it clear that "labour must be
encouraged by receiving a living wage in the normal day, instead of the
present system so prevalent whereby daily wages are so low that the worker
must depend heavily on overtime in order to live". *
The question of what is deemed to be a living wage will, of course,
largely depend on the social and economic situation of the country concerned.
Through the International Labour Conference, many governments have
accepted the principle that "In ascertaining the minimum standards of living,
account shall be taken of such essential family needs of the workers as food
and its nutritive value, housing, clothing, medical care and education". 2
However, in some developing countries, where the general level is inevitably
very low, wage rates have at times been fixed at a level which does not really
provide a living wage in the country concerned, as defined above.
A Meeting of Experts on Minimum Wage Fixing and Related Problems,
with Special Reference to Developing Countries, which met under the auspices of the ILO in 1967, pointed out that, while the minimum wage must
be related in some way to the needs of the workers, it was difficult to specify
these needs precisely, even in regard to food, clothing and accommodation.
In other categories of expenditure the minimum standard is still more a
matter of social convention. The report of the Experts 3 also pointed out
that:
49. . . . If the concept of human needs is interpreted very broadly in a poor
economy, it will lead to the setting of wages at a level which throws out of work
many of those who are in greatest economic need. On the other hand, if it is
interpreted too narrowly, it will have little effect on actual wages, and may indeed
be taken as an excuse for paying wages that are quite unreasonably low.
50. A distinction is implied between, on the one hand, a "subsistence" standard which covers the barest needs of the workers and which could be the basis of
1
Problems of Ports in Latin America and the Port Programs of the Organization
of American Stales, op. cit., p. 8.
s
Social Policy (Basic Aims and Standards) Convention, 1962, Art. 5 (2).
3
For an extract from the report, see ILO : Minimum Wage Fixing and Economic
Development, Studies and Reports, New Series, No. 72 (Geneva, 1968), pp. 147-164;
see also idem: Minimum Wage Fixing Machinery and Related Problems, with Special
Reference to Developing Countries, Report VII (1), International Labour Conference,
53rd Session, Geneva, 1969 (Geneva, 1968), pp. 76-91.

166

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

a national minimum wage, and, on the other hand, a somewhat higher standard
of living which should take greater account of social needs and which could be
seen as a future target for the whole population or as a yardstick for setting now
the wages of, for example those with some degree of skill.
Other criteria relate to comparisons with living standards elsewhere in the
economy and to the desirability of not unduly hindering economic development. The whole question will be examined by the International Labour
Conference in 1969 with a view to the subsequent adoption of international
standards in this field.
Payment According to Level of Skill.
Whatever their level, the wage rates fixed for dockers have to compare
with those in force for other jobs calling for comparable degrees of effort, skill
and responsibility. The question then arises as to whether dockers' wages
should be assimilated to these of unskilled, semi-skilled or skilled workers.
In early days there was—and in some countries there still is—a tendency to
pay the docker the wage of an unskilled labourer. This is, however, quite
contrary to new trends. The docker should be a versatile worker, capable of
handling various types of equipment and able to use his judgment when
stowing or handling cargo ; he should therefore no longer be regarded as an
untrained, unskilled labourer, and it is scarcely consonant with the attempt
to build up a more attractive image of the docker's job to continue to pay
him an unskilled wage.
Whether the wage should be that of the skilled or the semi-skilled worker
will depend on the definitions current in the country concerned, or on local
labour situations. The level of the wage should, however, reflect the new
status of the docker. It should also give recognition to the acquisition of
particular skills, such as fork-lift truck driving or the handling of specialised
gear. Cranemen, for instance, everywhere belong to the skilled grades.
Problems often arise when, in order to help out, a docker performs tasks
above or below his grade. Thus, if a holdsrnan who is not normally also a
winchman acts as such because of a shortage of winchmen, he should normally be paid the rate for the job while he is on it.
Compensation for the Nature of the Work.
When the docker's job is compared with other jobs, factors other than
skill will be taken into consideration by potential applicants.
The job involves exposure to weather and sometimes considerable physical effort under difficult conditions. If a worker is in a position to choose
between jobs, he will compare these conditions with work, say, in a factory,
and expect some additional compensation, reflected in wage rates, for these
factors. He will weigh them against other factors which he may regard as

CONDITIONS OF WORK

167

favourable to dock work, such as its variety and the relative independence
of the docker.
The disadvantages of shift work outside normal hours and of week-end
work or overtime are usually compensated by special supplements, but there
is also the question as to whether the wage rate should take account of the
irregularity of the work. This will depend on the extent to which the latter
is reduced by the introduction of the guarantees mentioned in Chapter 2.
Where, however, there is little or no guarantee of income, it seems only
reasonable that some compensation for irregular earnings should be incorporated in the wage rate.
Additional payments are usually made for particularly difficult or dirty
work. These are usually listed in collective agreements, and a percentage
increase in rates, or flat-rate supplement, is laid down for particular types or
conditions of cargo.
Payment by Results
The Case in Favour of Payment by Results.
Many experts present strong arguments in favour of payment by results.
"Suitable schemes of payment by results can provide a valuable incentive to
dockworkers, though account must be taken of local circumstances before
introducing them." *
Payment by results is widely practised in the ports of a number of countries, including the Republic of China, Ethiopia, France, India, Italy, New
Zealand, Poland, the USSR and the United Kingdom.
The problem of payment by results was investigated by a Meeting of
Experts which met under the auspices of the ILO in 19522, but the whole
question is now being re-examined. The supporters of the system claim that
it provides incentives to workers to increase their productivity and to cut
down on unproductive time as much as they can. It is also claimed that
tonnage payments make it easier to estimate handling costs in advance.
Investigations in a number of countries have concluded in favour of tonnage rates for dockers.
An expert who visited many African ports in 1965 presents the following
case:
400. It is to be considered axiomatic that labour deserves higher remuneration for higher productivity. Pay increases alone, not linked to productivity, are
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 32.
2
I L O : Payment by Results, Studies and Reports, New Series, No. 27 (Geneva,
1951 (tenth impression, 1969) and idem: The International Labour Code, 1951, Vol. II,
Appendix II, p. 95.

168

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

mostly ineffective, as is experienced in Mombasa and Dar-es-Salaam where a
number of increases were accompanied by a steady decline in productivity.
402. A higher rate of production also leads to a more rational exploitation
of port equipment.
403. The application of incentive systems is feasible for the bulk of cargo
generally handled in East African ports. It has to be adapted to local conditions
and characteristics of t r a d e . . . . i
He adds an example:
In the ports of Ethiopia stevedores are as a rule remunerated by piece-work
on a tonnage basis. The port of Assab shows consequently one of the highest
cargo production figures in the subregion in spite of dire lack of modern equipment and appliances.2
The same expert cites another example from West Africa :
The Elder-Dempster shipping agency in Ghana introduced in the past a tonnage premium of $0.07 per ton for every ton handled above the average production of 50 tons per gang-day and production increased to 80 tons per gang-day or
by 60 per cent.3
In India the Dockworkers' (Regulation of Employment) Enquiry Committee came to be conclusion that—
In order to ensure a reasonable output from workers and to minimise the possibilities of the turn-round of ships in Indian ports not being maintained at an
acceptable level of efficiency in future, wages paid to workers in connection with
loading and unloading of cargo must be linked with productivity and a system of
"payment by results" should replace the present system of time rate wages. It
would also be desirable to provide for an "incentive bonus" in the system.4
The introduction of a piece-rate system in Bombay after a period of very
low efficiency is reported to have resulted in a 40 to 50 per cent increase in
output. 5
Similarly, experts who have, under the United Nations Technical Assistance Administration, advised on the organisation of ports in Central America,
have also strongly urged that the payment of port labour should be by the
ton rather than by the hour.fl
1
Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in the
Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, op. cit., Part II, paras. 400-403.
2
Ibid., para. 407.
3
Ibid., Part I, para. 106.
4
Government of India: Report of the Dock-workers' (Regulation of Employment)
Enquiry Committee (1955) (Delhi, Manager of Publications, 1956), p. 214.
5
N. M. AYYAR, Secretary to the Government of India, Ministry of Transport : "The
Development of Indian Ports", in a supplement to Capital, 28 June 1956, p. 48.
6
United Nations, Technical Assistance Administration : Maritime Transport in
Central America, document TAA/LAT/5 (New York, 1955).

CONDITIONS OF WORK

169

The forms which incentive payments often take are either a straight rate
by ton of cargo handled, with variations for types of equipment or condition
of cargo, or bonuses paid on top of hourly rates for all cargo handled per
gang-shift over and above a set norm.
The Case against Payment by Results.
The case against payment by results in dock work rests largely on the
difficulty of setting the rates, the possible complexity of the rate book, and
the disputes which arise out of the system.
The difficulty of establishing suitable standards where cargo is very diversified is . . . recognised. Where appropriate procedures do not exist, new wage
systems should be introduced only after the most careful study, undertaken jointly
by employers and workers, of the operation involved, with a view to determining
whether it is being carried out in the 1most efficient manner and to fixing a suitable standard time for the operation.
The complexity of rate-fixing can be very great. In London, for instance,
there are over 1,200 tonnage rates. There are variations for the form of
packing, the state of the cargo, the type of ship. However carefully the rate
is fixed in the first instance, anomalies arise in time which make one type of
cargo a much more paying proposition to handle than another for the docker,
with the result that where the docker has a say in selecting the job he pushes
to get the good jobs and those who succeed incur a certain amount of jealousy
from the others. Ill-adjusted tonnage rates are one of the elements making
for the often wide disparity in earnings among dockers. Success in earnings
does not depend only on the work performed, but on ability to get selected
for the best-paying jobs (unless there is a rotation system). As has been
pointed out in Chapter 6, arguments about the applicable rate are one of the
most frequent causes of grievances, and increase the need for machinery to
deal with them on the spot.
The determination of standard times in port work is particularly difficult,
and the methods normally used in manufacturing industry can be applied only
with considerable adaptations and some reservations. There are so many
factors which can affect the speed of operations : the type of gear used, stowage, warehousing conditions, quay congestion, condition of the cargo,
weather, interruptions of work due to failure of co-ordination in the throughmovement of cargo, to mention but a few.
Once a tonnage rate or standard time is set, it is very difficult to alter it
when improved methods of handling the cargo are introduced, unless there is
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 32.

170

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

a change of technique sufficiently far-reaching to make it obvious that the
rate has to be recalculated. In that case the dockers may fear a reduction
in their earnings and may oppose the change, and progress is held up.
Changes of lesser scope are constantly being introduced, fast enough for
earnings on particular types of cargo to get out of Une with those of others
which call for no greater effort and are no more difficult to handle.
A further difficulty is that the existence of tonnage rates leads to recriminations between shore gangs and ship gangs, and sometimes between both
of them and cranemen, each asserting that hold-ups or slowness on the part
of the others (for which they may not be to blame) are preventing them from
earning as much as they think they should.
Payment for unproductive time also creates problems. It is usual for
men on tonnage rates to fall back on the hourly rate whenever work is held
up, for instance through bad weather, failure of cargo to arrive, or breakdown
of machinery. They obviously want every hold-up noted, so that they can
get paid the hourly rate in addition to the tonnage rate for the cargo actually
handled. This is particularly the case where the incentive payment takes
the form of a bonus on cargo handled per gang-hour over a given norm. In
that case it pays the docker to clear a high tonnage when the cargo can move,
while drawing the hourly rate during the rest of the time.
In some cases the increasing output per hour allegedly due to incentive
payments is partly offset by wasteful use of manpower. Where the tonnage
rate is paid to the gang, the operator has little incentive to reduce the size of
the gang. If the gang is unnecessarily large, and the practice develops of a
proportion of the gang not working at any given time, it does not cost the
operator anything. However, if there is a labour shortage, such practices
may adversely affect the capacity of the port as a whole.
Another problem in connection with payment by results is how to deal
with containers and the rapid loading of roll-on/roll-off ships. One solution
is to have a flat rate for each size of container passing through ports, or per
ton of cargo carried in them, but to apply the rate appropriate to the cargo
when the container is stowed or unpacked in the port. If only a few containers are being discharged at any given time, perhaps involving only a
couple of hours' work, a rate based on a charge per container would not
seem particularly attractive to the docker unless it were a very high rate;
on the other hand, it would yield disproportionately high earnings if a whole
container ship was being handled. Therefore, when new methods are being
introduced where the speed of handling is determined rather by the equipment available than by the efforts of the dockers, there is a strong case for
avoiding the complications of tonnage rates and falling back on rather liberal
hourly or weekly rates.

CONDITIONS OF WORK

171

Finally, the accountancy complications of tonnage rates, or bonuses,
should not be underestimated. If the cargo is diversified, and there are a
number of minor hold-ups to be timed, a close check on times and a careful
tally are needed. Tallying and time-keeping are in any case already enough
of a problem in some developing countries. The working out of the pay
check can be quite a complex job and tonnage rates throw a further strain
on the already weak administrative machinery in some countries.
The strongest argument against the widespread use of tonnage rates, especially in developing countries, is the jealousy these systems can breed between
one gang and another. How serious a problem this can present depends on
the psychology of those concerned, but it can be a major source of trouble.
For all these reasons, and in spite of opinions quoted in their favour by
experts, the adoption of tonnage rates or bonus systems should be approached
with the greatest caution, particularly in developing countries. They should
be introduced only when they have been carefully worked out, when there is
every chance that the rate will stand for a considerable time and when those
concerned are convinced that the advantages of incentive payments will outweigh all the drawbacks mentioned.
Some Criteria for Payment by Results.
A few generally accepted positions may be mentioned in regard to tonnage rates, whether they are fixed on a straight tonnage basis or as bonuses
for exceeding a standard tonnage.
The first is that under normal conditions the average gang working at
a standard pace—allowing for reasonable rest periods—ought to be able to
earn substantially more than on time rates. How much more is, of course, a
matter for negotiation, but one-third more is frequently accepted as a basis.
Secondly, minimum time rates should be guaranteed. The guarantee may
take either of two forms. Firstly, it may apply over the shift as a whole.
This system, while simple to administer, has the serious disadvantage that a
great effort on the part of the dockers during part of a shift may be wasted
as far as they are concerned if work cannot proceed during the remainder of
the shift, even though this may not be their fault; the unfairness of such a
situation leads to discontent. The other, and more usual, form of guarantee
is that the tonnage rate or bonus payment applies only to the period during
which work can proceed, and the time rate applies to the rest of the time.
As already pointed out, this calls for careful recording of unproductive time.
Finally, "rates should not be fixed in a manner which encourages overexertion or disregard of safety or of care in handling cargo".1
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 33 (c).

172

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Guarantees
In any consideration of remuneration it is necessary to stress once again
the importance, given the irregular nature of port work, of a guaranteed
minimum income, calculated over at least a week, and if possible over a
longer period. Examples have been given in Chapter 2.
Royalties and Special Funds
Where new methods of cargo handling have threatened employment, a
solution has sometimes been not in paying additional remuneration to the
dockers handling the new equipment, but in paying sums into funds designed
to provide for additional pensions or other indemnities to some of those who
might be forced to leave the industry, or for welfare facilities, or for some
other specified purpose.
An early example dating back to the 1930s was the agreement to pay the
dockers' union in Séte (France) a small levy on all wine handled from tankers
into pipes instead of in barrels, as previously; the proceeds were spent on
welfare facilities for the dockers. The same principle was taken up more
recently in Tunisia when the handling of wine went over to tankers, substantial royalties going into a relief fund which provides money for a special pension scheme for dockers. The very substantial Mechanisation and Modernisation Fund on the United States Pacific Coast has already been described,
as has the system of "royalties" levied on containers handled in the Port of
New York which were not packed by ILA labour in the port ; the royalties
are placed in a fund the use of which has yet to be decided.
HOURS OF WORK

Normal Hours of Work
In principle, general regulations on hours of work, where they exist,
should apply to port work, with such adaptations as may be necessary to take
account of shift work.
There is no reason why dockers should work longer normal hours, either
daily or weekly, than most other workers, even if their work is more intermittent. The need to give ships a quick turn-round can usually be met by
recourse to shift work and a limited amount of overtime to meet special
circumstances.
The International Labour Conference as early as 1919 adopted the
principle of the 48-hour week and the eight- or nine-hour day as the normal

CONDITIONS OF WORK

173

working periods in industry, which explicitly covers "the handling of goods
at docks, quays, wharves or warehouses" 1, and in 1962 reaffirmed this
standard.2 It recommended that "Where the duration of the normal working
week exceeds 48 hours, immediate steps should be taken to bring it down to
this level without any reduction in the wages of the workers as at the time
hours of work are reduced".3
There are few countries where hours of work of adult male workers are
not regulated by legislation, arbitration awards or collective agreements, and
still fewer where hours of work are above 48 a week. However, in ports
situations still arise in which dockers work far above normal hours of work,
and well in excess of 48, in particular weeks. The casual nature of the job,
however, provides no justification for permitting unduly long normal hours
of work. Where work is irregular, some men may be working for spells so
long as to be detrimental to their health and efficiency. The Recommendation of the Conference is thus fully applicable to dockers.
The Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962, urges that
"Normal hours of work should be progressively reduced, when appropriate,
with a view to attaining the social standard" 4 of a 40-hour week, without
reduction of wages. However, measures for such a progressive reduction
should be worked out and implemented in a manner suited to the particular
national circumstances and conditions in each sector of economic activity.
It should therefore be expected that if normal hours of work in industry
are reduced below 48 a week, as they have been in a great many countries5,
dockers should benefit by at least the same reduction.
There are, however, at least some grounds which can be advanced in
favour of a reduction of hours in ports below those generally applicable in
most other industrial undertakings.
Firstly the work is still often strenuous, in spite of technical progress,
and often has to be carried out under conditions of exposure to heat, cold or
bad weather and at times in the restricted space of a ship's hold.
Secondly, if technological progress results in the increased use of containers, unit loads and improved handling gear in countries which may have,
at least for a time, a surplus of labour, there are grounds for reducing normal
hours of work. The Recommendation indicates that reductions in hours of
1
Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919; see also The International Labour
Code, 1951, op. cit., Vol. I, Arts. 235-244.
2
Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962.
3
Ibid., Para. 5.
«Ibid., Para. 4.
5
ILO : Hours of Work—A World Survey of National Law and Practice (Extract
from the report of the 37th (1967) Session of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations) (Geneva, 1967).

174

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

work should take into account, among other factors, "the progress achieved
and which it is possible to achieve in raising productivity by the application
of modern technology, automation and management techniques".1
Thirdly, the docker should be compensated for the inconvenience of shift
work from the point of view of family life and of social and recreational
activities. One way of doing this is to arrange for a shorter working week :
in a number of countries shift workers in many industries enjoy a shorter
working week than those on normal single-shift operations.
In several countries, in particular Belgium, the Federal Republic of Germany, the Netherlands, Norway and the United Kingdom, reductions in the
normal hours of work of dockers have taken place by stages in recent years.
One example of action in reducing hours of work while introducing shifts
comes from Singapore, where the Port Authority reduced hours of work from
12 a day (in one shift) to 7 a day (with two shifts) in 1964. Increased productivity and an improved cargo bonus scheme enabled the hourly wage to
be increased and the level of earnings to bs maintained in spite of much
shorter hours. In a pamphlet issued to all employees the Authority explained
that—
The system whereby you have been working for long hours is undesirable
and it is not consistent with the labour trends in a progressive society; by shortening your working hours, there is every reason to believe that the productivity of

the port will be increased. 2

Overtime
In many ports a great deal of overtime is worked. Thus, to take a few
examples, at Montreal and Quebec (before the new agreement) the ratio of
overtime to total hours worked reached over 30 per cent.3 In Colombo
overtime earnings have been known to exceed the basic wage rate by 55 to
60 per cent.
In some United Kingdom ports "the volume of overtime working in the
docks has reached a pitch where it has ceased to be what it should be—a
means for dealing with emergencies and unusually brisk trade". *
The above statement brings out the main point of overtime. Under the
Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919, overtime, apart from preparatory or complementary work, is essentially provided "so that establishments
1

Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962, Para. 7.
The Port of Singapore Authority : What Is Shift Work at the Wharves ? (Singapore, 1964), p. 1.
3
Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St. Lawrence Ports, op. cit., p. 17.
4
Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin into
Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, op. cit., para. 80.
2

CONDITIONS OF WORK

175

may deal with exceptional cases of pressure of work". * In 1962 the Conference recommended that "The competent authority or body in each country
should determine the circumstances and limits in which exceptions to the
normal hours of work may be permitted".2 These were indicated and
included temporary overtime in case of accident, actual or threatened, in case
of force majeure, in case of abnormal pressure of work, in case of national
emergency and periodically for specified seasonal activities.
There is no doubt that there is often a need for overtime in ports. It
arises firstly because of fluctuations in traffic. Even if a labour force is kept
which can deal with rates of flow of, say, 10 per cent above average, that may
not suffice for high seasonal or sporadic peaks of traffic. If the dockers'
registers were increased, there might be excessive underemployment at other
times. Therefore overtime is a necessary instrument—as part of any scheme
for the régularisation of employment—for meeting peaks of traffic. For that
reason it is difficult to set strict limits to it in ports and this is seldom
attempted.
Recourse to overtime is also the obvious solution in certain specific
cases, for instance to enable a ship which requires only a couple of hours of
work to be done on her to sail. Even in ports where the policy is to restrict
overtime, it is allowed in such cases.
However, the disadvantages of working excessive overtime should be
clearly realised. Mention has already been made in Chapter 4 of the
unreasonable system according to which men work a ship through, working
round the clock or even longer, with either no formal rest at all or inadequate
rest periods. This, as has been pointed out, is both inhuman and inefficient,
and the strongest recommendations have been made for its suppression
wherever it exists.
Where physical effort is involved, all the evidence so far gathered points
to the fact that frequent or continuous working of long daily hours leads to a
marked fall in physical output and to an increase in absenteeism. The
counter-argument, sometimes valid and sometimes not, is that in ports the
long hours are only occasional and that recuperation is possible during the
spells of inactivity arising out of casual work. Though there is merit in this
argument, it does not apply when overtime is very frequent. In some ports
the ten-hour day, with two hours' overtime, has become almost standard
practice, and where ports are very busy, many men are doing this for long
periods. In one case an experiment to cut back from ten to eight hours
showed that in the shorter time as much work was done as in ten hours (with
1
2

Art. 6.
Reduction of Hours of Work Recommendation, 1962, Para. 14.

176

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

eleven hours' pay). The tempo of work had previously become adjusted
to a ten-hour day, which hac become inefficient in terms of output and cost.
There is also another argument : it is not unknown for men to slack off during
normal hours in order to earn overtime. This may be the case even where
tonnage rates are paid, because a special effort during overtime will yield
the tonnage rate with the overtime supplement (for instance rate-and-a-half).
Broadly speaking, expert opinion is that in general no man should be
expected to work more than two hours' overtime in excess of an eight-hour
shift, though there might, of course, be temporary exceptions in special circumstances.
In terms of efficiency there is no justification in using overtime as a
disguised means of increasing the dockers' earnings, so that the latter come
to rely on it to make up their take-home pay.
The ultimate solutions to the problem of excessive systematic overtime
reside in offering the income guarantees already referred to, so that the
docker does not seek to get as much overtime as he can out of each job;
greater efficiency and in many cases better time-keeping during normal
hours; and, finally, where it is not already widely practised, increased
recourse to shift work.
Is there an obligation to work overtime? In principle, under most laws
or agreements, there is not. It is best to rely on voluntary action where
possible. However, sometimes it may be necessary to require overtime, for
instance to enable a ship to sail. Most dockers work in gangs, and it is not
as a rule possible at short notice to replace a man who does not want to work
overtime just for the overtime hours. Some agreements therefore specify
the cases in which there is an obligation, as for finishing a ship.
In the United Kingdom Dock Labour Scheme the docker is under the
obligation to "work for such periods as are reasonable in his particular case",
and this has been interpreted by employers as an obligation to work overtime. Considerable controversy has arisen, not entirely resolved, though the
view is widely held that it is a matter for agreement to be reached through
the appropriate joint industrial organisation.
It is also sometimes specified that the worker should be notified in
advance that he will be wanted for overtime, for instance by informing him
before the mid-day break for work that evening, in order that he can make
his arrangements.
Some further safeguards are usual as regards overtime work. The docker
should expect to get additional pay. The Hours of Work (Industry) Convention, 1919, fixes the minimum rate at 25 per cent over normal rates. In
most major ports 50 per cent for the first two hours and higher rates thereafter are usual. In some cases double time is paid. Further, in some ports,

CONDITIONS OF WORK

177

the times at which overtime can reasonably be expected of the docker are
laid down by agreement, for instance the first two hours after the end of the
day shift Mondays to Fridays, and sometimes Saturday mornings.
Actual Hours of Work
It is difficult to assess the actual hours of work of dockers, because of
the irregularity of their employment in most countries. Statistics are lacking,
but the picture in most countries with casual employment would probably
show actual hours of work to be on average below those prevailing in other
industries. This does not preclude, as has been pointed out above, excessively long spells of work at certain times (which may be followed by slack
periods at other times).
Shift Work
The operational advantages of shift work have been set out in Chapter 4 :
only thus can delays to shipping be reduced to a minimum, port equipment
used to best advantage and goods handled expeditiously. It remains to consider some aspects related to conditions of work.
Rotation.
Various arrangements are made for the rotation of shifts. However,
because the demand for work on the various shifts fluctuates and cannot be
predicted, an automatic rotation schedule is usually out of the question.
Where two shifts are worked during the day, and reasonable rest periods
are given, rotation presents little difficulty and the changeover is sometimes
made weekly.
A frequent method is to arrange for dockers not taken on for a day shift
to be able to present themselves for a later day shift or for the night shift.
The drawback is that the men have to come to the call stand a second time
during the same day or hang around for some time.
To avoid this, the men are in some cases allocated to particular shifts in
proportions corresponding to average demand, changing round weekly. In
Antwerp the dockers opt for a particular shift on a permanent basis, without
rotation. Because too few apply for the afternoon shift, all newcomers are
allocated to it for some months.
Additional Compensation.
If shift work is an advantage to the operator, the worker suffers a good
deal of inconvenience. It disturbs family life ; sleep during the day in present-

178

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

day urban housing is difficult, and the need to respect the man's day-time rest
may impose a further strain on the family. It interferes with social activities
and recreation. It may also involve the docker in additional costs for transport to his workplace and meals at unusual hours, which may entail the
preparation of a separate meal for him. It is normal practice to offer compensation for these drawbacks and costs.
Rates are a matter for negotiation. They vary according to the shift, the
availability of manpower, the degree of reluctance of workers to offer themselves for shift work in relation to the demand for it, and local circumstances.
It is difficult to generalise, but afternoon shifts may carry only about
20 per cent higher pay, ranging sometimes up to 33 per cent. Workers on
the night shift do not get less than 20 per cent extra, but 50 per cent is more
usual, and in some ports double time is paid.
Week-end Work
The desirability of observing the ancient principle of a weekly rest cannot
be too strongly emphasised. This principle has been embodied in the Weekly
Rest (Industry) Convention, 1921, which applies to port undertakings, and
is to be found in the legislation of almost all countries and in collective
agreements.1
Exceptions are granted for a number of activities which have to be carried
on on the customary weekly day of rest, and these exceptions always cover
transport. The usual condition is that a compensatory day off be given.
This is highly desirable from a social point of view and from the point of
view of the health and efficiency of the worker. Continuous work with no
days off, or only occasional ones, has been shown through studies undertaken under wartime conditions to have a marked adverse effect on output
after a time. The result has been aptly described as "six days' output for
seven days' work on eight days' pay".
The problem has become more acute owing to the fact that in many
countries the five-day week has come to be accepted practice in industry and
in many types of offices.
The arguments for working a port on the customary weekly rest days are
particularly strong in the case of passenger liners, ferry services and specialised ships such as container ships. The change in cargo-handling techniques,
the increased capital involved, the planning for a quick turn-round, all add
to the pressure for week-end work, and there are strong economic grounds
1
ILO : Weekly Rest in Industry, Commerce and Offices—A World Survey of
National Law and Practice (Parí Three of the Report of the Committee of Experts on
the Application of Conventions and Recommendations) (Geneva, 1964).

CONDITIONS OF WORK

179

for allowing it, even if perhaps under conditions which limit it to the cases in
which the economic grounds for it are the strongest.
It is essential, however, to give due weight to the social arguments against
week-end work. Firstly, in a great many countries there are religious objections to work on the customary day of worship, and the convictions of the
workers must be taken into account. Secondly, the demands of family and
social life make it desirable for the worker to be free when the other members
of his family and his friends are free. In most countries recreation is very
important, and a Saturday afternoon football match can make it particularly
difficult to secure attendance of dockers at that time.
The conclusion is that in many cases work at week-ends—whether only
on the weekly rest day consecrated by religion or custom or during the longer
week-end of one-and-a-half or two days—will become increasingly desirable
from a general economic point of view as new methods of handling cargo
develop. On the other hand, with rising standards of living, dockers will set
a higher price on the advantages of their week-end.
The implication is that, as a general rule, week-end work should be
voluntary, though it may be reasonable to impose Saturday morning work
on one week-end in two or three, as part of shift work, as is done in the
Netherlands. By making week-end work voluntary, religious sentiment and
personal convenience are respected.
Secondly, the workers who sacrifice part of their week-end should be
suitably compensated, whether their work is in addition to the normal working week or whether a compensatory day off is given. The higher rate of
pay should be sufficient to compensate for the drawbacks of week-end work
and to induce enough workers to offer themselves for it, and to ensure that
it is only resorted to when the resulting economic advantages are really
important, and not as matter of routine.
As far as possible, the principle of the compensatory day off should be
respected. If the work is casual, the compensatory day off may occur in the
ordinary course of events. If, however, the dockers are in regular employment, or the port is so busy that most dockers are employed nearly all the
time, special arrangements should be made for compensatory time off.
Practice varies widely. Some ports work Sundays only for passenger
ships or quite exceptional cases, and a relatively small number of men are
involved. More latitude is given for Saturday work where a five-day week
is normal, though in certain cases, as in the Netherlands, overtime on Saturday afternoon is usually only worked to finish a ship sailing on that day.
The trend seems to be towards the progressive waiving of restrictions,
but for the bonus on week-end work to be increased. Sunday work, even
when not over and above normal weekly hours, is frequently paid at double

180

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

rates, and higher rates are not unknown (in Liverpool workers get 16 hours'
pay for six hours' work). Rate-and-a-half is quite usual on Saturdays when
a five-day week is being worked. These are, however, only generalised
indications, the range of supplementary payments varying widely as the
result of collective bargaining in the light of local circumstances.
HOLIDAYS WITH PAY

Holidays with pay are now granted to workers in industry in the great
majority of countries. There was international agreement on this practice
set forth in the Holidays with Pay Convention, 1936, and the Holidays with
Pay Recommendations, 1936 and 1954. In most countries two weeks a
year are given, and in a certain number three or even four are common.1
There has been a marked tendency in most countries for the length of
holidays with pay to increase. In industrialised countries in particular the
holiday would appear to meet a real social need, and it is in keeping with
the status of the modern docker that he should share fully in these new
opportunities for a broader social life.
The number of days granted often increases after a given number of years
of service, or with age. Young workers are also often granted longer
holidays.
These longer holidays should be, and usually are, also granted to dockers,
but because of the nature of their employment special arrangements have
sometimes to be made.
Collection and Disbursement of Holiday Pay
Where dockers are regularly employed by a given operator the normal
holiday with pay regulations can apply without difficulty. Where a docker
is given full-time employment with a reserve pool or a dock labour board,
the administrators of the pool usually pay the holiday and collect a pro rata
contribution towards holiday pay from the operators for whom the docker
works. Similarly, where a long-term guarantee fund exists, the association
administering the fund usually deals with holidays with pay, to which the
various operators contribute on the basis of a levy. Whatever the system
adopted, the board or association will have to administer a separate fund for
the purpose.
1
ILO: Annual Holidays with Pay—A World Survey of National Law and Practice
(Part Three of the Report of the Committee of Experts on the Application of Conventions and Recommendations) (Geneva, 1964) and Holidays with Pay, Report VI (1),
International Labour Conference, 53rd Session, Geneva, 1969 (Geneva, 1968).

CONDITIONS OF WORK

181

Where, however, the docker is normally paid on a shift-by-shift basis
by the operator for whom he works, some central organisation needs to be
set up. In a number of countries, even though the holiday regulations apply
to the port transport industry, the grant of holiday pay is made contingent
upon a minimum period of service with one employer—sometimes a year.
The effect is to exclude casual dockers from the benefit of the legislation.
The practice which has been followed in some countries to meet this situation is for the employers, through their association, to create a fund into
which is paid a percentage of the wages of the dockers employed by members ;
the docker draws the holiday pay standing to his credit when the time comes,
proportionately to the periods he has worked. In France a special institution
under government auspices has been set up for the purpose. Under some
collective agreements holidays with pay are given only to dockers who have
worked a minimum number of hours a year and who are regarded as depending primarily on dock work for their livelihood.
One administrative arrangement sometimes used for casual workers is to
issue them with holiday cards, on which the employer affixes a stamp for
each period worked with him.

The stamps are issued by the association,

and the card is cashed through any of the employing firms at holiday time,
that firm running a clearing account with the stamp-issuing association and
collecting from it or paying to it any balance due. This system is easy to
operate when fixed wages are paid per week and stamps correspond to the
wage rates, but does not stand up well to the complications of pro rata payments on piece-work earnings and very frequent changes of employer.
Public Holidays
Arrangements similar to the above are often made to cover the cost of
paying dockers on public holidays, when legislation or collective agreements
prescribe that payment should be made.
HoUday Dates
Holidays with pay may contribute to the régularisation of employment,
if they can be granted during periods when trade is slack. This, however,
may run counter to the desire of the docker to be able to enjoy holidays at
the best time of year, and, in many cases, when his children are free from
school. If the holiday season corresponds to an active period in the port,
and holidays are mainly granted in that season, then the registers will have
to be increased, and there may be increased underemployment at other times
of the year. A possible solution is the recruitment of short-term casuals

182

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

during the holiday season, bat in many countries this would not be possible.
It would also run counter to the main idea of decasualisation. Compromise
solutions have therefore to be worked out, such as extending the holiday
season for as long a period as possible, giving priority to family men during
the period of school holidays, or selecting holiday dates partly on a seniority
basis.
SOCIAL SECURITY

There can be no question here of describing all the various social security
schemes which exist in a great many countries and which apply to dockers.
The essential point to make is that where schemes apply to industrial workers
dockers should be covered, as indeed they usually are. In fact, the irregularity of employment of many dockers makes their need for social security
all the greater. Two issues only will be brought up: the position of the
docker with regard to unemployment benefit, and the question of special or
supplementary old-age and invalidity pension schemes, whether viewed
purely as a social measure or also as a means of facilitating the reduction in
the number of dockers registered when technical progress has made this
necessary.
Unemployment Benejit
A number of unemployment insurance schemes provide for a "waiting
period" in the sense that the insured person cannot draw benefit unless he
has been out of work for at least a minimum period of, say, three consecutive days. They may also require a period of several weeks of more or less
continuous employment before becoming entitled to benefit at all. A strict
application of these rules can deprive the casual docker of benefit of which
he stands particularly in need.
One solution is to make special arrangements in the case of dockers, so
that unemployment benefit can be paid on a daily basis. This is done in
Belgium, where unemployment benefit is paid at the hiring hall when a
worker has not been able to find work. It is coupled with a contribution by
the employers' association to increase the total so as to provide a minimum
daily guarantee.
Where longer-term guarantees of income or employment are offered,
these are usually regarded as periods of employment for the purposes of
unemployment benefit, whether the docker works or not.
Old Age
It has already been pointed out that when the number of registered
dockers has to be reduced one of the means always considered is inducing

CONDITIONS OF WORK

183

the older ones to leave by providing them with an adequate pension or with
lump-sum payments on retirement.
In many countries, however, there is no pension scheme for workers
who reach a certain age. In others the benefits are still so low that the drop
in income on retirement is regarded by those concerned as too great to enable
them to live decently. As a result, many dockers carry on work at an age
when it constitutes an excessive effort for them and when their efficiency is
much impaired. In some countries the proportion of old dockers is unusually
high. This is because when the impact of technical progress made it necessary to reduce the number of dockers recruitment was as a rule heavily
reduced or stopped altogether. Another reason is the traditionalist nature
of dock work in many countries, and the fact that dockers have often been
ill-equipped for finding other jobs after a certain age, even though efforts are
sometimes made to find other port jobs for them, such as gatekeepers or
watchmen. It has in some countries been possible for dockers to carry on
longer than they otherwise would owing to the willingness of other dockers
to keep the size of the gang rather larger than is necessary in order to carry
one or two older men along with them. Thus the size of the gang is related
to the introduction of pension schemes, as negotiations in the United Kingdom
and the United States have shown.
The problem is quite a considerable one. On the United States Pacific
Coast, for instance, workers can carry on without limit of age in order to
make up the requirement of 25 years of service, though new proposals now
make it possible, if necessary, to pay additional compensation to workers
who leave after 22, 23 or 24 years of service and who are over 62 years of
age. In the United Kingdom about 7,500 dockers, or about 13 per cent of
the register, are over 60. 1
These considerations point firstly to the desirability of making sure that
dockers are covered by any national old-age and invalidity pension scheme
which may exist and is applicable to industrial workers. This has to be
checked because casual workers sometimes fail to qualify under some contributory schemes, if they have not paid the required number of contributions.
The possibility should also be considered of enabling dockers to cease
work under old-age pension schemes at a lower age than other workers, in
view of the strenuous nature of their work, which is often carried out under
difficult conditions regarding exposure to weather. Special arrangements of
this kind have been made for miners in some countries.
Then there is the possibility, where this is necessary, of making up the
state pension to an amount which will reduce the gap between the pension
1

The Economist,

24 Feb. 1968, p. 7 1 .

184

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

and the docker's earnings and induce him to leave work at the normal retiring
age, if not sooner. The solution of lump-sum payments on retirement has
also already been mentioned, and there is also the possibility of making
monthly payments until a normal pension is due. These special schemes are
usually financed out of funds provided by the employers, on whom an even
larger burden may fall if there are no state schemes.
Measures of the kind mentioned serve a valuable social purpose and may
also help to adjust the manpower situation in ports to the changes engendered
by new labour-saving forms of handling cargo.

8. SAFETY AND WELFARE
One of the new trends affecting dockers is the increasing attention paid
to their safety and welfare.
Safety and welfare considerations are embodied in some of the over-all
new settlements which will be described in Chapter 9. For instance, on the
United States Pacific Coast both parties to the agreement have accepted
a special safety code to supplement the federal regulations. Though the
employer may choose methods of work, there is a proviso that "longshoremen shall not be required to work when in good faith they believe that to do
so is immediately to endanger health and safety". In order that advantage
should not be taken of this clause merely to obstruct work, the Memorandum
of Agreement of 1960 provides that "only in cases of bona fide health and
safety issues may a standby be justified. The Union pledges itself in good
faith that health and safety will not be used as a gimmick." » A detailed
procedure has been established for dealing with any dispute which may arise
in connection with this issue. In the settlement covering the St. Lawrence
ports it is stipulated that employers and employees shall comply with the
Longshoring Safety Code, which contains improved safety regulations and
which has become a part of the whole agreement enforceable by law. The
same settlement imposes the provision of certain welfare amenities.2 In the
United Kingdom the new arrangements include a provision requiring the
National Dock Labour Board to prepare for each port a "welfare amenity
scheme" for the provision and maintenance, whether by registered employers
or by harbour authorities in the port, of such welfare amenities as the Board
thinks ought to be provided and maintained for that port.s
In many cases in which expert advice has been given to governments
under the auspices of the United Nations or the International Labour Organisation, strong recommendations have been made for improvements in the
field of safety, health and welfare.

ILWU-PMA: Pacific Coast Longshore Agreement 1961-1966, Supplement III.
Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St. Lawrence Ports, op. cit., pp. 76-77,
97-100, and Annex H.
s
Docks and Harbours Act, 1966, Cap. 28, Part II, especially s. 25.
2

186

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

SAFETY

The Inland Transport Committee, in agreeing that it was desirable to
accept new types of mechanical equipment, specified that they should be
safe.1 This points to the importance of examining thoroughly, with the help
of experts, what new risks may arise when new methods of work and new
equipment are being introduced. This should be standard procedure. A few
indications are given below in respect of one or two of the new practices
which are developing in the handling of cargo, but these cannot of course in
any way replace a proper investigation of their potential risks or the new
regulations and safety practices which may be called for.
Containers
The use of containers will obviously reduce the number of accidents for
any given tonnage of cargo handled, if for ao other reason than that the
number of man-hours of exposure to risk will have been substantially reduced.
It is almost certain that the accident rate measured against the actual manhours of exposure will also decrease, because dockers' accident statistics
show that a high proportion of accidents occur while cargo is moved by hand,
and include strains, sprains and injuries resulting from the dropping of objects
and crushing between objects. In so far as the containers are not loaded or
discharged in port, many of these risks would no longer arise. Even if
account is taken of risks of this nature incurred in stowing or unloading containers, whether in port or elsewhere, they ars likely to be less than similar
risks arising with the mass of cargo in the hold of a ship or in a highly stacked
warehouse. Nevertheless, it may be worth while drawing attention to some
of the safety features of container handling.
Construction.
It is of course an obvious requirement that containers should be strong
enough to contain their load even under the stresses arising out of lifting and
lowering, and out of ships' movements at sea. This means that floors, sides
and doors should be strong enough and of such design as not to break open
even if the container is tilted during loading or unloading operations. As
will be seen from an example given below, the frames of containers may,
with certain methods of lifting, be subjected to very considerable longitudinal
compressive stresses. Similarly, the practice of stacking containers one on
1

Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 37.

SAFETY AND WELFARE

187

top of another not only on land but in the holds of ships has to be taken into
account and calls for considerable strength in construction.
A great deal of attention has been paid to the devices for locking a lifting
frame onto the container, and the International Organization for Standardization has recommended strengthened corner pieces for this purpose. On
systems widely used, lugs on the frame fit into eyes on the container, and
turn at right angles. Safety depends largely on the extent to which they do
in fact turn into position ; on some systems signal lights come on when the
system is locked into position and lifting cannot proceed if this does not
happen.
Present standards also provide that the floors of the larger containers
must be strong enough to enable fork-lift trucks to operate on them.
Standards have been established by the International Organization for
Standardization, the American Standards Association and other national
bodies, and Lloyds Register of Shipping. Some of these are, however,
provisional and further work is required on them.
The question of the acceptance by one country of the suitability of a
container built in another country for handling in its territory is still a troublesome one. If the containers are built to international specifications such as
those referred to above, the problem is whether the country of handling
accepts the standards to which the container has been built. If the proposed
international standards are generally regarded as providing adequate safety
in handling and are generally accepted, this solution is obviously the simplest.
Failing that, there may be a need for bilateral or multilateral arrangements
for accepting the safety certificates which would have to be issued by the
country of origin, as is internationally the rule at present for ship's gear and
hoisting equipment sold abroad. In this connection it is important to have
not only some certificate or equivalent guarantee before the container or
container-handling gear is brought into use, but also certificates that it has
been subsequently inspected at regular intervals. So far as is known, action
on these lines has not yet been taken.
Hoisting.
The system described above for locking a lifting frame onto a container
may have built-in safety control, but the dangerous period as regards containers is the transitional stage, during which they are being handled on
conventional ships with either ship's gear or shore gear. During this phase
there is an obvious temptation to handle heavy containers with gear not
originally intended for the purpose and to disregard the maximum load
limits set for that gear.

188

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

The Protection against Accidents (Dockers) Convention (Revised), 1932,
provides that "No gear of any description shall be loaded beyond the safe
working load save in exceptional circumstances and then only in so far as
may be allowed by national laws or regulations".1 The Convention requires
all States Members of the ILO which have ratified it to take appropriate
measures to ensure that no hoisting machine or gear, whether fixed or loose,
used in connection therewith, is employed for cargo handling on shore or on
board ship unless it is in a safe working condition. Provision is made for
initial and subsequent periodic examination of all such gear, for the marking
of the safe working load, and for the adoption of safe working methods.
"Cranes and winches shall be provided with such means as will reduce to a
minimum the risk of the accidental descent of a load while in process of being
lifted or lowered."2 The importance of such measures is evident when
ordinary gear not designed for the purpose is being used to handle containers.
There are indications that in some ports various makeshift arrangements
have had to be made to handle containers which arrived there when neither
the ship's tackle nor the shore-based facilities were suitably equipped with
modern container-handling hoisting devices.
It may be assumed that new and specially designed equipment will have
been examined and tested before being put into use, but such equipment
should also, of course, comply with the provisions of the Convention.
However, even under the more elaborate and recently designed systems,
containers may not always be handled by special lifting frames ; another possibility is that they may have slings passed under them. In such cases, special
rules regarding slinging may have to be devised and applied, bearing in mind
that some containers may not be well stowed and that cargo can shift inside
if they are tilted, and that in some cases the centre of gravity is not in the
middle of the container. For that reason some containers which carry
unbalanced cargo (e.g. a small aircraft with the weight of the engine forward)
show warning signs to this effect.
Containers may be subjected to considerable compression during hoisting
and the cables may have to bear unexpectedly high stresses. If a container
20 X 8 X 8 feet loaded 20 tons is raised by means of a transverse lifting beam
with wire ropes attached at angle of 45° to its four top corners, the wire rope
pull and force on the corner fittings will be 40 per cent greater than if the
lifting cables were vertical, and a 5-ton compressive load would affect each
top longitudinal beam in the container. If the container were improperly
loaded so that four-fifths of the load were at one end and it were hoisted by
l
2

A r t 11 (8).
Art. 9 (7).

SAFETY AND WELFARE

189

a transverse lifting beam and wire ropes at 45°, the container would tilt to an
angle of about 12° when hoisted. The stress in the ropes on the heavy side
would increase 68 per cent over an evenly distributed 5-ton load, and the
longitudinal compressive load would be about 6 tons.1 Special care is
therefore needed in checking the tackle, and especially the wire ropes which
are often in use to lift containers.
The Marking of Weight.
An international labour Convention and a large number of national
regulations require that any package or object of 1,000 kilogrammes (one
metric ton) or more gross weight consigned for transport by sea shall have
its gross weight plainly and durably marked on the outside of it before it is
loaded onto a ship.2 This clearly applies to containers.
There is a draft recommendation by the International Organization for
Standardization regarding the marking on containers of their maximum gross
weight and their tare weight. It is, however, desirable that the actual weight
be given. This may in some places give rise to some difficulty, because the
determination of the actual weight would require a weighbridge or some
similar device. While it may be expected that all container depots will have
this, a number of berths at which containers may be occasionally handled
will not necessarily be thus equipped. In the absence of weighbridges or
scales for heavy weights, the approximate weight would have to be arrived
at from the documents concerning the stowing of the container, but this might
not always be so reliable. The Convention does, it is true, provide that in
exceptional cases where it is difficult to determine the exact weight, national
laws or regulations may allow an approximate weight to be marked.
Other markings (apart from origin, etc.) which have been suggested as
desirable on containers include designed permissible stacking arrangements,
permissible hoisting arrangements and latest inspection and proof-test data.
In the case of unbalanced containers it would clearly also be useful to provide
an indication from which an approximate centre of gravity could be derived.
Handling on Shore.
The safety problems from a docker's point of view for the shore handling
of containers are rather similar to traffic problems, and many of the measures recommended stress the development of one-way alleys, proper marking
1

Charles G. VISCONTI : Statement in Progress in Cargo Handling, Vol. 3 (Cambridge, Maryland, Cornell Maritime Press, Inc., 1962, for the International Cargo
Handling Co-ordination Association), pp. 84-85.
2
Marking of Weight (Packages Transported by Vessels) Convention, 1929, Art. 1 (1).

190

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

of parking lots and roadways and, if the containers are parked close together,
adequate spaces in which workers in the yard can shelter from traffic.
Smoothness, proper surfacing and strength of paving are, of course,
important for container yards.
Other Forms of Handling
It is not possible here to cover all the safety provisions relating to other
newer forms of cargo handling, but a few may be briefly mentioned.
Increasing use of unit loads and palletised loads has pointed to the
importance of not overloading, providing special training to fork-lift truck
drivers regarding safety in handling this equipment, establishing clear traffic
rules and warning signals, whether in warehouse or on quay, laying down
safety rules such as those which prohibit passengers riding on empty or
loaded fork-lift trucks, and rules about the stacking of cargo, especially unit
loads.
The Maximum Weight Recommendation, 1967, urges that "The packaging of loads which may be transported manually should be compact and of
suitable material and should, as far as possible and appropriate, be equipped
with devices for holding and so designed as not to create risk of injury ; for
example, it should not have sharp edges, projections or rough surfaces".1
The same general considerations apply to unit loads and to the pallets on
which many of them are transported.
One point deserves special emphasis, and that is the use of petrol-driven
fork-lift trucks in the holds of ships. The exhaust can quickly generate sufficient noxious fumes to constitute a health hazard, especially as carbon
monoxide may tend to concentrate in ill-ventilated work areas, particularly
in the wings abeam. In San Francisco the problem was solved by the rigging
of ventilation ducts with 1,000 cubic feet per minute blowers.2 In the
St. Lawrence ports the new Safety Code provides that when any internal
combustion engine is used in a ship's hold a test for carbon monoxide concentration shall be made and recorded at least once every hour after the first
hour of operation. If any test shows as much as one-half the allowable
concentration (100 parts per million), three further tests shall be made. If
any test shows that the maximum allowable concentration is exceeded, men
shall be removed until it is shown by at least three tests that carbon monoxide
1

Para. 12.
Maritime Cargo Transportation Conference : San Francisco Port Study, Vol. II
(Washington, National Academy of Sciences—National Research Council, 1964),
pp. 41-42.
2

SAFETY AND WELFARE

191

concentration no longer exceeds half the maximum allowable. * Instructions
should be given to shut off the engines whenever the truck is not in use.
General Considerations
It is not possible in this report to cover all the general issues which relate
to safety of work in ports. The International Labour Organisation has
devoted considerable attention to these problems over the years. The Protection against Accidents (Dockers) Convention (Revised), 1932, provides
indications of the action which needs to be taken at the national level in a
number of safety fields.
Among other matters, this Convention, which has provided the basis for
many national regulations, deals with the safeguarding of approaches to
docks, wharves, quays or ships, the fitments on board ship and the access to
holds, the removal or replacing of hatch coverings, the safety of hoisting
machines and related gear, working practices, and first-aid arrangements.
The Convention was adopted many years ago, and new methods of
cargo handling are coming into use. The question of its further revision was
considered by a group of experts, but the view was taken that the Convention
continued to provide a sound basis for regulations, and that it would be
more appropriate for the International Labour Office to issue a code of
practice on safety and health in dock work, which would go into substantially
more detail, would give advice as to suitable ways of implementing the Convention, and at the same time contain suggestions which went further than
the Convention in the light of new techniques and also of a more modern
approach to safety regulation and the protection of workers. This Code of
Practice was issued in 1958 2, and has had a wide distribution.
A manual is in preparation, also on the basis of expert advice, which will
supplement the Code of Practice with suggestions on a wide range of points,
bringing in for the first time some considerations relating to the handling of
containers.
A problem of reciprocity also arises when ship's gear is issued, and the
Convention requires Members of the ILO which have ratified the Convention
to enter into reciprocal arrangements regarding the mutual recognition of the
arrangements made for testing, examining and annealing, and of the certificates and records relating thereto. If a country were satisfied that the arrangements made by another country (for instance the country where the ship
was built or the one in which it was registered) as regards the safety of gear on
board were adequate, further arrangements would not be necessary. To facili1
Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St. Lawrence Ports, op. cit., Annex H,
rule 818.
8
Safety and Health in Dock Work, op. cit.

192

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

tate these arrangements, a meeting of experts in 1956 1 drew up model standard forms for the register of ship's cargo-handling machinery and gear ; forms
for the annual and periodical examination of such gear; certificates of test
and examination of winches, derricks and their accessory gear, cranes and
hoists, before being taken into use ; and certificates of test and examination
of chains, rings, hooks, shackles, swivels, pulley blocks and wire ropes ; and,
where appropriate, certificates of heat treatment. It is, of course, highly
desirable that these tests and certificates should be applied in the case of
equipment installed on container ships to handle containers, and in regard
to equipment for the handling of containers on shore which may be sold
abroad. The question of any further adaptation of such forms and certificates
in regard to this specialised equipment may well call for further examination,
for instance in respect of the lifting lugs which fit into the corners of standard
containers.
The interest attaching to new methods of handling cargo and to the vast
range of mechanical equipment in use in ports should not, however, allow us
to forget that for many years yet there will be a large number of dockers still
having to heave, carry and lift sacks, crates and all sorts of packages of
varying shapes and sizes manually. This manual work often proceeds side
by side with palletised movements of the same or similar cargo. Many of
the standard forms of packaging, such as bags of sugar and flour (where
these products are not handled in bulk) are unduly heavy for handling by
individual workers or carrying on shoulder or head. Hence, after years of
insistence on the subject by the International Transport Workers' Federation,
the International Labour Conference at its 51st Session adopted the Maximum Weight Convention, 1967, one of the main provisions of which is that
"No worker shall be permitted or required to engage in the manual transport
of a load which, by reason of its weight, is likely to jeopardise his health or
safety".2 More detailed suggestions are included in an accompanying
Recommendation which urges that where the maximum permissible weight
which may be transported manually by one adult male worker is more than
55 kilogrammes, measures should be taken as speedily as possible to reduce
it to that level.3
From a general point of view, it should be mentioned that experts advising the governments of developing countries on ports in practically every
1
ILO : Meeting of Experts on the Standardisation of Certificates and Registers
relating to the Test and Examination of Lifting Machinery and Gear Used in the Loading and Unloading of Ships (Geneva, 1956), Report and Certificates (Geneva, 1956)
(mimeographed).
2
Art. 3.
'Maximum Weight Recommendation, 1967, Para. 14.

SAFETY AND WELFARE

193

case report a tendency to pay far too little attention to safety in dock work.
In many cases new regulations are needed, and above all, they point to the
need to establish some administrative machinery to promote safety and to
develop safety consciousness.
These recommendations are fully in line with present thinking on safety,
as the main trend in the efforts to prevent accidents is today directed more
to the human element and to the development of safety-consciousness on the
part of operators, supervisory staff and dockers. This is not to minimise the
fact that it is essential to have safety prescriptions regarding access to ships
and their holds, the lifting capacities and the maintenance of cranes, derricks,
winches and other hoisting equipment, the strength of chains, ropes, cables,
slings, blocks, hooks and other tackle, and methods of using this equipment
and handling cargo. Though detailed regulations on these and other related
subjects have been adopted in some countries, a great effort will still be
necessary to ensure their adoption or their improvement in many others ; in
all countries, however, regulations of this kind need bringing up to date to
adapt them to new methods of handling cargo. Furthermore, if they are to
be applied successfully, there must be an awareness of safety problems on
the part of all concerned, constant care in supervision, the establishment of
strict timetables for the regular and systematic checking of equipment,
careful rules regarding maintenance, an adequate system of inspection and
training in safe working methods. Supervisors and gang foremen can do
much to help by drawing attention to unsafe working practices, and all concerned should be prepared to listen to observations from the dockers regarding safety and to investigate them promptly.
Problems of safety in ports are sometimes complicated by the fact that
the employer of dock labour, or the operator for whom the dockers work,
is very often not the owner of the work premises (the ship or the dock) or
of all the equipment used, which may be owned by the shipowner or a separate port authority. The experts who drew up the Code of Practice expressed
the view that an essential condition for the promotion of safety and health in
dock work was full co-operation between all the employers concerned (shipowners, port authorities, master stevedores, etc.) and all the employees concerned (ships' officers, port employees, dockers, etc.).1
Final responsibility for safety no doubt rests with the employer, but joint
understanding and action can greatly assist in the task. There has therefore
been widespread support for the establishment of safety committees on which
all the parties concerned are represented. Their tasks might include, among
other things—
1

Safety and Health in Dock Work, op. cit., p. 3.

194

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

(a) the drawing-up of rules for the guidance of workers in carrying out the respective operations in a safe manner and the modification of these rules in the
light of experience ;
(b) the consideration of suggestions for improving methods of work in order to
ensure greater safety and bringing these suggestions to the notice of the persons concerned so that they may be implemented ;
(c) the consideration of reports made after the investigation of accidents; and
(d) the preparation of safety leaflets, posters, etc., drawing attention to particular
hazards. »
Other tasks might include promotional activities such as safety competitions, and safety instruction during the training and induction of dockers and
the training of foremen and supervisors.
The importance of emphasising safety in induction and training courses
has already been mentioned in Chapter 3. Newcomers more than any others
need to be made aware of hazards, to be shown the best methods of work
and to be encouraged to take an interest in safety.
Every docker should have a thorough understanding of the rules which
require him not to stand under slings or under loads, whether in the hold or
on the quay, and to observe traffic rules. The wearing of protective clothing
should also be stressed: in many ports the wearing of helmets is required,
and in some the wearing of gloves or boots with strengthened toe caps is also
at any rate strongly recommended. For all dockers "training or instruction
should include methods of lifting, carrying, putting down, unloading and
stacking of different types of loads, and should be given by suitably qualified
persons or institutions". 2 Fork-lift truck operators, drivers of motor vehicles
and motorised equipment, winchmen and cranemen will need special safety
instruction and training related to their jobs.
As an over-riding consideration, it is important to ensure that safety is
always considered as dominant when it appears to conflict with productivity.
Such a conflict is in any case unreal, because, quite apart from the consideration of human suffering which must always prevail, if the real cost of accidents
in terms of compensation, medical costs, time off, possible need for retraining,
and hold-ups in the work is fully taken into account, there can be little doubt
that preventive measures pay. Therefore, "The organisation of work should
throughout take full account of the need for safety, on board the ships as
well as on the quayside, and work should not be speeded up in a manner
which might lead those concerned to disregard necessary safety precautions". 3 These considerations apply for instance in measuring standard
1

Safety and Health in Dock Work, op. cit., para. 685.
Maximum Weight Recommendation, 1967, Para. 5.
8
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 35.
2

SAFETY AND WELFARE

195

times, in efforts to eliminate so-called "unproductive time", some of which
may be required on grounds of safety, working out incentive systems of payment, and determining maxima for overtime or periods of uninterrupted
work. In this connection it may be worth quoting a labour inspector, who
states that "from the many accident inquiries I have had to carry out in the
port, I can, without fear of the facts contradicting me, affirm that the great
majority of accidents are primarily caused by haste, over-zealousness and
excessive speed in the execution of the work".l
Finally, the need for an inspection service specialising in port work is
felt in many ports. The inspector who is able to devote all his time to safety
in ports, not only supervising the application of the regulations, but making
suggestions for their improvement, advising and talking to groups regarding
safe working practices, and keeping his eye on safety problems in general,
can perform a most valuable service to all concerned in port work.
WELFARE

The Need for Welfare Facilities
"Welfare facilities for dockers should be considered a normal feature
of a port."2 This was the view expressed by delegates of governments,
employers and workers in the Inland Transport Committee at its Fifth Session
in 1954. If ports indulge in considerable expenditure for more modern
equipment, they should seek at the same time to raise the status of the docker.
For that purpose ports should also provide adequate welfare facilities, ensuring that they also come up to modern standards. No doubt a great deal
has been done in this field since 1954 ; nevertheless, government reports and
other information all point to the fact that a great deal still remains to be
done in both industrialised and developing countries. In many ports,
especially in some developing countries, very little indeed is done in the field
of dockers' welfare, and it is high time that suitable programmes for developing the required amenities should be drawn up and put into action.
1
E. THIBAUT : "La sécurité technique au port", in Ministry of Labour and Social
Welfare (Belgium): Les aspects sociaux du travail portuaire et maritime (Brussels, 1954)
(mimeographed), p. 67.
2
Conclusions and statements concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers, para. 3.
See also ILO: Welfare Facilities for Dockworkers, Report III, Inland Transport Committee, Fifth Session (Geneva, 1954). For general recommendations on the subject see
the Welfare Facilities Recommendation, 1956, and "Report of the Meeting of Experts on
Welfare Facilities for Industrial Workers", the latter in Official Bulletin, Vol. XLVII,
No. 4, Oct. 1964, pp. 376-390.

196

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Broadly speaking, the reasons given by the Inland Transport Committee
in 1954 for the development of these facilities remain valid today.
The Committee considers that it would be possible, by providing suitable
welfare facilities for dockers, to minimise the effects of certain conditions which
are inherent in dock work, such as irregularity of employment, irregular hours,
waiting time, exposure to inclement weather, the handling of dangerous goods,
etc. Every welfare facility, moreover, helps to attract and to retain the necessary
manpower, to develop industrial and human relations in the docks, to reduce the
incidence of ill-health and the consequences of accidents and as a result to ensure
higher productivity in the form of quicker turn-round of ships.1
While account has to be taken of the fact that work in a port is carried
on in dispersed places, scattered sometimes over several miles of quay as
well as on board ships moored offshore, there is no reason in principle why
dockers should not have access to welfare facilities at least equal to those
which workers in manufacturing industry enjoy in the same country. Indeed,
there are good reasons for providing dockers with certain additional facilities
which might not be so badly needed in ordinary factory work, since their
work is frequently strenuous and is carried on at all hours of the day and
night, often in bad weather, and they may at times have to handle dirty or
obnoxious cargo.
Nature of Facilities
It is not the purpose of this report to describe in any detail the various
facilities which are needed, and the standards which ought to apply to them.
Indications are to be found in the conclusions and statements of the Inland
Transport Committee to which reference has been made, the Protection of
Workers' Health Recommendation, 1953, the Welfare Facilities Recommendation, 1956, and the Occupational Health Services Recommendation, 1959,
adopted by the International Labour Conference, and in the report of the
Meeting of Experts on Welfare Facilities for Industrial Workers which met
in 1964. There are also references to some of these matters in Safety and
Health in Dock Work. Only a few indications will be given here of some
of the special matters affecting ports.
Hiring Halls.
The importance of suitable schemes for the allocation of dockers has
been stressed in Chapter 2. In ports where dockers do not have regular
employment and in which arrangements have not been made to enable them
to report direct to their work, it is essential, if the allocation of dockers is to
1

Conclusions and statements concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers, para. 3.

SAFETY AND WELFARE

197

follow orderly procedures, for hiring halls to be established where the men
can assemble and wait for arrangements to be made for their selection.
These halls should provide protection from the weather, office facilities for
the allocation process and, where necessary, facilities for central pay arrangements.
Basic Health and Welfare Facilities (Sanitary Conveniences, Drinking Water,
Washing Facilities and Changing Rooms).
Because of the dispersion of the work over a wide area, the problem of
toilet facilities has often given rise to considerable difficulties. It is unreasonable for the men to have to go considerable distances to find them, and
it becomes a matter not only of convenience but of public health and cleanliness in the port to provide them in sufficient number and of suitable standards near all places of work. This also helps to minimise the problem of
time off for personal needs during shifts. Surprising as it may seem, in a
great many ports sanitary blocks are either virtually non-existent or are much
too far apart. Maintenance has to be provided if they are to be kept clean
and in decent order.
It is also necessary to make arrangements for men working on ships
offshore, possibly by obtaining permission for the dockers to use the ships'
facilities.
The provision of drinking water is obviously often a difficulty. Yet when
work is so strenuous it should be provided. In areas where some of the
piped water used for other purposes is not safe to drink, clear notices, understandable even to the illiterate, are needed to distinguish the taps.
"Suitable and adequate washing facilities should be provided for all
dockers at places readily accessible to them." 1 In many places cold water
taps above a trough along the wall of a warehouse are considered good
enough. No towels or soap are provided. This is clearly not what is meant.
In cool or cold climates, hot water would appear to be an essential. There
has been much controversy as to whether showers are necessary, many
arguing, often on the basis of experience, that even if they were provided
the dockers would not use them. The generally agreed line is that they
should be regarded as absolutely essential where dockers are handling cargo
liable to expose them to skin contamination, and should in such cases be compulsory. They should clearly also be provided in cases where the workers
are handling dirty or noxious cargo (fish-meal is a classic example). A
restrictive approach is, however, not consonant with the idea of improving
1

Conclusions and statements concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers, para. 21.

198

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

the image of the docker in society. He should be able to leave work washed
and changed out of his working clothes and be able to meet friends, travel
by public transport or go to places of entertainment without drawing attention to himself and without first having to go to his home, which may be
some distance away. Given that the job often causes perspiration, it would
seem that the new approach calls for showers to be available. It is also
more than likely that new generations of dockers will use them even if some
of the older ones on the job might prefer not to.
For the same reason, changing rooms should be provided, with lockers
for clothes and facilities for drying wet clothing.
There is a general tendency for these facilities to be grouped into larger
units with canteens and/or hiring halls, as this facilitates servicing and maintenance and reduces costs.
Facilities for Rest.
Experts visiting ports, especially in tropical countries, have advocated
the establishment of rest benches, with protection from rain, near the places
of work, intended more especially for workers who are allowed to take light
refreshment or to eat the meals they bring with them during shifts.
First-Aid and Medical Care Facilities.
Little need be said on this point, because there is general recognition of
the need for an adequate organisation of first-aid facilities, and these are
usually provided. It should, however, be emphasised that first-aid faculties
need frequent checking, lest a half-empty, rusty and contaminated kit is all
that is available when needed. Everyone must know where to find the kit
and where to call for help if needed. Reference has already been made to
the importance of having men trained in first aid available, often volunteers
from among the dockers.
In all these cases provision has to be made for dockers working on ships
offshore; among other things, this may mean having a launch available
equipped for first aid and for transporting a wounded man.
Ports, like any other undertakings, need occupational health services.
These may be centralised for z, whole port or an important section of one,
with all required medical services for cases not needing hospital or specialist
treatment. The functions of such units are set out in detail in the Occupational Health Services Recommendation, 1959. They take a leading part in
emergency treatment in case of accident or indisposition, the protection of
the dockers' health, examination of health hazards, training of first-aid per-

SAFETY AND WELFARE

199

sonnel, and generally advising on all occupational health problems that may
arise in the course of port work.
In many ports, especially in developing countries where general medical
services are weak, the port operators often find themselves providing medical
facilities not only to the dockers themselves but also to the members of their
families.
Employee Food Services.
In the matter of employee food services, allowance has to be made for
the widely differing customs of dockers in different ports. Some of them
prefer to eat the food they bring with them ; some of them may live so near
home that they can always get home for a meal, especially if the shift has
a two-hour meal-time break, as is the practice in a few countries ; in some
ports there are adequate and cheap commercial eating houses near the port.
However, circumstances are usually not so favourable, and what is definitely
not desirable is that dockers should have to eat the meal they bring with
them in the hold of a ship, in the warehouse, or even, as has been seen,
sheltering in the shade of a railway truck.
There is general agreement, therefore, that premises should be provided
in which workers can take their meals. Light refreshments and drinks should
in any case be available. In some places importance is attached to facilities
for heating up a meal brought from home. Whether or not meals should be
available depends on local traditions and the dockers' working schedules.
The possibility of buying meals at controlled prices is provided in a great
many ports, and is especially important for the night shift and in cold weather.
The provision of canteens or other eating places is obviously fairly costly,
and some of the better "dockers' canteens" in European ports could well
qualify as restaurants, with attractive eating halls which can be converted
for use as entertainment centres.
In some countries, and particularly in the Middle East, it is a common
practice to give a worker in industry a full meal each day free of charge.
The advantages and problems of doing so have been studied in a certain
number of countries by the Food and Agriculture Organisation and the
World Health Organisation, with the assistance of the International Labour
Office. It is generally recognised that this practice, which has been followed
as regards dockers in some Asian ports, among others, may be very important from the point of view of the maintenance of the health and physique
of the docker. In some cases the customary diet of the docker is so poor,
especially in proteins and fresh vitamin ingredients, quite apart from having
an inadequate energy value, that it impairs his health and his ability to carry

200

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

out strenuous work. Further, the meal provided during work (or, in some
cases, just before or after the shift) is a meal the worker does not have to
share with many perhaps not so close relatives who by custom seek his hospitality just because he has the privilege of being employed. An expert visiting
African ports has suggested that the merits of a free meal scheme should be
investigated for application there. He advocates a pilot scheme in one of
the ports in co-operation with the WHO, the ILO and the World Food Programme. Preliminary studies would be made of some of the dockers' canteens which already operate successfully.1
One example of a free meal service is to be found in the port of Singapore. "A good hot meal is most essential to the workers", and it has been
found best to have the meals prepared in a central kitchen and sent out for
thousands of workers to all parts of the wharves within a radius of three
miles. As the break lasts only an hour, timing is important: if the food
arrives too soon the dockers tend to break cff early; if it comes late, they
might not have time to finish eating.2
The problem of enabling dockers scattered all over a port to obtain light
refreshments and snacks has been successfully met in many ports by mobile
canteens. Some of these may be afloat and serve dockers on ships offshore.
However, on some shifts, especially night shifts, the turnover may be small,
and there will be some berths that are rather far away from normal facilities.
It is difficult to provide service in these circumstances. In some ports vending machines have been installed to serve hot and cold drinks and cold snacks.
Experiments are also being made with automats serving pre-cooked meals,
quickly heated up automatically when the button is pressed for purchase. It
remains to be seen whether these will be popular and meet the needs of the
average docker.
The usual principle is for any employee meal services to be operated on
a non-profit-making basis, or with strictly controlled prices. In many cases
meals are subsidised by the employers, or by authorities such as dock labour
boards, who may supply premises and equipment free. In a few cases the
services are run by co-operatives.
Travel to and jrom Work.
In many ports dockers now live at some distance from the port, owing
to the cost of housing near their work, among other reasons. In some cases,
1
United Nations, Economic Commission for Africa : A Report on a Preliminary
Survey of Factors Contributing to Level of Freight Rates in the Seaborne Trade of
Africa, op. cit., Part I, paras. 374-385.
2
LOH HENG KEE, Director (Operations), Port of Singapore Authority : "Introduction
of a Two-Shift System", in Ports and Harbors, Jan.-Mar. 1967, p. 30.

SAFETY AND WELFARE

201

as in the Netherlands, a number of them have been recruited at a distance.
In most ports they have to work shifts, and therefore have to be available
and finish work at hours when public transport may not be running. In such
cases it is usually necessary for the operators, the dock labour pool or the
port authority to lay on special transport. The same is true in the case of
transfers from one part of a port to another, or between neighbouring ports,
which are sometimes necessary in order to enable ships to be handled expeditiously while ensuring a fair allocation of jobs to registered dockers.
Cultural and Recreational Facilities.
As part of the aim of giving dockers a better status in society, a number
of social and cultural activities have been organised for them in many ports.
These include sports activities, since the fact that many dockers work shifts
gives them hours of daylight leisure. When the Singapore Port Authority
introduced the system of two shifts a day, for instance, it built a social and
recreational club-house with adjacent playing fields, and provided for a
modest subscription a wide range of outdoor and indoor activities for all
port employees from senior officers to dockers and messengers.1 In the
United Kingdom 18 approved dockers' clubs, controlled by committees of the
men, were in 1966 providing facilities for a membership of just over 19,000
(out of a potential total of about 60,000). In addition, there were 26 sports
associations with a membership of 11,000.2
In many countries facilities are provided for adult education, and dockers
are encouraged to use them. In developing countries emphasis is often laid
on literacy classes, and it has been pointed out that promotion for dockers
in port work usually depends on the men being able to read. That, however,
should be no more than a start. Opportunities for wider adult education
need to be made available to those who wish to take advantage of them, as
is indeed the case in many countries. There has been a vast increase in
adult education activities in all parts of the world, in many cases encouraged
and even assisted by the International Labour Organisation, the United
Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation and international
trade union organisations.3 In some countries special programmes have been
developed for dockers. In the United Kingdom, for instance, dockers' education groups organised 42 discussions, brains trusts and debates during
1966 ; regional and week-end conferences completed a three-year theme on
1

LOH HENG KEE, op. cit., p. 30.

Annual Report and Accounts 1966, op. cit., para. 83.
3
For information on developments and problems see Labour Education, a
periodical published three times a year by the International Labour Office.

202

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

"Frontiers of the 20th Century", printed bulletins were issued in seven areas,
written and edited to a large extent by dockers themselves. Films were widely
used.1
Opportunities for further education, opening up possibilities of promotion, are provided in several countries through study grants and scholarships.
Housing.
The problem of providing housing for dockers is of course just one of
the difficult problems which so many countries are facing in respect of
workers' housing in general, and these are beyond the scope of this report.2
What makes the problem rather more acute for dockers than for most
other workers is that they are usually required to be available for work at
short notice, and shift work is frequent. It is obviously much more difficult
for them to get to work quickly if they live far from the port. This is becoming increasingly the case as areas around ports become more congested.
Attention has been drawn to this problem in many ports of the world, and
there are, in several places, schemes for building housing specially for dockers
in the vicinity of the port, with financial participation according to circumstances by the port authorities and by the institutions dealing with workers'
housing in the countries concerned.
It is hoped that such housing schemes will contribute to reducing
absenteeism and help to build up a more stable and contented labour force
with its roots in the port itself rather than outside it. If there is considerable
travelling time the docker who lives at a distance has little time in his home,
and this can be a cause of discontent.
Among the many housing schemes for dockers, mention may be made of
those in the major ports of India and in Singapore. Schemes for extending
a housing estate near the port are projected also in Genoa with a view to
housing more of the dockers. In the port of Keelung (Republic of China)
some 200 houses were erected for dockers, the cost of which was borne
partly by the welfare fund and in part by the United States Mutual Security
Agency out of quick dispatch money earned from charter parties when United
States aid cargoes were discharged, the occupants of the houses repaying
some of the costs by instalments over a period of years. The houses are the
property of the labour union.
'National Dock Labour Board: Annual Report and Accounts 1966, op. cit.,
paras. 78-82.
2
Information on national developments will be found in ILO : Workers' Housing,
Report VIII (2), International Labour Conference, 44th Session, Geneva, 1960 (Geneva,
1960). For policy, see the Workers' Housing Recommendation, 1961.

SAFETY AND WELFARE

203

Working Clothes.
To the extent that certain working clothes are required to be worn on
grounds of safety and health, the usual policy is that they should be supplied,
cleaned and maintained by the employer free of charge. The Meeting of
Experts on Welfare Facilities for Industrial Workers made a clear recommendation on this point. In many countries other equipment, such as rainwear
and strengthened footwear, which are not required to be worn but are clearly
useful for work in ports, are supplied either free or at reduced prices.
Activities in Favour of Retired Dockers.
Quite apart from pensions, to which reference has already been made,
there are in many ports activities designed to facilitate the adaptation of
dockers to retirement and to enable them to maintain contact with their
former workmates through social and recreational activities.
Organisation of Facilities
Surveys of Needs and Determination of Responsibilities.
One of the difficulties of providing welfare facilities for dockers in some
cases is to decide who should do what. The division of responsibility between employer and operator in some countries, and the fact that many
operators are using premises which do not belong to them, give rise to frequent arguments and to a tendency to leave the initiative to some other party.
Where dockers are permanently employed by an employer on his own
premises, there is little doubt where responsibility lies. However, even in
these cases, the employer may find it expedient to arrange for certain amenities to be provided on a more centralised basis by all the employers in the
port, or for some activities on an even wider basis. In addition, special
arrangements may have to be made in some cases to enable dockers working
on ships offshore to use certain facilities on board the ship.
Where a port authority or municipality controls all, or most, of the quays
and wharves itself, it may be reasonable to require that it provides certain
facilities such as sanitary conveniences, even though it may not be the
employer.
Lack of definition of responsibility can paralyse action. An example
may be quoted from the United Kingdom. One official report after another
drew attention to the inadequacy of welfare facilities. The National Dock
Labour Board had powers to levy funds to provide facilities for training and

204

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

welfare in so far as there was no provision apart from the Dock Labour
Scheme. Thus the Board provided facilities directly related to its work,
such as hiring halls, but, having limited funds, did not step in if some other
body had expressed the intention of providing facilities. Some port authorities and larger operators did take some action in certain fields, but most
operators did not, as they used casual labour and often did not own the
wharves where they worked. The result was that, many years after recommendations for action had been made, the Devlin Committee, in 1965, concluded that in spite of some progress, not nearly enough had been done, and
severely criticised the passivity which had prevailed.1 As a result, arrangements were made for the dock labour boards to undertake surveys in each
port of what existed and what, in its opinion, ought to be provided. What
the Devlin Committee had in mind was "really no more than the ordinary
facilities which an employer should provide for his men at their place of
work". On the basis of these surveys, welfare amenity schemes have been
drawn up for each port, specifying the persons who are to provide and maintain the amenities to which the schemes relate and the area within which the
amenities are to be provided. In the case of protective clothing, the workers
for whom it is intended are to be specified. A time limit is set, taking account
of the fact that extensive programmes involving a good deal of construction
work are involved. In locating amenities the Board is to ensure as far as
possible that they will be conveniently accessible to the persons who are
likely to use them. The employers and other bodies concerned are then
formally notified of their obligations under such schemes. There is the possibility of withdrawing an operator's licence to engage in port activities in
case of serious or persistent failure to comply with the requirements imposed
on him in respect of welfare amenities. '
This description has been given in some detail, because it illustrates the
practical application of the procedure recommended by the Inland Transport
Committee in 1954. Similar action is undoubtedly called for in the ports
of many other countries. In only a few of them, such as the Netherlands,
are the obligations required in ports in respect of welfare laid down in special
legislation. The nature of the organisation of work in ports often makes it
difficult to apply legislation primarily intended for other industrial undertakings without considerable adaptations.
As situations change and the standards relating to welfare amenities rise
with time, it is desirable that surveys should be conducted every few years.
1
Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin
Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, op. cit., paras. 81-87.
2
Docks and Harbours Act, 1966, ss. 25-35.

into

SAFETY AND WELFARE

205

Participation of Employers' and Workers' Organisations.
The question arises of the extent of the participation of employers' and
workers' organisations in decisions regarding welfare amenities and their
supervision. It will have been noted that in the United Kingdom the surveys
and the preparation of schemes were the responsibility of a tripartite board.
In this case the employers' and workers' organisations were therefore completely associated in the surveys and the preparation of schemes. In so far
as the running of some of the facilities may be entrusted to the Dock Labour
Board, they would remain associated with their operation. This is clearly
what is desirable in all cases. "The employers' and workers' organisations
concerned and existing bodies should be closely associated with the provision
and operation of welfare facilities for dockworkers." 1 The association of
the workers' organisations in with the running of welfare amenities ensures
that the facilities provided meet the needs of the dockers and enlists their
support in making proper use of them.
In the case of cultural and recreational facilities the general policy should
be to respect the voluntary principle. There should be no compulsion to
take part in the activities provided. Further, as far as possible, the running
of the institutions concerned should be left to the users, for instance by setting
up clubs, even if the financing has come largely from other sources.
Inspection.
Finally, where certain amenities, such as sanitary and washing installations and eating places, are required by law, provision should be made for
their regular inspection. When they are provided on the basis of agreement,
or even set up by employers on their own initiative, provision should still be
made for regular inspection to ensure that proper standards are maintained.

So far, this report has dealt with particular aspects of work in ports,
such as the régularisation of employment, efficiency, labour-management
relations, and conditions of work. These various aspects are, however, interdependent and an over-all new approach is often needed, a "new deal" such
as is outlined in the next chapter.

Conclusions and statements concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers, para. 13.

9. A NEW DEAL
The changes in cargo-handling methods described in Chapter 1 call for
a new understanding between operators and dockers so that the vast possibilities for improved productivity offered by recent technical and organisational progress may be exploited to the full. This point has been stressed in
reference to labour-management relations in Chapter 6; the consequent
desirability of finding some way of regularising dock work and providing
guarantees of employment or income has been shown in Chapter 2, in which
a number of different systems are described ; and the need to give the docker
the benefit of conditions of work comparable to those in industry is brought
out in Chapter 7.
However, the above measures are all partial, dealing only with certain
aspects of an over-all problem. What is needed is a genuine breakthrough
in all these fields, since otherwise progress in many countries is likely to be
held up, with the result that shipping and cargo-handling firms, port authorities, the dockers themselves and the international economy as a whole will
suffer.
It remains to be seen what are the psychological bases for the new
approach, what are the fears to be overcome, and how the situation has been
dealt with in some countries.
ATTITUDE OF THE DOCKERS

The attitude of the dockers has generally been governed by three basic
considerations :
(a) a desire to be protected against unemployment or underemployment ;
(b) a desire to share in the benefits of technical progress ;
(c) a desire to be brought fully into the picture when—or even before—
changes are introduced.
As long as their preoccupations in regard to these points are met, the
dockers have expressed their willingness to accept new methods.
The Fear of Unemployment or Underemployment
The fear of unemployment, or of seriously reduced employment, has in
many ports dominated the minds of the dockers. This is very understandable

A NEW DEAL

207

in the light of the traditionally casual nature of the work. Memories of the
past die slowly, even if in many cases conditions have since vastly improved.
Too many dockers have suffered from the evils of the "shape-up", from the
necessity of pushing themselves forward to be picked under certain systems
of allocation, lest they be left unemployed or forced to accept the less remunerative and more disagreeable jobs. As the National Joint Council for the
Port Transport Industry in the United Kingdom pointed out:
Throughout the sixty years of this century, and before that, the background
to industrial relations in the docks, and the source of most of the industry's special problems, has been the casual system of employment
The Dock Labour
Scheme benefits and high average earnings do not prevent widefluctuationsin
the individual's earnings from week to week, and wide fluctuations in earnings
between individuals. *
This was written before the introduction of regular employment in the
ports of the United Kingdom in September 1967, but in ports where the
remuneration is based on piece-work, as in London, there can still be considerable fluctuations in earnings with, however, a higher guaranteed minimum than was previously the case.
An independent arbitrator in Canada, after reviewing the general position,
come to the conclusion that—
Practically every study of the problems and labour conflicts arising at ports
stresses the baneful effects of casual labour. Most labour conflicts at the Atlantic
and Pacific ports of the United States and at every major European port can be
more or less directly related to this particular aspect of work in ports.2
Given this situation, it is only natural that the dockers should be anxious
at the widespread adoption of new cargo-handling methods. They do not
know how fast the use of containers and other new forms of cargo handling
will grow and what the implications will be for them. A few indications of
the possible impact on the strength of the labour force have been given in
Chapter 1, but they are at best guesses which can by no means be considered
valid for all ports. The rate of change is at the present time unpredictable,
and will in any case depend in part on the reaction of the workers themselves
to the threat of redundancy and to the guarantees that may be offered to allay
their fears. The rate of change will also vary greatly from one country to
another, in the light of the type of cargo customarily handled in its ports, the
level of its economic development and the existence of suitable internal transport and handling facilities for containers.
1
Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Major Ports of Great Britain, op. cit.,
Policy Directive to All Local Joint Councils, October 1961, p. 262.
2
Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St. Lawrence Ports, op. cit., p. 8.

208

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

While the extent of the problem created by new methods and equipment
should not be exaggerated, there is enough substance in the predictions made
as to the impact on labour to cause grave anxiety among dockers about their
future job prospects. Unless the dockers can be assured that steps will be
taken to meet the threat of unemployment, they will resist the introduction of
new cargo-handling methods. Cases of refusal to operate new equipment
have arisen in the past. For instance, new grain suction equipment in a
major port was, when first introduced, left idle, and, more recently, arrangements for container traffic to Venezuela had to be postponed for à few years
because of the refusal of the dockers in the latter country to handle it.
These fears will also cause the workers to cling to practices designed to
keep up the numbers employed on a job beyond the level really required.
The whole issue of restrictive practices is, of course, directly related to the
fear of underemployment. The dockers seek to protect themselves in many
ports by recourse to "make-work" policies or rules designed to ensure that
one gang does not deprive another one of a possible job.
Work rules are labour's shield against the essential insecurity of industrial
employment. The longshore industry, not only in the United States but all over
the world, has always had an elaborate structure of work rules because the maritime industry is marked by wider fluctuations in the use of labour than other
industries. New machines, whatever they mean to anyone else, mean more insecurity to labour. So the natural and instinctive reaction is to hang onto these
rules for dear life. What looks like "feather-bedding" to you is job security and
bread on the table to the worker.
This is the problem. Finding the answer is no easy matter.1
Sharing in the Benefits of Technical Progress
The position of the trade unions has naturally been that the dockers
should share in the benefits of technical progress, and this conception has
been widely accepted in principle. Thus the International Labour Conference, in a resolution concerning automation adopted at its 39th Session
(1956), called for "close and continuous consultation between the parties
concerned . . . in devising the policies and taking the measures required to
facilitate adjustment to technological improvements and to ensure an equitable sharing of their benefits".2 The European Regional Conference of
the ILO recognised that—
Workers in a particular undertaking cannot be expected to co-operate in
measures for increasing productivity in that undertaking without the prospect of
1
Harry BRIDGES, President, International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's
Union, in American Association of Port Authorities, Proceedings of the Fiftieth Annual
Meeting, 1961, op. cit., p. 55.
2
Official Bulletin, Vol. XXXIX, 1956, No. 2, p. 64.

A NEW DEAL

209

sharing, through an immediate improvement in their remuneration or conditions
of work, the fruits of productivity increases.1
The Inland Transport Committee of the ILO has also considered that
improvements in productivity in ports were "expected to be reflected in better
social standards, in which dockworkers should have their fair share". 2
Consultation
One of the main claims made by the workers' organisations when new
situations have to be faced in ports is that they should be fully consulted
before changes are introduced. The spokesman for the World Federation
of Trade Unions at the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of
Freight held in 1967 stated that "the employer must consult the trade unions
before taking any steps towards the introduction of new techniques". In the
United Kingdom, the General Secretary of the Transport and General
Workers' Union also made it clear that, once the redundancy question was
settled, other issues were negotiable provided that the union officers and lay
representatives in the docks were fully involved in the decisions taken. The
Inland Transport Committee had also suggested that—
In order that adequate attention should be paid to methods of improving
organisation of work and output in ports, including in particular [their] labour
aspects, it is desirable that there should be appropriate machinery, involving consultation with the employers' and workers' organisations concerned, at the port
level and, if desired, at the national level.3
These positions are also fully in line with the Consultation (Industrial
and National Levels) Recommendation, 1960, adopted by the International
Labour Conference, which calls for consultation and co-operation at the
industrial and national levels with—
. . . the general objective of promoting mutual understanding and good relations
between public authorities and employers' and workers' organisations, as well as
between these organisations, with a view to developing the economy as a whole
or individual branches thereof, improving conditions of work and raising standards of living. *•5
1
Official Bulletin, Vol. XXXVIII, 1955, No. 2, First European Regional Conference,
Geneva, 1955, resolution concerning the role of employers and workers to raise productivity, para. 18, p. 83.
2
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 2.
3
Ibid., para. 9.
4
Para. 4.
5
Further indications on the procedures of consultation were given in Chapter 6.

210

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Acceptance of Change
Subject to the safeguards referred to, the dockers' organisations have
agreed to accept new methods of cargo handling. They concurred in the
statement that "It is desirable that a concentrated effort be made to introduce practicable methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports with a view to speeding up the turn-round of ships". * All concerned
have also agreed that "It is desirable to accept new types of mechanical
equipment, whether they are for use on board ship or on the quayside, and
new methods of work, when they are efficient, economic and safe".2
The representative of the World Federation of Trade Unions at the
United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight also stated that "the
trade union movement cannot be hostile to the improvement of transport".
The International Transport Workers' Federation points out, however,
that "steps must be taken to ensure that the interests of port labour are not
lost sight of in these developments. The social factor is no less important
than the financial, economic or technical and should receive the same degree
of consideration." The Federation makes suggestions regarding the possible
adjustment of the labour force and training and retraining schemes on lines
set out in earlier chapters. The Federation adds that "an adequate fund
should be established for the different port industries and financed by the
employers and/or government, for the guaranteed maintenance of earnings
for agreed periods of adequate duration, for the provision of early retirement
pensions, severance payments, retraining and rehabilitation schemes, and
other measures to avert adverse effects of new methods and techniques in
port industries".3
ATTITUDE OF THE EMPLOYERS

The position of the employers would appear to be that, broadly speaking,
they should be able freely to introduce containers and other new methods of
handling cargo, and to use the available labour force as efficiently as possible,
without undue restrictions on its transferability on the job or from job to job.
Shipowners, port operators and others concerned clearly cannot be
expected to undertake large investments in new ships, containers, cargohandling equipment and berths if they are not assured that the dockers will
1
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 2.
2
Ibid., para. 37.
3
Statement on the Social and Trade Union Consequences of Containerization,
op. cit.

A NEW DEAL

211

handle the containers and operate the new equipment, and that they will not
engage in work stoppages as a result of any attempt to introduce new
methods. Port employers are anxious to have some assurances against the
labour disputes, often unofficial, which have so frequently affected a certain
number of major ports.
The employers, however, generally accept the principle that "increased
productivity can and should be achieved through the use of improved methods
rather than by excessive effort" i and that "The organisation of work should
throughout take full account of the need for safety . . . and work should not
be speeded up in a manner which might lead those concerned to disregard
safety precautions". 2
THE GENERAL LINES OF A NEW DEAL

It will be seen from the above that the way can be opened, and in a
number of cases has been opened, to the conclusion of broadly based agreements.
To meet the situation created by new methods of cargo handling, however, a new approach is needed in the negotiations. Discussions must go
beyond the usual limited bargaining on wages, hours of work and some
fringe benefits to deal in detail with the whole complex question of port
operations, the modernisation of processes and the aspirations of the dockers
for a steady job ; a bold, new and comprehensive approach must be taken so
that the dockers are assured of a new deal.
The parties must develop a programme which helps remove the fear of
unemployment and reduced work opportunities which the machine induces while
sharing the benefits of technological change with the workers whose lives are
being so disrupted.
You must discover new guarantees of security to substitute for the old work
rules. The men don't want to continue working the hard way without machines ;
yet they fear the insecurity of the new way with machines. They must be offered
an alternative. »
As the representative of the World Federation of Trade Unions stressed
when addressing the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight,
there is a demand for "new agreements which would protect more effectively
the dockers' interests in the new situation brought about by the introduction
of containers".
1

Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 2.
2
Ibid., para. 35.
3
Harry BRIDGES, in American Association of Port Authorities, Proceedings of the
Fiftieth Annual Meeting, 1961, loc. cit.

212

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Taking as a basis the positions of the respective parties analysed above,
we can sketch the broad outlines of a new deal for the dockers.
On the one hand, the workers' organisations may agree to accept the new
cargo-handling techniques, to abandon all or many of their work rules or
restrictive practices, and to agree, if necessary, to a reduction in the total
labour force, provided that it is carried out otherwise than by redundancy
dismissals.
In exchange, the employers may agree to the operation of a scheme for
the registration of dockers (if it does not already exist) and the régularisation
of their employment, to guarantees against redundancy (or at any rate to a
satisfactory method of dealing with it), and to guarantees of minimum
employment or income.
A pledge of "no redundancy" may be a matter of primary importance to
workers' leaders. As Frank Cousins, General Secretary of the Transport
and General Workers' Union, stated when the new scheme was introduced
in the United Kingdom—
There must be a clear understanding that the "no redundancy" pledge . . .
will be fully honoured, and this implies a gradual reduction of the labour force
where this is necessary, not a crash programme of pushing workers
out of the
industry. Once this is accepted other issues become negotiable.1
The employers may further agree to provide for participation of the
workers, in the form of the guarantees indicated above or in other forms, in
the benefits arising from the use of new techniques, and to consultation of
the workers' organisations on the consequences of the introduction of these
techniques for their members.
The general lines of a new deal were proposed by representatives of
governments, employers and workers at the Sixth Session of the Inland Transport Committee in 1957, when they adopted suggestions encouraging the use
of methods of improving organisation of work and output in ports, dealing
in a comprehensive manner with many aspects of labour-management relations, the allocation of manpower, efficiency in port work and the introduction of new equipment, together with consequential adjustments in working
practices.2
A number of outstanding examples of the comprehensive approach recommended by the Inland Transport Committee have occurred in the last few
years, particularly in countries where changes in cargo-handling methods
were fast being introduced or were impending. Because the negotiations
1
2

ports.

The Financial Times, 16 Sep. 1967, p. 13.
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in

A NEW DEAL

213

which took place illustrate the problems to which the new approach gives
rise and the lines of their solution, they will be described in this chapter in
the light of the technical points in earlier chapters.
The agreements or arrangements described are those which have been
arrived at on the Pacific Coast of the United States, in the Port of New York,
the St. Lawrence ports, the United Kingdom, Norway, Sweden, Italy, New
Zealand, Singapore and Australia.
SOME NEW AGREEMENTS

The United States Pacific Coast
The port industry on the Pacific Coast of the United States had been
through difficult periods. As far back as 1934 the International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union (ILWU) had been officially
recognised by the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA) as the industry's
bargaining group. Nevertheless, the period from 1934 to 1948 was marked
by 20 major port strikes, more than 300 days of coast-wide strikes, about
1,300 local grievance strikes and about 250 arbitration awards.1 Practically
no agreement could be reached between the parties without recourse to arbitrators and government conciliators. Thereafter a period of relative calm
set in, but the problem of introducing new labour-saving equipment and eliminating restrictive work rules remained. Soundings, however, led the
employers to believe that there would be "tacit acceptance" of containers,
"provided some suitable palliative could be found for the sociological damage
that more widespread mechanisation would imply".2
In 1959 a provisional Memorandum of Understanding was drawn up.
The aim was to guarantee fully registered dockers a share in the savings
effected by labour-saving machinery, changed methods of operation or
changes in working rules or contract restrictions resulting in reducing manpower or man-hours with the same or greater productivity for any operation.
Difficult problems of measuring these savings arose, and the employers
changed their position, feeling that to permit the union to share in savings
constituted an unacceptable invasion of management's prerogatives. They
preferred to negotiate on the basis of getting rid of restrictive rules and
having a free hand in organising the work.
1

"Mechanisation Clause in New United States Dockworkers' Agreement", in International Labour Review, Vol. LXXXVI, No. 1, July 1962, pp. 42-49.
2
Foster L. WELDON, Director of Research, Matson Navigation Company : "Research
in Steamship Operations", in Progress in Cargo-Handling, Vol. 4 (London, Fairplay
Publications, for the International Cargo Handling Co-ordination Association, 1964),
p. 28.

214

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

In October 1960 a new Memorandum of Agreement was arrived at which
constituted a real breakthrough in that both parties made considerable concessions.
The ILWU agreed—
. . . to eliminate restrictions in the contract and working rules, as well as unwritten but existing Union unilateral restrictions and arbitration awards which interfere with the Employers' rights dealing with sling loads, first place of rest,
multiple handling, gang sizes, and manning scales, so as to allow the Employers
to—
(a) operate efficiently ;
(b) change methods of work ;
(c) utilise labour-saving devices; and
(d) direct the work through Employer representatives....4
The employers were not to be required to hire unnecessary men, subject
to certain safeguards. Provisions protecting the safety and welfare of the
workers were to be respected ; "speed-up" was to be avoided, this term being
understood to refer to "an onerous workload on the individual worker", but
not to "increased production resulting from more efficient utilisation and
organisation of the workforce, introduction of labour-saving devices, or
removal of work restrictions". The determination of the number of men
necessary "shall take into account the contractual provisions for relief, the
fact that during many operations all men will not be working at all times due
to the cycle of the operation, but this shall not be construed to sanction such
practices as four-on four-off2 or variations thereof '.
A system was established for the peaceful settlement by arbitration of
disputes arising out of the agreement. In the event of stoppages or refusal
to abide by the decision of a Labour Relations Committee or arbitrator, an
abatement of up to $13,650 a day could be made in the payment by the
employer to the Mechanisation and Modernisation Fund to which reference
will be made below.
These were very important concessions by the union. What was obtained
in exchange?
In regard to employment opportunities, it was agreed that all cargohandling operations in the ports would be carried out by longshoremen. All
the regular registered dockers (known as Class A workers) would be given a
guarantee of no dismissals, except for cause. They were also guaranteed
employment and pay for a number of straight-time hours per week to be
determined. This was in practice fixed at 35, it being understood that the
1

Memorandum of Agreement on Mechanization and Modernization, 18 October 1960.
2
A practice by which two men from each of two shifts working in the hold take
time off in turn.

A NEW DEAL

215

making-up of the guarantee became operative only when work opportunity
has been reduced because of new contract provisions and not when tonnage
declined because of curtailed economic activity.
A Mechanisation and Modernisation Fund was established. The employers paid into it a lump sum of $5 million a year for five-and-a-half years, to
which was added the $1.5 million already accumulated under the earlier
agreement. The Fund was to be used in part to make up the weekly
guarantee. However, it was expected that the guarantee could only be
implemented if a certain number of men left the industry, and the Fund was
therefore used to provide inducement to the older men to do so. This took
the form of paying various benefits on retirement, after 25 years' service,
which normally took place at age 65 and was compulsory at age 68. To
attain 25 years' service, a docker could, however, stay on irrespective of age.
On retirement at 65, with 25 years' service, a lump sum of $7,920 was paid.
Voluntary retirement with the required period of service at ages 62, 63 or
64 was made possible, with monthly payments of $220 for up to 36 months,
any unpaid portion being paid at age 65 as a lump sum. Provision was also
made for the possibility of imposing compulsory retirement at ages 64, 63 or
62 if necessary, with respectively 24, 23 or 22 years' service, in which case
the monthly payment would be raised to $320.
There were also wage increases and improvements in some fringe benefits.
This negotiation has been described as "buying the rule book", because
the dockers were selling for the guarantees and lump sums described above
the right to insist on practices which were designed primarily to increase the
demand for labour.
How has this bargain worked out in practice?
The first point to note is that traffic through the port increased between
1960 and 1965 by about 32 per cent, as will be seen from table 5. Traffic
would no doubt have grown in any case owing to the development of trade
across the Pacific, but it is believed that much of the additional traffic resulted
from the employers' ability to operate without increasing shipping rates and
thus to attract more cargo, and because the operators felt free to invest
heavily in containers, ships designed to carry containers and new mechanical
devices.1 Productivity, measured in hours per ton (five tons of bulk cargo
are equated to one ton of general cargo) rose by about 24 per cent. The
labour cost per ton decreased slightly, in spite of increases in wages and other
benefits in the interval ; total man-hours worked increased.
As a result, there was no need to draw on the Fund in order to make up
the weekly guarantee, so that the $13 million accumulated for the purpose
•KOSSORIS: "1966 West Coast Longshore Negotiations", op. cit.

216

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

have been placed at the disposal of the union. The loss of workers by normal
departures had to be made good by drawing on Class B workers (who did
not come under the guarantee) and it became necessary to replenish the ranks
of the Class B workers. In spite of the fact that the latter do not enjoy the
guarantee until they pass into Class A, between 9,000 and 10,000 men
applied for about 2,000 vacancies. The general level of unemployment in
the area was at the time about 5 per cent.
The employers seem to be satisfied. The President of the Pacific Maritime Association stated :
We have been able to absorb all of the increases in fringe benefits and wages
that we have negotiated year by year on top of the Modernisation and Mechanisation Fund. We have been able to maintain, as a result of the changes in operation which have taken place, a sufficiently increased manpower productivity
(i.e. tons per man-hour) so that our unit cost per ton is no greater now than it
was in 1959.... Over all, my opinion, and I think that of a major part of the
industry, is that the experiment has been worth while, that the plan is a sound
one, and that there have been reasonable benefits achieved.1
Attempts were made for a time to work out how much it would have
cost to handle the increased tonnage by earlier practices, but this type of
reporting was after a while abandoned. But even on a rough computation,
and after allowance for sizable wage and fringe benefits increases, there
would still be a gain to employers of well over $100 million for the period
1960-65. This figure does not take into account the faster turn-round of
ships, which may realise savings of between $2,000 and $5,000 per ship per
day. There are no detailed data, but it has been considered that $50 million
would be a conservative estimate for savings achieved in turn-round time
over the period. The gain to the employers under the agreement may therefore be placed conservatively at well over $150 million for the period
1960-65. When the sums paid into the Mechanisation and Modernisation
Fund are subtracted, there is still a balance of over $120 million.2
New negotiations took place in 1966, at which it was agreed that the
employers would pay $8.6 million a year into the Fund ; wages and pensions
would be substantially increased ; retirement would be at 63 after 25 years'
service ; and the lump-sum payment due to the worker on retirement would be
raised to $13,000. In return, the unions undertook that there would be no
work stoppages for another five years and the employers would obtain still
1
J. Paul ST. SURE : "The US West Coast Agreement", in Fairplay Shipping Journal,
13 May 1965.
2
KOSSORIS: "1966 West Coast Longshore Negotiations", op. cit., pp. 1068-1069.

217

A NEW DEAL

greaterflexibilityin the use of men, with no obligation to employ unnecessary
men as further mechanisation proceeded.1
However, there has been criticism of the new arrangements. On the part
of the employers it is claimed that the "four-on four-off" working outlawed
by the agreement was still to be found. It was proving difficult to reduce
gangs to the minimum size really needed for operational purposes. The fact
that a flat annual payment was made into the Fund instead of one varying
with productivity, or with savings effected, removed the incentive on the part
of the men to increase productivity and placed the onus of doing so on the
employers.
A further difficulty resides in the fact that many of the benefits go to the
older men. More younger men are being taken on, and it is by no means
certain that these younger men will attach so much importance to longdeferred separation payments.
Problems therefore remain to be solved, but all parties agree that the
deal has been a good one.
TABLE 5. HOURS WORKED AND TONNAGE HANDLED
ON THE UNITED STATES PACIFIC COAST, 1960-65
Year

Hours worked
(millions)

Weighted tonnage
(millions) >

Hours per ton

1960
1961
1962
1963
1964
1965

29.8
29.8
26.7
27.8
27.7
30.1

19.9
18.8
19.8
21.7
23.4
26.3

1.502
1.477
1.349
1.281
1.184
1.143

Source : Adapted from Pacific Maritime Association : Annual Report, 1966, op. cit.
1

Five tons of bulk cargo are equated to one ton of general cargo.

New York
New York had had a long record of strife in the port. A scheme for the
decasualisation of dockers had been introduced in 1954 by the states of
New York and New Jersey. The Waterfront Commission of New York
Harbour, which had been set up by the two states, had, in spite of attacks
made on its operations sometimes by both parties, succeeded in bringing the
1
For general information on this agreement see, in addition to sources cited, Pacific
Maritime Association: Annual Reports; KOSSORIS: "Working Rules in West Coast
Longshoring", op. cit. ; and Men and Machines—A Story about Longshoring on the
West Coast Waterfront (San Francisco, ILWU/PMA, 1964).

218

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

number of registered dockers down to a level at which steadier employment
for those who depended on port work for their livelihood became a practical
possibility.
In April 1965 a big step forward was taken following the recommendations of a mediation panel : a new agreement was signed between the New
York Shipping Association and the International Longshoremen's Association
(AFL-CIO) and its affiliated bodies of Greater New York. The union
accepted a reduction in the required strength of the basic gang and greater
flexibility in the use of labour in exchange for a guarantee of minimum
income, improvements in the pension scheme and increases in wages, holidays
and welfare amenities.
The strength of the general cargo gang was reduced by two men on
1 April 1966 and by another man on 1 October 1967. Management has
acquired the right to distribute members of the gang to any assignment within
the gang which they are qualified to perform. Any extra men that may be
added to the basic gang may be transferred from gang to gang as needed.
Gangs may be transferred from hatch to hatch and from ship to ship within
the same terminal, provided such transfer does not cause displacement of
another gang. Subject to certain conditions, employers are required to hire
only the number of clerks, checkers and other crafts and terminal labour as
may be necessary to perform the work.
The dockers, for their part, are for the first time provided with a guaranteed income. All those who, in the period 1 April 1965 to 31 March 1966,
worked for at least 700 hours for employers who are members of the NYSA
(this figure is considered to be the dividing line between those who are and
those who are not dependent on port work for their livelihood) are guaranteed
an income of not less than 1,600 hours a contract year multiplied by the
hourly straight-time rate applicable during that year. The union has since
requested a guarantee for 2,080 hours a year.
It is significant that up to January 1967 the annual income guarantee,
paid out on a quarterly basis, was reported as involving only some 350 payments, totalling about $150,000, for the period beginning 30 April 1966. '
Pension benefits are improved, so that, as from 1 January 1966,
employees have been eligible, after 25 years' service and attainment of
age 62, for a monthly pension of $175 for life. There is an invalidity pension—payable after age 45 with 15 years' service—of $125 a month, rising
by $5 a month for each additional year's service up to $175. There are also
widow's pensions of half the full pension, payable also to the widow of a man
who dies before retirement, but after 25 years' service, such benefits com1

The Brooklyn Longshoreman (New York), Apr. 1966.

A NEW DEAL

219

mencing when the employee would have reached the age of 62. The union
has since pressed for earlier and more generous pensions.
There are also substantial wage increases, an extension of holidays with
pay, additional paid public holidays and additional payments into welfare
and related funds.1
The handling of containers had also given rise to difficulty. In November
1958 the union refused to handle shipper-loaded containers, but was subsequently obliged to handle all container traffic as the result of an arbitration
award. After there had been a failure to agree on the terms, it was decided
under a further arbitration award that royalties should be paid on containers
that were loaded or unloaded away from the pier by non-ILA labour. The
royalty on conventional ships is 35 cents a gross ton of the weight of cargo
in the container; 70 cents on partially automated ships (conventional ships
converted for the handling of vans and containers) or on partially automated
ships converted for the handling of vans and containers where not more than
40 per cent of the ship's bale cube has been fitted for containers ; and $ 1 on
ships where more than two hatches have been converted, or where more than
40 per cent of the ship's bale cube has been fitted for containers.2 A lower
rate applies to coastal traffic. The same rate has been maintained for some
years, and so far the annual income going to the container fund is small. For
the first two years it averaged half a cent per hour worked in the port. No
decision has yet been taken as to the use of the funds.3 Since the union is
seeking a review of the provisions relating to container traffic4, this issue
may yet give rise to difficulty.
Further, only certain changes in work rules were agreed to in 1965. The
gang strength for containers is maintained at full level. The 1965 agreement
is under review.
It remains to be seen how far the somewhat reluctant new approach,
partly forced on the union by arbitration, will continue so that further progress can be made.
The St. Lawrence Ports
The St. Lawrence ports of Canada had suffered from labour disputes
over a number of years, culminating in a serious strike in May and June
1

Memorandum of Settlement of 13 April 1965 (New York Shipping Association
Report No. 2345 of 20 April 1965), article in the New York Times of 18 Apr. 1965,
and the revised version of General Cargo Agreement between the New York 'Shipping
Association, Inc., and the International Longshoremen's Association (AFL-CIO),
October 1, 1964-September 30, 1968, for the Port of Greater New York and Vicinity.
2
In the Matter of Arbitration between the New York Shipping Association and the
International Longshoremen's Association: Award dated 16 November 1960.
3
Ross, op. cit.
4
New York Times, Oct. 1967.

220

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

1966. Here again, the need for a new deal was felt, and a basis of agreement was arrived at in June 1966 between the Shipping Federation of Canada
and the locals of the International Longshoremen's Association in Montreal,
Quebec and Trois Rivières. While a settlement was reached on wages and
some other matters, it proved impossible to secure agreement on arrangements for the régularisation of employment and guarantees of employment
or income, and on certain operational problems such as the size and make-up
of gangs, sling loads and the use of equipment, and methods affecting productivity in loading and discharging operations.
The two parties agreed to refer these outstanding points to an Inquiry
Commission appointed by the Minister of Labour with their agreement. The
parties undertook in advance to accept the conclusions of the Commission.
In addition, legislation * was passed which stipulated that, upon receipt of
the report of the Commission, "the Minister of Labour shall cause copies of
the report to be furnished to the Federation and to the Union, and thereupon
each collective agreement to which this Act applies shall be deemed to be
amended by the incorporation therein of the conclusions of the Commission,
as set forth in the report".
The report2 makes a thorough survey of the situation. To take Montreal as an example, it provides the dockers with a guarantee of a standard
work week's employment for each of 37 weeks a year. Since the port of
Montreal freezes up in winter and little work can be done, 37 weeks represents the usual working season. However, the extent of the guarantee is
made to depend on the maintenance of productivity. The standard work
week is fixed at 40 hours in Montreal if productivity is at least equal to that
of 1964. If it falls below, the number of hours a week guaranteed falls in
accordance with a sliding scale to 35 hours, a figure corresponding to a productivity index of 88 per cent of the level for 1964. The guarantee is
covered by a Job Security Fund fed by payments from the employers. In
Quebec and Trois Rivières, the guarantee covers 39 weeks, but because of
the greater seasonal variation in traffic and the smaller number of employers,
it cannot be offered on a weekly basis but only on a seasonal basis. The
guarantee is therefore for 1,560 hours a season (39 weeks at 40 hours),
falling to 1,200 hours on a sliding scale according to a productivity index;
the latter figure corresponds to 70 per cent of the productivity level in 1964.
To .make it possible to effect the guarantee, special arrangements have
had to be made regarding the allocation of workers. In Montreal each of
the nine companies involved has to take responsibility for a certain number
1
2

The St. Lawrence Ports Working Conditions Act, 1966.
Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St. Lawrence Ports, op. cit.

A NEW DEAL

221

of gangs attached to it. Each company is, however, obliged to lend its gangs
to other companies when it has no work for them, and, likewise, it is obliged,
once its gangs have attained their quota of guaranteed hours, to hire those
of other companies who have not, at the time, reached their guaranteed quota.
There are also substantial improvements in welfare amenities, a new
safety code, and other adjustments in conditions of work.
For their part, the dockers agree to a reduction in gang size and to greater
flexibility in their deployment. In Montreal the size of the basic gang is
reduced from 17 men for loading and 19 men for unloading, plus a foreman
and 1 or 2 fork-lift truck operators, to a basic gang of 16 men in each
case (plus a foreman) to which extra men may be added as required. Changes
are made as regards relief men and rest periods. There is flexibility in
moving gangs from hatch to hatch and from ship to ship in each work period,
and in moving extra men from hold to shed. A number of restrictive practices are abandoned.
In issuing a summary of his report, the Commissioner remarked that "It
is important to emphasise that if both parties wish to enjoy the benefits
accruing from the rationalisation of operations and the stabilisation of work
in the three ports involved, they will have to surrender certain privileges
which are related to an obsolete conception of longshoring".
As the report was published only in October 1967, it is too soon, at the
time of writing, to judge how these new arrangements have worked. What
is significant is the fact that both parties left so much to be settled by a
Commission of Inquiry, and that Parliament should have provided in advance
that the conclusions of the Commission should be embodied in the agreements between the parties. The broad basis of the settlement thus achieved
follows the pattern already described : guarantees of employment and income
and improvements in conditions of work, in exchange for flexibility in the
use of labour and the abandonment of certain restrictive practices, thus
opening the way for the fuller use of new cargo-handling techniques.
The United Kingdom
In the United Kingdom a scheme for the regulation of employment in
ports had long existed, the version in force early in 1967 being based on an
Act of 1947, which set up a National Dock Labour Board as well as local
boards, and provided for the registration of dockers and the adjustment of
their numbers in accordance with changing needs. The dockers received
attendance money for calls at which they were not taken on, and a rather
limited weekly guarantee of income.

222

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

However, in many cases the dockers showed marked reluctance to operate
new equipment and operators therefore often hesitated to introduce it. A
number of work rules were practised which restricted productivity. The fact
that many dockers, though employed by the National Dock Labour Board,
worked for different operators as allocated, while others had regular weekly
employment with specified operators, gave rise to a number of difficulties in
the field of labour-management relations. The system had been investigated
by a number of official committees, and the observations of the National
Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry on the repercussions of casual
employment have already been referred to earlier in this chapter.
In October 1961 the National Joint Council, in a policy directive to all
its local joint committees, decided that the time had come "for a fresh and
bold advance towards effective decasualisation with the object of decasualising both employment and relationships in the industry". The directive
pointed out that in many ports the real obstacle to more effective decasualisation had been a lack of flexibility in the deployment of labour in the most
effective manner possible. The deployment of the labour force to meet a
situation of either relative surplus or relative shortage of labour was—
. . . inhibited by one or other of the following principal factors, or a combination
of them :
(i) rigidity of manning scales ;
(ii) the complexities arising from the presence on the registers of a multiplicity of
employers, many of whom only engage labour intermittently but all of whom
are entitled to call for labour at any time ; and
(iii) restriction of the scope for the use of mechanical aids. *

Though the directive outlined a programme of action, progress was very
slow, and little action was at first taken. A Committee of Inquiry appointed
by the Minister of Transport was meeting at the time to consider to what
extent the major docks and harbours of the United Kingdom were adequate
to meet present and future national needs and whether methods of working
could be improved. It devoted a great deal of attention to the labour aspects
of the problem. After further difficulties and delays, the Minister of Labour
appointed a further Committee of Inquiry, under Lord Devlin, to deal in the
first instance with a current dispute, but thereafter to inquire into decasualisation and the causes of dissension in the industry and other matters affecting
efficiency of working.2 This Committee made far-reaching recommendations and proposed a plan of action, which was, subject to some reservations,
1
Report of the Committee of Inquiry into the Major Ports of Great Britain,
Appendix N, op. cit., p. 263.
2
Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin into
Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport Industry, op. cit.

A NEW DEAL

223

accepted by the Government and the two sides of the industry. As a result
the National Joint Council issued a new national Policy Directive in September 1965.
This constituted a proposal for a fundamental change, fully accepted by
both parties. Time was, however, required to enable it to be carried out, as
the number of port employers had to be drastically reduced and new legislation was necessary. The main provisions of the new Dock Labour Scheme
came into effect on 18 September 1967, though some elements of the basic
bargain were left over for further negotiations.
The scheme does indeed represent a new deal for the dockers, in that all
dockers on the register are given regular employment on a weekly basis for
a given employer. Thus decasualisation has become fully effective, with a
wage guarantee of £16 a week (£17 in London). This sum includes a
"modernisation payment" of 40 shillings a week. To enable regular employment to be offered, employers have had to be licensed and their numbers
reduced, one of the conditions for receipt of the licence being the ability to
employ a reasonable quota of the dock labour force in the port, bearing in
mind that all registered dockers must be absorbed by comparatively few
employers. Employment has to be offered on terms and conditions laid
down in national or local agreements. To provide for sufficient flexibility,
employers can transfer their men temporarily, under arrangements to be
approved by the local dock labour board, provided this is not done to an
excessive extent.
It was also made clear when the scheme was initiated that the modernisation agreement would not lead to the discharge of men from the industry,
either initially or as a result of increased efficiency, and pledges to this effect
were given by the Minister of Labour and by the employers. Any necessary
reduction in the labour force was to be effected by natural wastage and/or
the control of recruitment.
The dockers also gained other advantages : the 40-hour week, which had
already been granted, was confirmed ; the sick-pay scheme was substantially
improved; and considerable improvements in welfare amenities were to be
made mandatory. Improvements in the pension scheme were envisaged, but
have been left over for further negotiation.
What are the concessions which the dockers are expected to make in
exchange for such a long-desired reform?
The Policy Directive of 1961 called upon local Joint Committees to
study and report on, among other matters, "the abolition of restrictive practices including all practices inhibiting the mobility of labour" and "the fullest
possible economic use of mechanical aids". In the 1965 Policy Directive
there was agreement on the abolition, in the first instance, of all restrictive

224

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

practices which are essentially a feature of the casual method of employment,
and, in a second stage, of all other restrictions on the effective utilisation of
manpower and facilities, including the fullest possible economic use of
mechanical aids. There was also to be a review of the wages structure of the
industry.
To work out these changes, a National Modernisation Committee was
set up, seconded by local modernisation committees in each port. Details
of the changes in working rules and practices were therefore worked out in
each port. The principle has been accepted that restrictions on mobility
within working periods, whether between different points or between different operations, should be eliminated. "The aim must be to facilitate the
maximumflexibilityof working. Continuity rules which inhibit such mobility
will require modification so as to ensure that the full benefit in terms of production is secured from all hours of a shift."1 These rules had in the past
often prevented the transfer of men from hatch to hatch, or ship to ship, in
the course of a shift.
In Liverpool other factors intervened. The workers were mainly on
time rates, supplemented in part by a bonus scheme of limited range. The
earnings compared unfavourably with those of dockers in London, where
most of the work is on piece rates.
These are some of the complex factors which led to the new deal in the
United Kingdom, but gave it a difficult start. It should satisfy aspirations
which the workers have long had, and it is hoped that it will lead to a marked
increase in productivity. A competent observer expressed the view that the
new arrangements should make possible a 25 per cent increase in productivity, leaving out of account the results of introducing new equipment. The
final outcome will be closely watched, as it may mean a vast change for the
better in the social climate of United Kingdom ports and in their efficiency.
Within the broad scheme, two special cases deserve separate mention.
A shipowner operating in the Tilbury docks of the Port of London
shifted over to loading and unloading his ships on the roll-on/roll-off principle, with cargo as far as possible palletised. Unit loads moved through
side ports with fork-lift trucks, while trucks, cars and trailers could be loaded
over a ramp. A very great increase in productivity was achieved, and the
¿hip could be turned round in two days instead of five or six, and with a
much smaller number of men. Negotiations led to an agreement covering
just under 250 men, which offers the dockers concerned a guarantee of
£29 lOo. Od. a week. The men concerned are completely mobile and can
i National Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry : Provisional Agreement,
effective 18 September 1967.

A NEW DEAL

225

handle a variety of jobs. Problems which arise are dealt with at weekly
meetings between the parties. Naturally, such an agreement gives rise to
some questions among the men who do not benefit from it.
In Liverpool negotiations were undertaken regarding the introduction of
piece rates which might substantially increase earnings in exchange for
improvements in productivity.l
Norway
In Oslo a collective agreement of 1966 is based on the principle that the
dockers will agree to co-operate in the rationalisation of cargo handling ; the
principle that manning scales will be based on actual needs is accepted. For
instance, for fork-lift truck work, or for roll-on/roll-off ships, two men may
constitute a team, and they may be employed on any cargo-handling job.
Compensation is offered in part in the form of pensions.2
Sweden
In Gothenburg a special agreement, based on previous agreements covering ferry terminals, was concluded in September 1967 for the workers
employed in one of the terminals handling containers. About 200 of the
1,200 dockers in Gothenburg are affected. Only dockers are employed
(except for crane drivers and tally clerks). Shift work, which the dockers
had previously opposed, was agreed to for two shifts covering the period
from 7 a.m. to midnight, Mondays to Fridays, and a relatively high weekly
wage rate was fixed.
Italy
In Italy legislation of 1967 3 aims at a reorganisation of the registers of
the regular dockers, who are members of the "dockers' corporations", and
of the registers of the casual dockers, as well as certain changes in practice
required to meet new situations. In the meantime, agreements have been
arrived at between the operators of roll-on/roll-off services in Genoa and the
dockers under which, in exchange for lump-sum payments, far fewer dockers
are employed on the ships concerned than previously. New rates and
smaller teams have also been agreed for palletised loads. Earlier voluntary
1

The Guardian (Manchester), 5 Feb. 1968.
Journal de la Marine Marchande, 18 Aug. 1966.
3
Presidential Decree No. 809 of 21 July 1967.

226

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

retirement is offered with compensation for future lack of earnings, and
250 men have taken advantage of the scheme.
New Zealand
In New Zealand a scheme for the registration and allocation of dockers
has long existed. In 1965, however, a new basis of understanding regarding
port work was arrived at, reflected in the General Principal Order issued
that year.1 The unions agree that the employers have the right to load or
unload cargo with mechanical equipment, or in containers or on pallets or
in unit loads, or by pre-slinging. The number oí men for any of these operations concerned must be that required to perform the operation efficiently.
In case of dispute, the matter is to be settled by the Port Conciliation Committee. If the gang is reduced, an adjustment of contract or incentive rates
shall be made such as to give fair and reasonable financial benefit to the
smaller gang, in relation to the number of men by which the gang has been
reduced. Subject to the observance of regulations, any safe method of working may, if required by the employer, be used. Other points deal with sling
loads.
As a counterpart, the employers offer wage increases and the establishment of a modernisation fund which will provide (i) lump-sum payments on
retirement at age 65 (or earlier if on account of sickness) amounting after
10 years' service to £15 per year of service, with a maximum of 40 years*
service ; (ii) sickness benefits ; and (iii) a small fund to cover cases of individual hardship, due in particular to redundancy.
However, it is not expected that the introduction of mechanical equipment at New Zealand ports will necessitate the removal of workers' names
from the register. Production in New Zealand was increasing at the time of
the new order, and notwithstanding the introduction of mechanical equipment the tendency was for the register strengths of waterside workers to
increase.2
Singapore
In 1964 new arrangements were worked out by agreement between the
Singapore Port Authority and the union. The stevedore gang (working on
board ship) was reduced and greater transferability from hatch to hatch and
from one ship to another accepted. Two shifts a day were introduced
1
New Zealand, Waterfront Industry Tribunal : General Principal Order No. 247 as
to Conditions of Work on the New Zealand Waterfront, 18 October 1965.
2
General Report, Inland Transport Committee, Eighth Session (Geneva, 1966),
op. cit., p. 48.

A NEW DEAL

227

instead of one. In return for this the dockers get a reduction of daily hours
of work from 12 to 7, increased rates of pay, and allowances and bonuses
such that earnings can be maintained and, if productivity increases, even
raised. A guarantee of 26 days' basic pay a month, including allowances, is
given, provided that the tonnage per month in the port does not fall below
300,000 tons.J
Australia
In Australia a National Stevedoring Industry Conference, faced with the
impending arrival of container ships from Europe and the United States, has
been considering changes which would give the dockers permanent employment, retirement pensions, transfer arrangements, retraining and redundancy
payments, incentives to increased throughput, and higher wages, including
increased attendance money and meal money. The statutory age of retirement is to be reduced by stages from 70 to 65. The Conference also had on
its agenda a discussion of the future of the industry. As regards permanent
employment, the scheme initially considered involved weekly hire for all
regular workers in major ports, some of them with operators and others in a
pool, but other alternative methods of achieving the desired result were also
to be examined.2
By January 1967 agreement had been reached in principle on a scheme
of permanent employment; a pension scheme was being developed; and
work was proceeding on a scheme to offset the effects of redundancy.3
Other Countries
In other countries also a new approach to deal with the problem of
changing techniques of cargo handling and changing social attitudes to work
in port has taken place or is under consideration.
There are many countries which have not been mentioned because the
purpose of this chapter has been to provide some of the more striking
examples. In many countries changes in cargo-handling techniques have not
yet had much impact, or their impact has been mitigated by rising trade and
manpower shortages. In some countries, also, there has been little or no
resistance to change and little recourse to restrictive practices. There are
also cases where the normal turnover of dockers is so high that the problem
of running down a register is never acute.
1

What is Shift Work at the Wharves ?, op. cit.
Australian Stevedoring Industry Authority: Report and Financial Statements for
Year Ending 30 June 1966, pp. 22-24.
2

D'ABBS, op. cît.

228

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

The problem of adjustment to changing techniques and social outlooks
is, however, likely to arise in many more countries than those which have
been mentioned in this chapter. There have been signs of reluctance to
handle unitised cargo in some developing countries, but, as the General
Manager of the Bombay Port Trust said at a symposium on palletisation, if
labour is taken into confidence and brought into the deliberations and also
assured that there will be no retrenchment, there is no reason why it should
oppose palletisation.
Nevertheless, new deals on the lines of those described in this chapter
may yet prove to be desirable in other countries in order to ensure acceptance
of new methods of handling cargo, port efficiency, quicker turn-round of
ships, fair conditions of work for those on the job, and protection against
discharge as a result of progress.

10. TOWARDS THE FUTURE
Fifty years ago, in New York, as in a great many other ports, the "vicious
and antiquated system" 1 of the shape-up was in use.
They are so thickly packed near the doorway that often a man who is entitled
to pass in has to be pulled through by his fellows.... Sometimes the line of the
shape is broken, and the whole mass surges forward. The gateman is handed a
stout switch, with which he attempts to strike the men over their faces.... If the
rod fails, the hose is turned on, even in winter.2
The docker was paid 10 cents an hour 60 hours a week, i.e. $6 a week,
assuming he was lucky enough to get work for a whole week. In London the
dockers, under Ernest Bevin, were asking for and getting a registration
scheme and a "tanner", or sixpence, an hour, then roughly equivalent to
10 cents.
The industrialised countries have come a long way since then. Earnings
are as a rule at or above average for comparable work, schemes for full-time
employment or a guarantee of earnings or employment exist, allocation procedures are orderly. This is also the case in many developing countries. In
others, it is unfortunately true that earnings are still substandard even in
relation to those current in the country concerned, the competition for jobs
is such that men will work 24 hours on end or even more rather than take
their chance on the next job, and abuses in recruiting procedures are far from
unknown.
However, the greatest change is that the social conscience of mankind is
more alert. It has been accepted that the central aim of national and international policy must be the attainment of conditions in which it will be possible
for "all human beings, irrespective of race, creed or sex . . . to pursue both
their material well-being and their spiritual development in conditions of
freedom and dignity, of economic security and equal opportunity".3
Where abuses and substandard conditions still exist in the docks today
there is increasing momentum behind the drive to eliminate them. Schemes
1
So described in Fourth Report of the New York State Crime Commission, Legislative Document 1953, No. 70 (Albany, NY, Williams Press, Inc., 1953), p. 37.
2
Charles BARNES: The Longshoremen (New York Survey Associates, Inc., 1915),
pp. 63-64.
3
Declaration of Philadelphia, Annex to the Constitution of the International
Labour Organisation.

230

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

for the régularisation of employment have been introduced in a great many
ports in recent years, more attention is being paid to safety and welfare,
discussions between employers' and workers' organisations are proceeding in
a constantly growing number of countries to a greater extent than ever before
on a basis of mutual respect, and bases of understanding as to the conduct
of relations between management and labour are becoming established in
most countries.
Into this picture of gradual social improvement comes the so-called
"container revolution". It is, of course, far more than just the increasing
use of containers. It is the notion of through-handling, or "combined transport", in which the port is merely the point at which the goods change their
mode of transport with the minimum of handling operations and a great
simplification of the documentation work. It covers containers, other unit
loads, palletisation, roll-on/roll-off operations, and, more generally, an
approach to greater efficiency in all port operations, including the handling
of general cargo in the more customary ways. It implies the application of
more efficient methods of work to an occupation in which tradition has held
sway. It implies the attempt to secure in the field of transport the advantages
of scale which have revolutionised production in so many industries. It
should mean cheaper, quicker and better carriage of goods from those who
produce them to those who need them.

It is the sum total of these technological changes and of the change in
outlook which they imply which constitutes a breakthrough in transport.
At this early, if momentous, stage of the container revolution it is still not at
all easy to attempt historical comparisons and yet remain truly objective. But it
is probably true to say that the changes which are being effected today in the
theory and practice of goods transport, especially by sea, are as great and farreaching as those which took 1place in the transition from packhorse to railway
truck a century or more ago.
As a report to the United Nations puts it, "Unitisation is a catalytic agent
of international commerce. Its growth requires co-operation and integration
of investment, management and labour, and international planning and regulation." 2
So far from being viewed with alarm and misgiving, these changes should
be regarded as a great opportunity. They should contribute to the general
raising of standards of living and help developing countries both in their
' E . J . GROOM: "The Great Container Revolution—The Facts of Life in 1967", in
Journal of Commerce, Annual Review 1968—Year of Revolution at Sea, p. 79.
2
An Examination of Some Aspects of the Unit-Load System of Cargo Shipments:
Application to Developing Countries, op. cit., para. 25.

TOWARDS THE FUTURE

231

trade and in their programmes of industrialisation. The opportunity should,
however, be taken to modernise the outlook towards the work of the docker.
This may be the time to aim at the adoption of a "Dockers' Charter",
which might lay down certain principles that should govern their work and
lives.
Such a charter might, for instance, establish the principle of a steady
job, with a guarantee of employment or income, coupled with suitable safeguards as to how cases of redundancy, if these are admitted at all, are to be
dealt with. Certain principles regarding conditions of work with respect,
for instance, to earnings, hours of work, holidays and welfare amenities, might
be agreed to, to ensure that the worker enjoys conditions at least as favourable as those prevailing for comparable work in other occupations, and
allowances should be made for any special difficulties dockers have to face
in their jobs. Training for the acquisition of special skills might be a point
to mention, as well as the status of those who have acquired these skills. The
charter would obviously refer to freedom of association, and might deal with
matters such as negotiations and consultation between employers' and workers' organisations and the settlement of grievances.
The Dockers' Charter of 1969 would no doubt be somewhat different,
in the light of social and technological progress, from any which might have
been put forward in 1919.
There remains, however, the question of future job opportunities. This
depends on the outcome of many interdependent factors, the main ones being
the growth of maritime trade, the increase in labour productivity and the
turnover of dockers.
For a considerable time to come, it would seem likely that international
trade will increase (if short-term crises and cyclical fluctuations are disregarded). With rising standards of living, international exchanges of goods
tend to increase. As more and more countries enter the group of industrialised countries trade between them is likely to grow. Further, the proportion of that trade which can be classified as "general cargo" will also
increase, because of the increasing proportion of manufactured goods.
Also, for a considerable time to come the tonnage moved by sea may be
expected to continue increasing, in spite of the fact that the impending arrival
of larger freight aircraft is likely to make airfreight less expensive so that an
increasing proportion of freight will move by air. Rapid handling by surface
transport will be a partial, but not a total answer, so that competition from
airfreight will be an additional spur to efficiency.
The increase in labour productivity must therefore keep pace with the
increase in volume of maritime traffic. Here it may be expected that past
trends will be accelerated. Productivity, in terms of man-hours per ton of

232

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

general cargo (or still more so of all cargo, of course), has, as a rule, been
improving steadily over the years and has been reflected in many countries
by a gradual reduction in the number of dockers. In trades that are affected
by new methods of handling cargo and in particular by containers and roll-on/
roll-off ships, it is more than likely that the net result will be a reduction in
the total number of dockers required, in spite of the new trade which cheaper
and more convenient transport may generate. However, in many other trades
modernisation will, for reasons given in this report, take rather longer to
achieve, so that the time-lag before a substantial proportion of cargo is carried through the port in containers or other unit loads will be substantially
longer.
That being the case, how will the run-down in numbers needed compare
with the run-down arising out of natural wastage ? This is the great unknown.
On some trade routes a difficult, but probably fairly short-lived, problem will
arise and special steps will, it is hoped, be taken in the social field to cope
with the excess of dockers temporarily available. For ports serving many
other trade routes, it may reasonably be supposed that the rate of technological change will perhaps not be greater than can be met by natural wastage,
including voluntary separations, from a dockers' register.
In all these uncertain forecasts the picture is likely to remain somewhat
confused. Side by side with containers there may still be a great deal of
handling by traditional methods. There will be variations in the proportions
handled by different techniques at different periods in the future rather than
a complete and sudden swing-over to new methods. Men handling bags and
parcels by hand onto a barge or in a warehouse can sometimes still be seen
almost alongside the most modern hoisting equipment.
The trend is clearly towards the more efficient movement of cargo.
Already containers travel in combined transport by land and sea from the
middle of the United States to places far inland in Europe, or from Britain
across Europe and the Trans-Siberian Railway to Japan. There is much
speculation about the United States railways constituting the "land bridge"
in future container traffic between Japan and Europe.
Changes should be welcomed, if they are efficient, economic and safe,
and if they can be made to contribute to a better life for all. They call for
a new and broader outlook involving a great deal of planning and co-ordination. Their social implications, and in particular their impact on the life
and work of the dockers, must be constantly watched, and the planning of
new methods of handling cargo must include planning for dealing with all
the related social consequences such as job opportunities, methods of payment, shift work, welfare and training.

TOWARDS THE FUTURE

233

Over the last half-century the attitude of society to the docker has made
great strides forward ; it may be hoped that over the next half-century the rate
of social progress will be even faster, facilitated by the widespread acceptance
of technological innovation and the desire to give all concerned, including the
docker, a share in its benefits.

APPENDIX 1
ILO ACTION ON BEHALF OF DOCKERS
Most of the Conventions and Recommendations adopted by the International
Labour Conference apply either to all employed persons or to persons employed
in industrial undertakings, the latter as a rule including transport undertakings,
and more specifically those engaged in "the handling of goods at docks, quays,
wharves or warehouses". They therefore include dockers in their scope.
To the extent that the Conventions are ratified, they constitute a network of
international obligations on labour and social matters. Even the unratified Conventions, together with the Recommendations, constitute standards which a most
representative gathering of delegates representing governments and employers'
and workers' organisations have adopted as desirable, and as such they are
referred to as standards to be achieved as far as possible. These standards deal
with nearly all aspects of labour legislation and policy. Among other matters,
they set the basic principles of freedom of association and the right to collective
bargaining, of freedom from discrimination, of equality of remuneration for men
and women workers, and of employment policy. They cover the organisation of
employment services, recruitment, vocational guidance and training. All aspects
of conditions of work are covered : minimum wage fixing, hours of work, weekly
rest, holidays with pay, and industrial safety, health and welfare. Other instruments cover the whole field of social security. In the field of labour-management
relations subjects such as problems of negotiation, the participation of employers'
and workers' organisations in decisions at national and industry levels, the settlement of disputes and grievances, and communications are covered.
A few texts deal specifically with the handling of goods, in particular the
Protection against Accidents (Dockers) Convention (Revised), 1932, the Marking
of Weight (Packages Transported by Vessels) Convention, 1929, and the Maximum Weight Convention and Recommendation, 1967.
It is therefore of particular importance that, when considering the application of certain measures to dockers, the texts of the international labour Conventions and Recommendations be consulted.
Three of the conclusions adopted by the Inland Transport Committee of the
International Labour Organisation have special relevance to the matters discussed
in the present report. They are therefore reproduced in full hereunder.
Resolution (No. 25) concerning the Régularisation of Employment
of Dockworkers
The Inland Transport Committee of the International Labour Organisation,
Having been convened by the Governing Body of the International Labour
Office, and having met at Brussels in its Third Session from 18 to 27 May 1949 ;

236

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Having discussed the problem of casual dock labour on the basis of the report
on Decasualisation of Dock Labour prepared by the International Labour Office
in pursuance of the resolution adopted by the Committee at its Second Session ;
Being convinced of the need for providing greater regularity of employment
for dockworkers and for ensuring an adequate supply of labour for the efficient
performance of the work of the ports ; and
Having recognised that any steps towards these ends must have regard to the
varying conditions of the ports and the circumstances of the different countries,
Adopts this twenty-seventh day of May 1949 the following resolution concerning the principles which it would be desirable to observe with a view to promoting greater regularity of employment for dockworkers :
I. MEASURES FOR PROMOTING RÉGULARISATION OP EMPLOYMENT

1. Registers of regular dockworkers should be established in the ports.
These registers should be periodically adjusted so as to ensure the maintenance of
a sufficient but not more than sufficient supply of labour for the efficient turnround of ships while providing regular dockers with the maximum degree of
employment.
2. No person other than a registered regular docker should be employed in
dock work until all registered regular dockers available for work have been
engaged for employment.
3. Systems of engagement fox dock work should be established which will
ensure equitable opportunities of employment for the registered regular dockers,
with due regard to the special requirements of the work to be done and the qualifications of the dockers available for employment.
4. Adequate statistical information should be available for the purpose of
determining the manpower needs of the ports.
5. Arrangements should be made in the ports for recruiting persons who are
not normally dependent on dock work for their livelihood for casual employment
in such work during periods of exceptional fluctuations of traffic.
These arrangements should include—
(a) the establishment of registers of casual workers likely to be available for
employment during such periods ; and
(b) the maintenance of co-operation between the appropriate authority or
employer and the public employment service.
6. The engagement of dockers for employment should be co-ordinated in
one or more centres so organised as to take account of the labour requirements
of the port as a whole.
7. Consideration should be given to the desirability of arranging for the
central payment of wages in ports in which such arrangements are possible and
desirable.
8. Suitable training should be provided for specialised categories of dockworkers.
9. Comprehensive programmes should be earned out with a view to raising
the standard of welfare of dockworkers. These programmes should include the
provision of adequate waiting-room accommodation and canteen facilities.

APPENDIX 1

237

II. MEASURES CONCERNING STABILISATION OF EARNINGS

10. Consideration should be given to the need for providing where practicable a minimum guaranteed income for registered regular dockers who are
available for work. Arrangements to this effect may be made by means of collective bargaining, by legislation or by other suitable means. In drawing up such
arrangements consideration should be given to the experience of various countries
in this matter, e.g. in regard to the payment of attendance money and/or of a
guaranteed minimum weekly wage.
11. The Governing Body of the International Labour Office is invited to
instruct the Office to continue its examination of this problem and to prepare for
the Committee a full comparative study of the existing schemes.
III. ARRANGEMENTS FOR CO-ORDINATION AND CO-OPERATION

12. Where practicable, suitable arrangements should be made in each country for co-ordinating the schemes for the régularisation of employment in the
different ports.
13. In drawing up and applying schemes for the régularisation of employment in dock work, provision should be made for close co-operation between the
employers and the workers concerned.
Resolution (No. 52) concerning Welfare Facilities for Dockworkers
The Inland Transport Committee of the International Labour Organisation,
Having been convened by the Governing Body of the International Labour
Office, and
Having met at Geneva in its Fifth Session from 15 to 26 February 1954,
Having discussed the problem of welfare for dockworkers on the basis of the
report Welfare Facilities for Dockworkers, prepared by the International Labour
Office, and
Being convinced of the need for promoting the welfare of dockworkers,
taking into account the different conditions in ports and the situation existing in
the various countries ;
Adopts this twenty-sixth day of February 1954 the following resolution:
The Governing Body of the International Labour Office is invited to communicate the conclusions and statements concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers appended to the present resolution to all governments of States Members
of the International Labour Organisation, with the request that these conclusions
and statements be transmitted to the employers' and workers' organisations
concerned.
APPENDIX
CONCLUSIONS AND STATEMENTS CONCERNING WELFARE
FACILITIES FOR DOCKWORKERS

I. Introduction
1. At its Fifth Session (Geneva, February 1954), the Inland Transport Committee of the International Labour Organisation considered certain problems
relating to the provision of welfare facilities for dockworkers.

238

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

2. The Committee considers that the nature and importance of installations
to be provided and measures to be taken to ensure the welfare of dockers vary
considerably according to the conditions obtaining in the different countries and
also in the different ports in each country. For this reason, it considers it useful
to suggest, in the form of general conclusions, various measures which might
serve as guidance for the different countries, taking into account their general
economic position, climate, national habits and customs and certain peculiarities
of their ports, such as their layout, types of cargoes handled and type of equipment.
3. The Committee considers that it would be possible, by providing suitable
welfare facilities for dockers, to minimise the effects of certain conditions which
are inherent in dock work, such as irregularity of employment, irregular hours,
waiting time, exposure to inclement weather, the handling of dangerous goods,
etc. Every welfare facility, moreover, helps to attract and to retain the necessary
manpower, to develop industrial and human relations in the docks, to reduce the
incidence of ill-health and the consequences of accidents and as a result to ensure
higher productivity in the form of quicker turn-round of ships. Therefore, welfare facilities for dockers should be considered a normal feature of a port.
II. General Principles
Ascertaining the Position.
4. In many ports effective measures have been taken to provide welfare
facilities for dockworkers. The welfare services which have already been instituted can, with suitable modifications, provide valuable guidance to those ports
which have not yet accepted similar practices.
5. Experience shows that it is desirable that as a first step, and where this
has not already been done in the last few years, a survey be undertaken in each
port to ascertain which facilities already exist, how they are maintained and run,
to what extent they meet the needs of dockworkers, which additional facilities are
urgently required and which others are desirable.
6. Such surveys should be undertaken by the competent bodies already in
existence or by bodies specially appointed for the purpose. In countries where it
is customary for the government to participate in such surveys, they should be
included as a party to the survey. It is desirable that those undertaking the
inquiry should have knowledge of the kind of welfare facilities provided for
workers in other industries and of those provided for port workers in at least
some ports in other countries.
7. In addition to the initial survey referred to above it would be useful if,
from time to time, progress made in the provision of welfare facilities was
reviewed and a report drawn up, to which adequate publicity should be given.
Responsibility for Providing Facilities.
8. If recommendations are made in favour of the provision of additional
facilities for dockworkers, there should be consultation between the parties concerned (the competent government services, port authorities, employers' and
workers' organisations, existing bodies, etc.) to determine on whom the responsibility should lie in the case of each new facility or amenity provided.
9. The method of financing both initial expenditure and operating costs
should be determined by agreement between the parties concerned.
10. Boards on which the employers and workers concerned are represented
have, in many countries, rendered great service in the organisation of welfare

APPENDIX 1

239

facilities. When no such boards or other appropriate bodies exist, consideration
might be given to the setting up of special welfare committees on which all interested parties are represented.
11. In cases in which it would be difficult, or inappropriate, for any individual employer to provide certain facilities, action may usefully be taken, as has
been done in many ports, by an association of employers of dock labour in the
port.
12. Where those concerned fail to reach agreement regarding the allocation
of responsibility for providing facilities, the appropriate conciliation procedure
should be invoked. Government action may be necessary in certain cases.
Operation of Facilities.
13. The employers' and workers' organisations concerned and existing bodies
should be closely associated with the provision and operation of welfare facilities
for dockworkers.
14. All dockers should have the opportunity of voicing freely, and through
the appropriate channels, complaints arising out of the operation of welfare facilities. Careful consideration should be given to complaints and, where appropriate, investigations should be carried out.
15. The use of welfare facilities provided in the first place for dockworkers,
namely those employed in connection with the loading, unloading, movement or
storage of cargoes or with work in connection with the preparation of ships and
other vessels for the receipt or discharge of cargoes or for leaving port, might, in
certain cases, be extended to other workers employed by port users.
Welfare Officers.
16. Welfare officers who enjoy the confidence of all concerned can play an
important part in the provision of welfare facilities and in helping dockers and
members of their families to deal with personal difficulties.
III. Particular Facilities
Waiting Rooms.
17. Dockworkers should be provided free of charge with suitable rooms
where they can wait between calls or between the end of a call and the start of
work. These rooms should be sufficiently spacious, provide adequate seating
accommodation and be heated and ventilated according to need. Waiting rooms
may be part of the hiring hall.
Refreshment Facilities.
18. Suitable premises (eating rooms or canteens) in which workers may take
their meals should be available. Food and appropriate light beverages may be
on sale. Measures should be taken to ensure that all meals and refreshments are
of good quality and sold at fair and reasonable prices either by services operated
on a non-profit-making basis or by other appropriate means. Mobile canteens,
whether in road vehicles or afloat, may in some cases constitute a suitable means
of providing these facilities.
19. Where workers are employed on shifts facilities should be provided,
particularly in cold weather and to workers on the night shift, to enable them to
partake of hot meals.

240

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Drinking Water.
20. Wholesome drinking water should be readily accessible at all docks or
wharves, where possible by upward-jet fountains. Dockers working on board ship
should be able to obtain drinking water.
Facilities for Washing and Changing Clothes.
21. Suitable and adequate washing facilities should be provided for all
dockers at places readily accessible to them.
22. Shower-baths with an adequate supply of hot water should be provided
near docks at which dirty or noxious cargo liable to expose the dockers to skin
contamination is frequently handled. Suitable facilities (lockers) should also be
provided to enable dockers to change their clothes near the workplace. Where
possible the use of shower-baths should be progressively extended to other
dockers.
Toilet Facilities.
23. A sufficient number of sanitary conveniences should be provided within
reasonable distance from the place of work. Suitable arrangements should be
made for dockers employed on ships not moored at a quay.
First Aid.
24. Facilities should be available at or near every dock or wharf at which
work is in progress for rapid rendering of first aid in case of accident.
25. Where work is in progress on a ship not moored at a quay, arrangements may be made for the use of ship's facilities. In that case a clear understanding should be reached in advance with a responsible ship's officer.
26. All treatment, even in emergencies, should as far as possible be administered by persons trained in first aid.
27. Arrangements should, wherever possible, be made to ensure that an
ambulance is available when necessary. If work is proceeding in a vessel not
moored at a quay, arrangements should be made to ensure that a boat can be
promptly secured to land an injured person.
28. It would be desirable, when various first-aid measures are introduced
in ports, that the provisions of the Model Code of Safety Regulations for Industrial Establishments for the Guidance of Governments and Industry1 be used as a
guide.
Dispensaries and Medical Centres.
29. Medical centres and dispensaries have in some ports rendered great
services, especially in the treatment of accident cases. The nature, scale and
functions of the medical facilities provided naturally depend on the importance
of the port.
30. Consideration might be given to the possibility, in countries where a
general health service does not exist, of making the facilities of a medical centre
or dispensary available not only to the dockers themselves but also to members
of their families.
1

Geneva, ILO, 1949 (third impression, 1962).

APPENDIX 1

241

Rehabilitation of Injured Dockers.
31. Dockers who are injured in accidents should be given access to vocational retraining centres at which they receive treatment and instruction, and, in
certain cases, accommodation, meals and travelling expenses.
32. A stay in such centres should lead, wherever practicable, to a resumption
of work in the same, or a related, occupation.
Transport Facilities.
33. Wherever necessary, arrangements should be made for suitable transport
facilities to be available for meeting the needs of the docker, especially the shift
worker, in travelling to attend calls, and in travelling to and from his work, more
particularly at times when, and in areas where, normal transport facilities are
lacking.
34. Where bicycles are a customary means of transport, covered bicycle
sheds should be provided at suitable places.
35. No charge should as a rule be made to dockers for transport within the
harbour in connection with their work. When dockers are sent to a port other
than the one they normally serve or to an exceptionally distant part of the port,
either transport should be provided or any costs incurred by the worker for the
purpose should be refunded to him.
Protective Clothing and Equipment.
36. The docker should be provided with equipment, such as masks or goggles, which he may be required by laws or regulations to wear when handling
certain cargoes. In other cases, the provision of the clothing and equipment
—which should meet certain recognised standards—at a reduced price or at cost
price or on loan should be considered.
Educational, Social and Recreational Facilities.
37. In appropriate cases, port authorities, joint committees or other appropriate bodies should organise educational, social and recreational activities, the
management of which should, as a general rule, be left to those directly interested.
Resolution (No. 66) concerning Methods of Improving
Organisation of Work and Output in Ports
The Inland Transport Committee of the International Labour Organisation,
Having been convened by the Governing Body of the International Labour
Office,
Having met at Hamburg in its Sixth Session from 11 to 22 March 1957,
Having discussed methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports on the basis of the report prepared on the subject by the International
Labour Office, and
Being convinced of the need to speed up the turn-round of shipping and to
improve efficiency in ports in the interests of shipowners, port employers, port
authorities, dockworkers, and the community as a whole ;

242

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Adopts this twenty-second day of March 1957 the following resolution:
The Governing Body of the International Labour Office is invited to communicate the suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work
and output in ports appended to this resolution to all governments of States
Members of the International Labour Organisation, with the request that these
suggestions be transmitted to port authorities, employers' and workers' organisations, and all others concerned with cargo handling in ports.
SUGGESTIONS CONCERNING METHODS OF IMPROVING
ORGANISATION OF WORK AND OUTPUT IN PORTS
INTRODUCTION

1. Circumstances vary greatly from one port to another and measures to be
taken to improve the organisation of work and output in ports vary considerably
according to the conditions obtaining in the different countries and also in the
different ports in each country. The suggestions made below concern certain
measures which might serve as guidance to port authorities, employers' and
workers' organisations, and all others who are called upon to deal with cargo
handling in ports in the different countries, each in so far as—in accordance with
the circumstances obtaining in their particular port—they may be concerned. In
making use of these suggestions it may be necessary to take into account the
administrative organisation of the port concerned, national habits and customs
and types of cargo handled.
2. It is desirable that a concentrated effort be made to introduce practicable
methods of improving organisation of work and output in ports with a view to
speeding up the turn-round of ships. A quicker turn-round of ships can make a

substantial contribution to raising general economic efficiency. This increased
productivity can and should be achieved through the use of improved methods
rather than by excessive effort. Such improvements are expected to be reflected
in better social standards, in which dockworkers should have their fair share.
LABOUR-MANAGEMENT RELATIONS

3. Sound labour-management relations based on active co-operation and
mutual trust are an essential element in any programme designed to improve the
organisation of work and output in ports.
4. Fear of unemployment, underemployment and loss of earnings is often
the cause of resistance to methods of improving organisation of work and output.
5. Schemes for the régularisation of employment of dockworkers, where
they do not already exist, should be developed along the lines of resolution
No. 25 adopted on this subject by the Inland Transport Committee at its Third
Session (Brussels, 1949). Such schemes should, where necessary, extend to the
dockworkers whether ashore or on board ship.
6. Without prejudice to any legislation or practice regarding retrenchment
benefits or similar measures, the competent authorities or employers, or both,
should take all practicable steps to ensure that methods of improving organisation
of work or the introduction of new equipment do not lead to sudden or arbitrary
dismissals from the industry nor to a permanent accentuation of the casual character of the employment. Should long-term changes in traffic handled or
changes in the organisation of work and the equipment used call for a reduction

APPENDIX

243

in the number of men included in the register of regular dockworkers, such
changes should—subject to any arrangements made under schemes for the régularisation of employment adopted on the lines of resolution No. 25 referred to
above—if possible only be made in agreement with the organisations of employers
and workers concerned but, in any case, only after consultation with them.
Every effort should be made to bring about an adjustment without recourse to
dismissals, for instance by slowing down or stopping recruitment, releasing certain
men temporarily, on their request, from the obligation to attend calls and facilitating voluntary resignation. If a further reduction is inevitable the employers'
and workers' organisations concerned should, if possible, agree on the method
of selecting those to be dismissed and on the criteria to be taken into account,
for instance seniority, family obligations, regularity of attendance and efficiency.
If, as a result of failure to agree, reference to arbitration or action by an authority
is necessary, the authority concerned should consult the employers' and workers'
organisations concerned and take their views into account to the greatest possible
extent.
7. Fear of overstrain due to overwork is at times another cause of opposition
to productivity measures. Suitable procedures regarding the adjustment of the
strength of gangs and the weight of loads to be carried by one man should be
adopted for avoiding such difficulties.
8. Free and independent organisations of employers and workers should
play a very important part in encouraging and assisting their members in achieving a quicker turn-round of ships.
9. In order that adequate attention should be paid to methods of improving
organisation of work and output in ports, including in particular its labour
aspects, it is desirable that there should be appropriate machinery, involving
consultation with the employers' and workers' organisations concerned, at the
port level and, if desired, at the national level. This machinery may, where
considered appropriate, take the form of committees consisting of representatives
of the employers' and workers' organisations concerned, or in which these organisations are equitably represented.
10. Such machinery should not duplicate the work of existing statutory
bodies or established negotiating machinery set up to deal, for instance, with conditions of employment, the administration of a dock labour scheme or the settlement of grievances.
11. Subject to the preceding paragraph, the bodies which may thus be set up
might consider, either in an over-all committee or council or by means of one or
more ad hoc subcommittees, all the problems relating to improving methods of
work and organisation in ports, including in particular—
(a) the arrangements for making manpower available at suitable times and where
needed, including the provision of suitable call stands and the suitable frequency of call times;
(b) recourse to casual labour ;
(c) work by shifts or half-shifts ;
(d) performance of work at night, on week-ends or on public holidays ;
(e) overtime ;
(f) the strength of gangs and the arrangements for dealing with incomplete
gangs ;
(g) the problems arising out of the transferability of workers, for example from
hold to hold and ship to ship, between ship and shore, and between shore
jobs ;

244

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

(h) the prompt settlement of questions arising out of the application of existing
agreements, including the determination of the piece rate applicable to particular cases, and the payment of supplementary rates for dirty or awkward
cargo, bad weather money or other similar matters ;
(i) the consequences of the introduction of new equipment ;
(j) questions of safety, health and welfare ;
(k) training.
Expeditious Settlement of Disputes or Grievances
12. Procedures for prompt settlement of grievances and disputes and, in
particular, of the rates of pay or the strength of gangs applicable to particular
cargoes and circumstances, are an essential part of a good system of industrial
relations. Where appropriate, arrangements should be made to enable representatives of the employers and workers to meet at very short notice on the spot
for the purpose. It may be necessary in a port of any size to appoint highly
qualified delegates for this purpose who have the full confidence of all concerned.
13. It will be advisable to recognise that any decision rendered in this manner is only likely to be acceptable for the particular case under consideration.
The decision may then be reported for subsequent confirmation to any body
empowered to interpret agreements and to deal with such cases. Work should
proceed pending decision, without prejudice to subsequent review of any decision
taken on the spot or to further negotiation.
Discipline
14. Maintenance of discipline is necessary to efficiency. Employers' and
workers' organisations should accept responsibility, where necessary, for ensuring
that discipline is observed by all participants, either employers or workers, according to such systems as may have been agreed upon. Any person affected is
entitled to a fair hearing.
The Position of the Gang Foreman
15. The gang foreman plays an essential part in promoting efficiency. His
position should be suitably recognised and rewarded, and he should be given the
necessary support by both sides.
Communication
16. Efficient systems of communication between all concerned, using all
suitable available media, can make a substantial contribution to better labourmanagement relations and to a better organisation of work in ports. Their main
purpose is to inform the docker on all matters relating to his conditions of
employment, trends in the demand for labour, new methods of work and their
impact on the general state of the industry and on the workers, and regarding
all discussions undertaken in joint bodies, where such exist.
THE ORGANISATION OF WORK

Allocation of Manpower
17. The most desirable solution, where practicable, is for dockworkers to be
employed on a regular basis.

APPENDIX 1

245

18. Systems of allocation should aim at ensuring that every operator is able
to obtain, when needed, the labour required in order to secure a quick turn-round
of ships, or, in case of shortage, his fair share of such labour. They should also
aim at reducing the idle shifts for the dockworkers to the lowest limit compatible
with the necessity of maintaining a number of registered dockworkers sufficient,
but not more than sufficient, to meet the needs of the port.
19. The means of achieving this aim will vary according to local traditions
and circumstances. Allocation by rotation, whilst having the advantage of ensuring to all an equal share of the work, may be a matter of particular importance
where there is unemployment or extensive underemployment ; however, the right
•of the operator to pick workers of his choice may be conducive to efficiency in
that the workers selected will include many familiar with the warehouses of that
•operator and the ships and types of cargo handled by him. Whichever method is
selected and where assembly of dockworkers is involved, allocation arrangements
should take place through suitable hiring halls, administered either by a competent
authority or by the employers' and workers' organisations separately or jointly,
with a view to preventing recourse to arbitrary methods, favouritism and other
abuses.
Availability of Dockers
20. Every effort should be made to enable dockworkers to be available when
and where needed with as little delay as possible. For this purpose central hiring
arrangements are usually required, involving the establishment of call stands suitably located and equipped.
21. Call times should be reasonably arranged, with the double objective of
minimising delay to shipping and avoiding unnecessary attendance of dockworkers.
22. Recourse to the engagement of labour outside the registration scheme
should be avoided as far as possible. In any case, such additional labour should
only be engaged after all available registered dockworkers of the category
required have been employed.
Periods of Work
23. Subject to suitable arrangements being arrived at by the parties concerned, it is desirable that work proceed on ships for as many hours a day as
possible. This may imply recourse to shift work with a number of different
starting times in the course of each day. However, no worker should be expected
to work for two successive shifts.
24. Work during the customary weekly rest period should be undertaken
only when necessary.
25. A supplementary payment should be made for work outside normal
hours.
Overtime
26. In order that undue delays should not occur it is reasonable to expect
dockworkers to perform a reasonable amount of overtime, subject to payment at
overtime rates. This is particularly important, for example, where only a relatively short period of work is needed to enable a ship to sail. Where it is clear
in advance that such overtime is likely to be needed adequate notice should be
given to the workers concerned. However, recourse to excessive overtime is
undesirable and is not conducive to efficiency.

246

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Unproductive Time
27. It is desirable that a concerted effort should be made to reduce unproductive time to a minimum. Among the many matters which may call for consideration mention may be made of the following :
(a) late starts and early knocking off;
(b) arrangements for preparatory and complementary work, for example removal
and replacement of beams and hatch covers and adjustment of gear ;
(c) interruption of work without sufficient justification owing to rain or bad
weather ;
(d) over-frequent and unsuitably timed breaks ;
(e) spelling or unauthorised absences from work, for example due to slack
supervision or covering up by fellow workers ;
(Y) cargo handling and cargo delivery so planned as to minimise delays ;
(g) careful co-ordination between activities on board ship and on shore, for
example to ensure a regular flow of slings or pallets, an adequate supply of
lighters or of vehicles on shore, and adequate co-ordination of shunting with
other handling operations ;
(h) adjustment of working periods and of breaks, including the possibility of
staggering the breaks, with a view to minimising delays.
28. Productivity can also be promoted by increased mobility of labour, for
example between hold and hold, ship and ship, ship and shore, and between
shore jobs.
29. It is also desirable that there should be agreed arrangements for greater
flexibility in regard to the strength of gangs in relation to the job and for dealing
with the problem of incomplete gangs.
30. Certain practices are detrimental to efficiency and to good labourmanagement relations. In particular—
(a) kickbacks on wages to hiring foremen or recruiting agents should not be
tolerated ;
(b) recruitment through labour contractors, whsre still practised, should be eliminated ;
(c) transfers of workers employed on a regular basis by one employer to temporary work with another employer (where the latter is not working for the
former or under him) should only be effected by agreement or, where appropriate, with the approval of a competent authority. The first employer
should not receive a commission or similar monetary reward as a result of
the arrangement.
Work Study Techniques
31. The application of work study techniques to port work, although not yet
generally advanced, holds the prospect of material assistance in determining
methods of increasing efficiency. These techniques should be explained to the
workers and should be developed with the co-operation of both operators and
dockworkers. In particular careful attention should be given, for instance, to—
(a) the elimination of unnecessary handling and unnecessary movement of goods
and men;
(b) the co-ordination of movement at each phase where goods are set down and
picked up, and particularly at points where responsibility for handling is
transferred from one operator to another, e.g. between work on ship and
work on shore ;

APPENDIX 1

247

(c) the elimination as far as practicable of unproductive time ;
(d) the determination, with due regard to the differences which occur in ships,
cargo and conditions, of reasonable standard times for the carrying out of
certain tasks as a basis for the establishment of fair wage rates, which would
take into account the breaks and rest periods necessary in the carrying out of
work involving physical effort ;
(e) the grouping of small packages through the use of pallets, containers, trailer
vehicles, reducing as far as possible the number of times each package has to
be separately handled, and the possibilities of "through-movement" methods,
by which pallet loads, unit loads or containers remain unbroken for as great
a part of their journey as possible.
Payment by Results
32. Suitable schemes of payment by results can provide a valuable incentive
to dockworkers, though account must be taken of local circumstances before
introducing them. Such schemes may either be based on a rate per ton or unit
handled, or on a bonus supplementary to straight time rates payable when the
quantity of cargo handled exceeds a previously agreed standard. The difficulty
of establishing suitable standards where cargo is very diversified is, however,
recognised. Where appropriate procedures do not exist, new wage systems should
be introduced only after the most careful study, undertaken jointly by employers
and workers, of the operation involved, with a view to determining whether it

is being carried out in the most efficient manner and to fixing a suitable standard
time for the operation.
33. The following suggestions should be borne in mind in introducing any
form of payment by results :
(a) piece-workers should always be guaranteed at least the usual time rate ; this
is important as a social safeguard and because many interruptions in the work
may occur for which the worker is not responsible ;
(b) the rates' fixed for payment by results should be such as to provide an adequate incentive above time rates;
(c) rates should not be fixed in a manner which encourages over-exertion or disregard of safety or of care in handling cargo ;
(d) consideration should be given in advance, bearing in mind the situation in
the port concerned and particularly the general nature of the cargo operations, to the need for agreed methods of dealing with interruptions to work
which occur through no fault of the worker, in such a manner that the piecework incentive may be maintained during hours actually worked on a piecework basis ; similar consideration should be given to the need for methods
of dealing with unusual peculiarities of the ship or abnormal cargoes or
stowage ;
(e) incentive payments should be made as soon as practicable after they have
been earned ;
(f) the working of excessive hours should be avoided.
Training
34. The training of dockworkers can also contribute to greater efficiency.
Training is particularly important in the case of specialist workers such as cranemen, winchmen, deckmen and tallymen, as well as in the case of foremen and
supervisors.

248

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Safety
35. The organisation of work should throughout take full account of the
need for safety, on board the ships as well as on the quayside, and work should
not be speeded up in a manner which might lead those concerned to disregard
necessary safety precautions.
Welfare
36. The provision of transport for dockers within the port, of canteens, firstaid posts and medical facilities, to which reference has been made in resolution
No. 52 concerning welfare facilities for dockworkers adopted by the Inland Transport Committee at its Fifth Session (Geneva, 1954), all contribute to ensuring
more regular attendance and a reduction of time lost by dockworkers.
THE INTRODUCTION OF NEW EQUIPMENT

37. It is desirable to accept new types of mechanical equipment, whether
they are for use on board ship or on the quayside, and new methods of work,
when they are efficient, economic and safe. It is also desirable that they should
contribute to easing the work of the dockworker and to speeding up the turnround of ships.
38. In countries which lack the capital needed for economic development,
in which wages are relatively low and in which unemployment or underemployment is widespread, it may not be economically justifiable or socially desirable to
introduce expensive equipment to the same extent as in countries with cheap
capital and relatively high wages. In economically underdeveloped countries,
therefore, attention might appropriately be concentrated in the first place on the
simpler types of equipment involving less capital and fewer maintenance problems, and which save unnecessary physical effort but displace fewer workers.
39. When new types of equipment and new methods are introduced, suitable
procedures should be established between employers and workers for making
adjustments in the strength of gangs, piece rates and labour mobility consequent
upon the introduction of such new equipment and methods.
PORT ORGANISATION

40. Many factors are involved in the turn-round of ships. Most of them
are connected with the organisation of the industry and the organisation of port
work. Attention needs to be given to all aspects of the problem, economic and
technical as well as social. Confidence that an over-all approach is being made
to the problem can greatly facilitate the finding of solutions.
41. With a view to increasing the efficiency of the port industry in relation
to matters other than labour, special attention should be paid to the following:
(a) co-ordination between the activities of all the authorities and bodies concerned with the handling of goods in ports ;
(b) co-ordination of work between ship and quay ;
(c) co-ordination between maritime and inland transport ;
(d) adjustment of timetables and methods of the administrative authorities (port,
customs and health) to the hours during which ships can be worked ;
(e) measures for improving the organisation of port services and routines, such
as previous notification of arrival of ships, advance forwarding of documen-

APPENDIX 1

249

tation, simplification of cargo marks, pooling of certain types of equipment,
loan of pallets and containers.
42. It may be desirable to establish, where they do not exist, and depending
on local conditions, co-ordinating bodies on which the various authorities and
interests concerned, including the employers' and workers' organisations, are
represented, with the task of reviewing all the problems of cargo handling in ports
and ensuring that action is being taken with regard to them.
43. The collection of statistics is important for many purposes, including
the estimation of probable future manpower requirements and the determination
of the extent of unproductive time in cargo handling and the analysis of the
reasons therefor.
44. Common services available to the whole port may greatly assist the
organisation of work and output in ports. These may, depending on local conditions, include central manpower allocation, central payment of wages, the central
administration of training and welfare activities, and joint action for the promotion of safety.
45. It is desirable that the technical and administrative aspects of cargo
handling continue to be examined at the international level through appropriate
organisations.
Technical Assistance
46. Technical assistance might usefully be made available to countries in
need of it in connection with methods of improving organisation of work and
output in ports.

APPENDIX 2
TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION
The purpose of this appendix is to provide some guidance to port authorities
or operators who wish to benefit from the possibilities of assistance under the
United Nations Development Programme in order to improve the handling of
cargo in their ports and deal with some of the related labour problems.
The costs of inland transport and cargo-handling costs in ports (including the
costs of ships' time spent in port) in many cases represent a substantial percentage
of total transportation costs of international shipments. There are possibilities of
reducing the total cost of transportation by improving port facilities and in the
establishment of new facilities. All countries should therefore give priority to
improvement of port operation and of connected inland transport facilities.
Greater efforts should be made in providing for the aforesaid purposes and to
this end international financing and aid and technical assistance should be made
available on favourable terms and conditions.1
This is the view expressed by the first United Nations Conference on Trade
and Development.
As has been shown in this report, ports now have to face considerable adaptation in many areas to be able to use new methods of handling cargo, and the
introduction of these new methods gives rise to many problems in the field of
labour. In addition, even where conventional methods of handling cargo are
retained for a considerable time to come, it is nevertheless desirable to adopt
schemes to regularise employment, to improve labour-management relations, to
raise port efficiency and to make better arrangements for the protection of the
health and safety of the docker.
As the ILO Inland Transport Committee has suggested, "technical assistance
might usefully be made available to countries in need of it in connection with
methods of improving organisation of work and output in ports".2
What are some of the possibilities of technical co-operation and other ways
of helping governments, employers and workers to overcome the labour problems
which they face if they wish to improve the passage of cargo through ports ?
The improvement of port facilities, probably involving the introduction of
new methods of cargo handling, is an important element in the industrial development of a country. International concern with these matters is—
. . . the responsibility of many bodies, whose work must be effectively co-ordinated.
The ILO, having particular responsibility for problems of industrial labour and
1
United Nations : Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and
Development (Geneva, 1964), Vol. 1, Final Act and Report (New York, 1964), p. 54.
2
Suggestions concerning methods of improving organisation of work and output in
ports, para. 46.

APPENDIX 2

251

manpower, must be enabled to make its contribution to industrial development
The ILO should continue to co-operate . . . with other agencies. This co-operation
must not become a mere matter of drawing up lines of demarcation of agency
competence ; rather, it should often take the form of joint projects integrating one
agency's work with that of others. But such co-ordination should take full
advantage of the ILO's tripartite structure and its working methods.*
It is the facilities which the International Labour Organisation offers which
are the principal subject of this appendix.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS

Submission of Projects
In accordance with a request made by the Inland Transport Committee at
its Fourth Session, the International Labour Office places its services—
. . . at the disposal of those countries in which the improvement and development
of inland transport give rise to labour problems which call for solution, in order
that such countries, being aware of the help the International Labour Organisation
is able to offer, may have recourse to its services to the largest possible extent.2
However, there are within the United Nations Development Programme, in
which the International Labour Organisation participates, well-established rules
for the submission of requests for assistance. Projects must be submitted by
governments, and the allocation of funds has to be made some time ahead. If
any port authority or other interested party wishes to receive expert advice or
other aid, it is therefore necessary for it to submit detailed proposals to its government. If the project is of a type which would require financing by the Special
Fund, in other words a major one likely to continue for several years and usually
aiming at leaving behind it an institution which will be able to carry on on its
own, a very detailed plan of operation is necessary, indicating clearly the number
of international staff required, the times at which they will be needed, and the
nature and extent of the national contribution in personnel, buildings and equipment. Even if the project is less ambitious, it is still necessary for it to be given
the requisite priority in the national programme of requests. Most governments
have on hand requests which exceed the amount which they will be able to obtain
from limited international funds, and they have therefore often to make difficult
decisions regarding priorities. Though an increasing measure of flexibility is
being introduced into the timetable for the preparation and submission of programmes, it remains most important that projects should be submitted at the
right time and through the correct procedures. This implies that interested parties
must from the start keep in close touch with the authorities in their respective
countries concerned with the preparation of these programmes. Broadly similar
considerations apply to requests for assistance under the ILO Regular Programme
1
Official Bulletin, Vol. L, No. 3, July 1967, Supplement I, International Labour
Conference, 51st Session, Geneva, 1967, Extract from the Report of the Committee
on Technical Co-operation, conclusions on industrialisation, para. 5, p. 61.
2
Idem, 20 Dec. 1951, Vol. XXXIV, No. 2, resolution (No. 45) concerning technical
assistance in inland transport, p. 95.

252

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

or other methods of financing multilateral technical co-operation programmes,
e.g. through funds-in-trust; but such requests are normally addressed by the
governments to the United Nations agency concerned, with a copy to the United
Nations Resident Representative.
Integrated Development Projects
There is an increasing tendency to aim at larger and more important projects,
covering a fairly wide field. For instance, a project might cover the whole field
of port development in a country. Such Iargsîr schemes, however, very often
have a labour component, in that they directly affect the workers. The modernisation of a port, for instance, should go hand-in-hand with new methods of
régularisation of employment; consideration should also be given to labourmanagement relations, methods of remuneration, training, safety and welfare,
where the problems raised in this report may come up for examination. This
point should be made clear from the start, in order that labour specialists may
be included in any team dealing with the project. It would normally be the task
of the International Labour Organisation to provide these experts, or to advise
on their nomination, and to ensure that the policies of the ILO are taken into
account in formulating recommendations.
Association of Employers' and Workers' Organisations with Projects
In order that the labour and management aspects of proposed projects be
brought into the picture, the employers' and workers' organisations concerned
should be closely associated with their formulation. "The participation of
employers' and workers' organisations in accordance with national practice in the
formulation of development policies and in the fixing of technical co-operation
priorities is indispensable for the success of projects."* These organisations also
need to be brought into the picture throughout the implementation of programmes, and experts sent by the ILO are under instructions to keep in touch
with them.
ILO Field Services
The International Labour Office is pursuing a policy of decentralisation by
reorganising and strengthening its field services. As a result there will be in each
region a number of experts in various fields, who may be consulted by governments. It will take time before enough experts to cover the main fields of activity
of the ILO are available in all regions, but it is hoped that they will be available
to advise and assist on such problems as manpower planning, organisation of
training, labour-management relations, conditions of work, social security and
safety. The actual facilities provided will depend on the demand for them and
on funds available.
The ILO regional and area offices are also available to assist in the formulation and presentation of technical co-operation projects, and in general "to assist
1

Official Bulletin, Vol. L, No. 3, July 1967, Supplement I, International Labour
Conference, 51st Session, Geneva, 1967, resolution concerning the International Labour
Organisation and technical co-operation, including conclusions, para. 7 of the conclusions, p. S3.

APPENDIX 2

253

requesting governments by giving them the technical advice and information
which would enable them to orient their development plans and take decisions
on priorities".l Moreover, the United Nations Development Programme Resident
Representatives in the various countries, with whom the ILO field services are
closely associated in respect of all technical co-operation matters, are also always
ready to help in the preparation of balanced and co-ordinated programmes,
which take the various aspects of an over-all project into account.
FORMS OF TECHNICAL CO-OPERATION

Port Surveys
In the course of the last few years, a number of surveys of port problems
have been undertaken by the United Nations.
One such survey was carried out in Central America, covering Costa Rica,
El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras and Nicaragua. The problem had arisen
because some governments thought that the freight rates of shipping to and from
their countries were unduly high. The results of the investigation showed that a
number of administrative problems slowed down the turn-round of ships, which
at times suffered considerable delays in order to land or take on relatively small
tonnages. Problems of port labour also came under scrutiny, and the ILO cooperated in this aspect of the survey. Similar surveys in Chile and the Congo
(Kinshasa) were carried out with ILO co-operation.
Another survey, which covered African ports 2, was carried out by an expert
assigned by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa. The origin
was once again a resolution regarding shipping rates, but the expert devoted a
substantial part of his reports to labour problems and stressed their importance.
These reports are under consideration by the United Nations Economic Commission for Africa.
In 1965 the ILO carried out a mission in West Africa for the purpose of
collecting information on various aspects of dock labour, including systems of
recruitment, training, methods of remuneration, shift work, the manning of gangs,
welfare facilities and safety and health.
The Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East has been actively
engaged in helping to reduce delays to shipping in the ports of the region and in
the general improvement of port efficiency. In 1964 the member countries of
ECAFE requested the creation of a port survey team, which began its work early
in 1965 with the co-operation of the Governments of Japan, the Netherlands and
the United Kingdom, which each provided one of the members of the team. In
view of the importance of the labour problems in the ports of the region, the
International Labour Office also provided a member. The team has been able to
survey many ports in seven countries of the region, namely Ceylon, the Republic
of China, Indonesia, Iran, Korea, Pakistan, the Philippines and Thailand.
Detailed and realistic recommendations have been made in respect of each port
visited, and these include a thorough survey of the labour practices and sugges1

Official Bulletin, Vol. L, No. 3, July 1967, loc. cit.
Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in the
Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, op. cit.
2

254

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

tions for their improvement. Many points mentioned in the present report are
based on the experience of this team. *
It is envisaged that these surveys will lead the Economic Commission for Asia
and the Far East to make recommendations on a regional basis for parallel
action by several countries.
As regards the Americas, tie Fifth Meeting of the Permanent Technical
Committee on Ports of the Organization of American States (Lima, April 1965)2
requested the Secretary-General of the OAS to make a survey of labour relations
in the ports of the American hemisphere, in collaboration with the ILO, with a
view to recommending the necessary measures for establishing effective systems
for increasing productivity through consultation and collaboration between management and labour. It is expected that this survey will be carried out in the not
too distant future.
The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development has also carried
out surveys in many countries in connection with their over-all development or
with particular requests for loans. In several cases the Bank teams had occasion
to include port facilities in their surveys, and could not do otherwise than comment on certain problems of port labour.
Surveys of this kind can be a most valuable source of advice to the governments concerned and can greatly assist in providing a realistic picture of the
present situation. They can point to the fields in which technical co-operation
could be most helpful. They would be incomplete if they did not examine the
labour situation in the ports, and if they did not take into account the consequences of any changes recommended—either in the equipment used or in the
methods of port work—for the dockers, their job opportunities and their conditions of work. That being the case, the teams undertaking such surveys should
include a person or persons knowledgeable about the labour problems involved.
The team should also be informed as to relevant international labour standards
and the suggestions made by the ILO Inland Transport Committee relevant to
port work.8 When requests for further surveys are made, it would seem desirable
that the request for them should mention the appropriateness of ILO participation.
Similarly, survey teams would be well advised to consult the employers' and
workers' organisations concerned in the countries they visit.
Port Development
Advice and assistance may be given in connection with over-all schemes of
port development. The United Nations has had occasion to deal with several
such projects, and it is to be hoped that the related labour problems will always
in future be covered.
The International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and its affiliate,
the International Development Association, have been largely concerned with
helping to finance the infrastructure necessary for economic development, of
1

T*he reports of the survey team can be released only with the consent of the
governments concerned and of the Economic Commission for Asia and the Far East.
2
Organization of American States, Permanent Technical Committee on Ports, Fifth
Meeting: Final Report, doc. GP/CIES-8 (Washington, Pan American Union, 1965).
3
See Appendix 1.

APPENDIX 2

255

which transport facilities constitute an important part. About one-third of the
Bank's loans have been made for transport, including, up to March 1967,
$450 million for port development.
It may well be that in future some of the port development projects which
receive international aid in the form of loans are of a kind which may present
additional problems for the dockers. It may then be appropriate to offer guarantees of income, earlier pensions or redundancy schemes, training in the use of
new types of equipment and possibly also retraining schemes for dockers displaced by new developments. It would be in line with much of present-day
social thinking that the capital costs incurred to finance social projects in relation
to the modernisation of a port should be regarded as being as much a part of the
cost of the whole scheme of port modernisation or development as the cost of
the equipment and construction work itself. It would therefore appear reasonable
to suggest that when port development schemes are planned their labour aspects
should be planned at the same time, and that the team which prepares the
scheme should include a member who is in a position to assess its impact on
labour, the new social projects which should go with it, and their cost. In this
way, all the various aspects could be taken into account at the same time.
Expert Advice
The most usual form of technical co-operation has been the provision of
expert advice to governments at the request of the latter.
Any government may ask for the advice of an expert in a particular field
which is relevant to thè economic and social development of its country, and a
large number of such experts have been sent out. In the matter of ports, experts
sent by the United Nations have covered a wide range of subjects, including port
development and construction, administration and operation, cargo handling and
cargo equipment maintenance.
The ILO has provided expert advice on labour problems in general, and in
particular on the régularisation of employment, conditions of work and safety.
Advisers in these fields can be sent out if the request is submitted through the
government in the usual way. Similarly, help can be provided in other related
fields, for instance labour-management relations, methods of remuneration, the
training of dockers or management development.
There is an increasing tendency for technical co-operation activities financed
through the United Nations Development Programme to be prepared within the
framework of national development plans, and for the various participating
agencies to co-ordinate their respective activities. It is therefore preferable to
give port problems their proper place within broader development plans, ensuring
that their labour aspects are covered, rather than to send out an isolated expert in
a given field outside the framework of any major project.
If, however, it proves more difficult to get an expert detached ad hoc for a
port project, other means of obtaining the advice needed may be used, and are
likely to become increasingly available.
The first is recourse to full-time regional advisers in certain fields. When,
for instance, the ILO has full-time regional advisers available on certain general
subjects, their help might be enlisted for ports as for other activities, always

256

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

provided that the ports do not present such special problems as could not be
dealt with by an expert in a particular subject but having no experience of port
work. For instance, an expert in manpower planning might have difficulty in
working out a scheme for the registration and allocation of dockers and the
evaluation of the size of the register. On the other hand, regional advisers in
labour-management relations or conditions of work (especially wages and shift
work) could provide valuable advice in these fields to ports as to other undertakings.
If the demand were felt by several governments in the same region and formulated in the proper way, there would of course be the possibility of considering
the appointment of special regional advisers on port labour questions who would
play a role similar to that of the ILO member of the port survey team in Asian
countries.
The other possibility is to make use of institutions which have been set up in
various countries as a result of technical co-operation activities.
For instance, in many countries vocational îraining centres have been set up
with help from the ILO and other institutions. They have not trained dockers,
but they can provide training for the electricians, mechanics and some other types
of craftsmen needed in the port for the maintenance of equipment. Some of
their facilities could be used for training dockers under the guidance of port
operators, though separate and specialised institutions would usually be best.
In many countries productivity centres or management development centres
have been set up with the assistance of the ILO. These might help in such
matters as the study of the prevention of unproductive time, time study as adapted
to port work, determination of tonnage rates of payment, ergonomics, analysis of
problems of the through-handling of cargo by newer methods, and the choice of
an intermediate technology appropriate to a particular port. As a rule, port
operators have not yet approached productivity centres, though the centres in
Nairobi and in Dar-es-Salaam have been consulted on some port matters and
some help was given by a management development expert in a Moroccan port.
There might, however, well be many occasions in which a port operator could
benefit from advice on particular points from experts attached to productivity
or management development centres.
In many ports the nature and traditions of the work, and especially its casual
character, have created difficulties in the way of sound labour-management relations. Given the importance of quick settlement of grievances and disputes 1,
industrial relations institutes or centres or ILO-sponsored missions might often
be in a position to advise on the setting-up of appropriate machinery for this
purpose.2
On the strength of a resolution adopted by the Inland Transport Committee,
the Director-General of the ILO agreed—
1
2

See Chapter 6.
Industrial relations institutes have been set up in many countries. The establishment of some of these has been encouraged by the emphasis which the ILO has always
given to the improvement of labour-management relations. Many of the institutes are
affiliated to the International Industrial Relations Association, which has close connections with the International Institute for Labour Studies in Geneva which the ILO
helped to set up.

APPENDIX 2

257

. . . to take into account [in developing the operational activities of the Organisation] the need to assist developing countries in building up suitable machinery for
promoting joint consultation between representatives of employers and workers
with a view to improving the well-being of the workers, the prosperity of industry
and of the community in general.1
The workers' education associations and similar bodies which exist in many
countries can assist in the general education of dockers, as well as help to provide
training to union leaders on many of the matters with which they have to deal.
Under the adult education programme of the ILO these institutes receive assistance in education in labour matters. Workers' education manuals have been
prepared on such subjects as freedom of association, collective bargaining, wages,
accident prevention and discrimination. These are published in English, French
and Spanish. They are sometimes available in Arabic, German, Hindi, Japanese
and Urdu.
Fellowships and Trainees
There are also fellowships to enable the holders to study certain problems in
countries where they have been successfully solved.
Under the United Nations Development Programme fellowships are generally awarded only as part of an over-all development project, and few exceptions
are made to this rule. The fellowships, which are usually for six months to a
year but may occasionally be shorter, enable the holder to be received in the
countries he is visiting with a carefully established programme of study.
Fellowships may be held in part at the International Centre for Advanced
Technical and Vocational Training in Turin, Italy, set up under the auspices of
the ILO. This Centre offers advanced training in a number of fields, including
the maintenance of automotive and electrical equipment. It intends to begin on
courses for foremen and management at middle and higher levels. The latter
courses would be particularly useful with respect to many ports, in view of the
desirability of improving management practices there ; some port operators might
wish to consider if their government should not be asked to request the placing
of a trainee at the Centre as part of port development and modernisation plans
or otherwise.
The International Labour Office is available to assist in the preparation of
programmes of study on management and labour matters for fellows or others
who are sent by their employing organisations at the expense of the latter, or who
are sponsored by other organisations. For instance, it has assisted in this manner
fellowship holders appointed under the Colombo Plan.
The International Association of Ports and Harbors operates a scheme under
which employees of port authorities or operators may be given a training period
by a port authority of another member country. Some of the beneficiaries of
this scheme might perhaps devote their time to the problems of labour productivity in ports and the labour problems arising in connection with new methods
of handling cargo.
1
Official Bulletin, Vol. XLIV, 1961, No. 6, Inland Transport Committee, Seventh
Session (Geneva, 1961), resolution (No. 75) concerning technical assistance in the field
of inland transport, p. 459.

258

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Reference might also be made to the "Puertos Amigos" programme set up
by the Organization of American States and the American Association of Port
Authorities to enable port personnel at all levels to receive practical on-the-job
training at other ports, and to permit the interchange of information of a practical
nature. *
The Interchange of Ideas
Much can be gained by making it possible for those concerned to participate
in the interchange of ideas on the matters dealt with in this report.
An opportunity will be offered by the Tripartite Technical Meeting on Dock
Labour which is being held under the auspices of the ILO in 1969, and it is
hoped that on this occasion recommendations regarding policy and action will
be submitted to the Governing Body of the International Labour Office, which
may decide to transmit them to the governments of all States Members of the
International Labour Organisation.
The Regional Economic Commissions of the United Nations have also provided, through their subsidiary bodies, valuable opportunities for discussion, often
leading to recommendations for action or the preparation of draft international
conventions or agreements on transport matters of interest to ports. Thus, the
Economic Commission for Europe has examined the arrangements for the combined transport of containers, the customs regime applicable to empty containers,
the transit of trucks, trailers and vans (including containers) in road transport in
its region, and many related questions. The Economic Commission for Asia
and the Far East has been actively engaged in helping to reduce delays to shipping in ports in the region and in the general improvement of port efficiency. It
sponsored the survey team to which reference has already been made. The
Economic Commission for Africa has also debated the issue of freight rates and
related matters and arranged for a preliminary survey to be made of conditions
in many African ports.
A very important Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other
Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight was held in London
in May 1967 under the auspices of the United Nations; the discussions at the
Seminar helped to bring out what the new methods of cargo handling were and
gave indications as to what their consequences might be. 2
There are also the Ports and Shipping Training Centres established by the
United Nations and financed by the Danish Government. A wide variety of
subjects have been dealt with, including mechanical equipment, hydrography and
charting, damage to and theft of cargo, dredging, the classification of ships and
port economics. Each session is attended by 25 or 30 persons from developing
countries, including port managers and directors, heads of government shipping
departments, and similar officials. The sessions may last from three to five
weeks. Papers are submitted by participants and discussed, so that a useful
exchange of information takes place. Five sessions have been held in Denmark,
1
The Puertos Amigos Program of the Organization of American States and the
American Association of Port Authorities, doc. UP/CIES-8 (Washington, Pan American
Union, 1965).
2
Report on the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and
Other Unitized Methods for the lntermodal Movement of Freight, op. cit.

APPENDIX 2

259

one in 1965 in Nigeria and one in 1967 in Peru. The ILO has participated in
these meetings since 1963, and its representative has given talks and opened
discussions on such subjects as the maritime activity of the ILO, including
technical co-operation, occupational safety and health in ports, the welfare of
dockers, productivity and work organisation in ports.
The ILO has started a programme of regional seminars on dock labour. The
first was held in Barranquilla, Colombia, in November 1968 for Latin America
and was attended by some 30 participants representing port authorities, port
employers and dockers' unions. Subjects dealt with included organisation of
work in ports, régularisation of employment, labour-management relations in
ports, social repercussions of the introduction of new cargo-handling methods,
safety, health and welfare of dockers.
The International Association of Ports and Harbors also organises seminars
and group training schemes in conjunction with the technical co-operation programmes for the Americas or for the Middle or Near East or the Colombo Plan,
but so far these have concentrated on port and harbour engineering.
FIELDS OF CO-OPERATION

The observations made above on the possibilities of technical co-operation
have already indicated some of the fields in which advice and assistance might
be provided through the International Labour Organisation, on request by governments and if the necessary funds are available. These fields are summarised here
for convenience.
Conditions of Employment of Dockers.
Organisation of work in ports, registration of dockers, decasualisation, régularisation of earnings, systems of remuneration, hours of work, composition of
gangs.
LabourrManagement Relations in Ports.
Trade unions and employers' associations, consultation and participation,
establishment of dock labour boards or joint committees, disputes and grievances,
communications.
Social Repercussions of the Introduction of Modern Methods of HandlingCargo.
Reduction of the dock labour force, stopping of recruitment, early retirement,
dismissals, efficiency in ports, maintenance of port mechanical equipment.
Dock Labour Statistics.
Establishment of modern statistics relating to the need for dock labour,
trends of port trade, modifications in port labour requirements, port accounting,
use of computers in relation to port statistics and accounting.

260

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Efficient Operation and Productivity in Ports.
Introduction of modern port management methods, training of management
personnel at all levels, efficiency in port administration and organisation, including such items as financial management, operations management and administration, office management and personnel management.
Safety, Health and Welfare of Dockers.
Safety and health in dock work, codes of practice, welfare of dockworkers,
basic health and welfare facilities (sanitary conveniences, drinking water, washing
facilities, etc.), first-aid and medical care facilities, transport facilities.
Social Security for Dockers.
Pension schemes for dockers, inducements to early retirement.
Vocational Training of Dockers.
Training facilities for supervisory personnel, foremen, drivers of mechanical
equipment, tally clerks, dockers, retraining.
*

The United Nations Development Programme, with the participation of the
ILO, offers various forms of technical co-operation covering a wide field of
subjects affecting labour in ports. It is of course necessary that the requests be
made by governments through the proper channels and that they be given the
requisite priority, being if possible presented as a part of a wider programme
of economic development. The importance of ports to national economies and
the desirability of paying proper attention to the labour aspects of the modernisation and development of ports, including the social implications of new methods
of cargo handling, should secure a sympathetic hearing for such requests.

APPENDIX 3
BIBLIOGRAPHY
The purpose of this bibliography is to provide indications of the principal
publications and documents relevant to the labour aspects of changes in the techniques of handling cargo in ports, including measures for the improvement of
efficiency and the speeding up of the turn-round of ships.
It does not claim to be complete, and the emphasis is on publications of recent
date which are of more than local interest.
Legislation and collective agreements are only occasionally mentioned, mainly
when they are particularly relevant to the introduction of a new scheme having an
important bearing on the organisation of work in ports. National safety regulations
have been excluded.
ILO PUBLICATIONS

Conventions and Recommendations, 1919-1966 (Geneva, 1966).
Maximum Permissible Weight to Be Carried by One Worker, Report VI (1), International Labour Conference, 51st Session, Geneva, 1967.
"Mechanisation Clause in New United States Dockworkers' Agreement", in International Labour Review, Vol. LXXXVI, No. 1, July 1962, pp. 42-49.
SZCZEPANIAK, Tadeusz: "Stabilisation of Dockworkers' Employment in Polish
Ports", in ibid., Vol. 90, No. 6, Dec. 1964, pp. 503-520.
Inland Transport Committee: First Session: Official Bulletin, Vol. XXX, No. 2,
15 Sep. 1947, pp. 99-103; Second Session: ibid., Vol. XXXI, No. 2, 15 Sep.
1948, pp. 90-101; Third Session: ibid., Vol. XXXII, No. 4, 15 Dec. 1949, pp.
239-254; Fourth Session: ibid., Vol. XXXIV, No. 2, 20 Dec. 1951, pp. 87-99;
Fifth Session: ibid., Vol. XXXVII, No. 2,15 Sep. 1954, pp. 31-64; Sixth Session:
ibid., Vol. XL, No. 3, 1957, pp. 183-214; Seventh Session: ibid., Vol. XLIV,
No. 6, 1961, pp. 413-461; Eighth Session: ibid., Vol. L, No. 2, Apr. 1967, pp.
225-264.
Idem, Third Session, 1949: Report II: Decasualisation of Dock Labour.
Idem, Fifth Session, 1954: Report I: Item 1 (a) and (b): General Report—Effect
Given to the Conclusions of the Previous Sessions: Chapter 4: Ports; Item 1 (c) :
General Report—Recent Events and Developments in Inland Transport: Chapter
III: Work in Ports; Report III: Welfare Facilities for Dock Workers.
Idem, Sixth Session, 1957: Report I: Item 1 (a) and (b): General Report—Effect
Given to the Conclusions of the Previous Sessions: Part I, Chapter IV, and Part II,
Chapter V: Resolutions concerning docks; Report II: Methods of Improving
Organisation of Work and Output in Ports.
Idem, Seventh Session, 1961: Report I: General Report: Chapter II: Labour Conditions in Ports.

262

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Idem, Eighth Session, 1966: Report I: Item 1 (a) and (b): General Report—Effect
Given to the Conclusions of the Previous Sessions : Chapter III : Labour Conditions
in Ports; Item 1 (c) : General Report—Recent Events and Developments in
Inland Transport: Chapter IV: Dock Labour Problems in Developing Countries.
Tripartite Technical Meeting on Dock Labour, 1969: Report I: Social Repercussions
of the Introduction of Unit-Lead Systems (Pallets, Containers, Roll-onjRoll-off,
LASH), with Special Reference to Régularisation of Employment and Stabilisation
of Earnings.
Idem, Report II: Vocational Training and Retraining of Dockworkers.
Idem, Report III: Safety, Health and Welfare of Dockworkers.
Safety and Health in Dock Work, ILO Codes of Practice (Geneva, 1967).
OTHER PUBLICATIONS

ARGIROFFO, Enrico : Social Repercussions of the Introduction of Unit-Load Systems,
paper submitted to the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight
(London, 1967) (mimeographed).
BACKX, J. Ph., and EARLE, C : "Cargo Handling", in ICHCA Monthly Journal
(London), Mar. 1967.
Canada Department of Labour: Report of the Inquiry Commission on the St. Lawrence
Ports (Ottawa, 1967) (mimeographed).
CHAUDHURI, P. C : Ports and Port Workers (New Delhi, Ministry of Transport
and Communications, 1957).
Containerization, Supplement to the Journal of Commerce (New York), 1 May 1967.
Department of Labor (United States): Manpower Utilization—Job Security in the
Longshore Industry : Report and Findings of the Department of Labor (separate
mimeographed studies on each of the major ports in the United States) (Washington, 1964).
EVANS, Archibald A. : "Régularisation of Seasonal and Casual Employment-Casual
Labour Markets—Docks", in OECD: Proceedings of the International Conference on Employment Stabilization in a Growth Economy (Munich, 1967) (in
preparation).
GOLDBERG, Joseph: "Containerization as a Force for Change on the Waterfront",
in Monthly Labor Review (Washington, DC), Vol. 91, No. 1, Jan. 1968.
GROOM, Phyllis: "Hiring Practices for Longshoremen", in Monthly Labor Review
(Washington, DC), Vol. 88, No. 11, Nov. 1965.
Government of India: Report of the Dock Workers (Regulation of Employment)
Enquiry Committee (1955) (New Delhi, Government of India Press, 1956).
International Association of Ports and Harbors: papers submitted to the Fifth
Conference (Tokyo, 1967) and published by the Association in Tokyo, in particular Ten-Minute Speeches.
International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union: Information and Union
Comment on the 1960 Mechanization and Modernization Fund Agreement between
the Longshoremen of the Pacific Coast and the Steamship and Stevedoring
Employers (San Francisco, I960).
International Transport Workers' Federation : Report on Marine Containers (London,
1966) (mimeographed).
Idem, Containerization—An International Report on the Social and Economic Consequences of Container Traffic (London, 1968).

APPENDIX 3

263

Idem, Statement on the Social and Trade Union Consequences of Containerization
(London, 1968).
JENSEN, Vernon H.: "Decasualization of Employment on the New York Waterfront", in Industrial and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 11, No. 4, July 1958,
pp. 534-550.
Idem, Hiring of Dock Workers and Employment Practices in the Ports of New York,
Liverpool, London, Rotterdam and Marseilles (Cambridge, Mass., Harvard
University Press, 1964).
Idem, "Computer Hiring of Dock Workers in the Port of New York", in Industrial
and Labor Relations Review, Vol. 20, No. 3, Apr. 1967, pp. 414-432.
KLUGMANN, Werner (ed.): Facts and Figures about the Port of Hamburg (Hamburg,
Verlag OKIS Dr. K. J. Sattelmair, 1966), especially pp. 106-107.
KOSSORIS, Max D.: "Working Rules in West Coast Longshoring", in Monthly
Labor Review (Washington, DC), Vol. 84, No. 1, Jan. 1961.
Idem, "1966 West Coast Longshore Negotiations", in ibid., Vol. 89, No. 10, Oct.
1966.
LOH HENG KEE: "Introduction of a Two-Shift System", in Ports and Harbors (Tokyo,
International Association of Ports and Harbors), Jan.-Mar. 1967, Vol. 12, No. 1,
pp. 26-30.
Ministry of Labour (United Kingdom) : Final Report of the Committee of Inquiry
under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin into Certain Matters concerning the Port Transport
Industry, Cmnd. 2734 (London, HMSO, 1965).
Idem, Report of the Committee of Inquiry under the Rt. Hon. Lord Devlin into the
Wages Structure and Level of Pay for Dockworkers, Cmnd. 3104 (London,
HMSO, 1966).
Ministry of Transport (United Kingdom): Report of the Committee of Inquiry into
the Major Ports of Great Britain, Cmnd. 1824 (London, HMSO, 1962).
Idem, Licensing of Port Employers—Memorandum to Licensing Authorities on Their
Functions under the Docks and Harbours Act, 1966 (London, 1966).
National Academy of Sciences (United States), National Research Council, Maritime
Cargo Transportation Conference: San Francisco Port Study (Washington,
DC, 1964).
National Commission on Labour (India): Report of the Study Group for Ports and
Docks (Delhi, Samrat Press, 1968).
National Dock Labour Board (United Kingdom): Training of Dock Workers—
Great Britain (London, 1966).
National Joint Council for the Port Transport Industry (United Kingdom) : National
Policy Directive on the Modernisation of the Docks Industry (London, 1965).
Idem, Provisional Agreement Effective 18 September 1967 (mimeographed).;
National Ports Council (United Kingdom): North Atlantic Container Experiment,
1966 (in conjunction with the United States Department of Commerce, Maritime Administration, National Facilitation Committee) (London, 1966).
Idem, Training Schemes for the Port Transport Industry (London, 1967).
New York Shipping Association and International Longshoremen's Association:
Memorandum of Settlement, 20 Apr. 1965.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development: Productivity in Ports:
Final Report on the Conference Held in Copenhagen from 1 to 4 October 1957.

264

TECHNICAL AND SOCIAL CHANGES IN PORTS

Organization of American States: Problems of Ports in Latin America and the Port
Programs of the Organization of American States, topics II and III, Second
Inter-American Port and Harbor Conference (Mar del Plata, 1963) (Washington,
DC, Pan American Union, 1962), OEA/Ser. K/X.2.1.
Pacific Maritime Association and International Longshoremen's and Warehousemen's Union: Memorandum of Agreement on Mechanization and Modernization,
18 Oct. 1960.
Port of New York Authority: Via Port of New York (New York) Vol. 17, Oct.Nov. 1965, Nos. 10-11, Special Issue: Transatlantic Transport Prévue.
Idem, Container Shipping: Full Ahead (New York, 1967).
Port of Singapore Authority: What Is Shift Work at the Wharves? (Singapore, 1964).
Ross, Philip: "Distribution of Power within the ILWU and the ILA", in Monthly
Labor Review (Washington, DC), Vol. 91, No. 1, Jan. 1968, p. 5.
ST. SURE, J. Paul, and BRIDGES, Harry: "The US West Coast Agreement", in
Fairplay Shipping Journal (London), 13 May 1965.
SCHEEPVAART VEREENIGING NOORD: Organisation of Labour, Working Conditions
and Welfare (Amsterdam, 1966) (mimeographed).
Idem, Promoting Personnel Management (Amsterdam, 1967) (mimeographed).
Idem, Training Dock Workers (Amsterdam, 1967) (mimeographed).
Shipping—The Next 100 F<?ar/(London, J. & J. Denholm Ltd., 1967).
State of Singapore : Report of the Commission of Inquiry into the System of Contract
Labour in Singapore (Singapore, Government Printer, 1960).
United Nations, Department of Economic and Social Affairs: An Examination of
Some Aspects of the Unit-Load System of Cargo Shipments: Application to
Developing Countries (New York, 1966), Sales No. 66. VIII.2, ST/ECA/93
(mimeographed).
Idem, Department of Economic and Social Affairs: The Turn-Around Time of Ships
in Port (New York, 1967), Sales No. 67. VIII.5, ST/ECA/97 (mimeographed).!
Idem, Economic and Social Council, Economic Commission for Africa: A Report
on a Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in
the Seaborne Trade of Africa, Part I, West Africa (New York, 1965), E/CN.14
TRANS/27 (mimeographed).
Idem, Preliminary Survey of Factors Contributing to the Level of Freight Rates in
the Seaborne Trade of Africa and Related Matters, Part II, The East African
Sub-Region (including Madagascar and the Mascarene Islands) (New York,
1966), E/CN.14 TRANS/27 (mimeographed).
Idem, Proceedings of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development
(Geneva, 23 March-16 June 1964), Vol. I: Final Act and Report; Vol. V:
Financing and Invisibles : Institutional Arrangements (New York, 1964).
Idem, Report on the United Nations Interregional Seminar on Containerization and
Other Unitized Methods for the Intermodal Movement of Freight (New York,
1968), ST/TAO/Ser.C/102 (mimeographed).
Idem, Technical Assistance Administration : Maritime Transport in Central America
(New York, 1955), TAA/LAT/5 (mimeographed).
Waterfront Industry Tribunal (New Zealand): General Principal Order No. 247 as
to Conditions of Work on the New Zealand Waterfront, 18 Oct. 1965.