Hahn, brinkmanship, and recovery

Ships in queue

The Mayor is the highest authority. And rightfully so, he is “elected by” and “held accountable to” the citizens. No doubt, the citizens will take care of the Mayor. However, if we fail to hold EVERY city official accountable, we will propagate the same problems again and again.

Recall the new city Charter that expanded mayoral power to make exempt appointments and to transfer loyalists into strategic positions, all of whom serve at the pleasure of their appointee. Each mayoral appointment makes decisions in the Mayor's interest. Of course, there is a Board review and approval process – of more mayoral appointees. It is easy to see this elaborate rubber-stamping process is to obscure what most know as a simple quid pro quo arrangement. In the old days, we found this arrangement led to corruption. We called it the “spoils system” and responsible civic leaders developed the “Civil Service System” to combat it.

Civil Service has been eroding for years. The changes to the Charter made them official. The changes enacted during the previous administration were exploited in this administration. The spoils system was reestablished through minion-minded appointments to the city’s oversight and policy-making bodies. The fruits of this administration in this environment (vesting too much authority in the mayor) have led to a brinkmanship pursuit of special interests – to the point of corruption and chaos.

It would be a mistake for citizens to focus only on the mayor. There is an old axiom in business: “First rate managers, hire first rate managers. Second rate managers hire third rate minions.” The truth of this axiom can be seen throughout the city in ineffective boondoggle political marketing efforts at DWP: Nobody uses the electric vehicle charging stations. Did they finally get Lopez Canyon landfill generation system to work? How about the high-visibility photo-voltaic system that has to be plugged in to line power in order to function? Anthony Office Building condemned for mold and donated to the school district. Pasadena Test Lab project is way over budget. These examples can be seen in airports and harbor, too.

Running electricity to power cargo ships waiting to be unloaded to reduce pollution is not a solution. It merely addresses a symptom of mismanagement and mayoral attempts at diversion. Yes, ships pollute. However, the real problem is the ships are taking too long to unload and their engines plume tons of smoke waiting to be unloaded. We don’t need to pay for high-voltage water-proof extension cords. In case you don’t know, water and electricity are not a good mix.

Notwithstanding mayoral serfs have paid millions to spin-masters and consultants to say otherwise, harbor managers need to eliminate one very big bottleneck. The bottleneck is not technology or infrastructure – we rebuilt the harbor, remember? The real problem is a conflict of interest. And here is how it works: The union objective is to control the terms and conditions of labor. The mayor and his minions are a reflection of that conflicted interest. Artificially constrained labor creates the bottleneck. The bottleneck justifies outrageous wages, benefits, control, and influence for union gate keepers. Mayoral homage justifies efforts to keep it that way – protect the concession. Ultimately, the price of this boondoggle is borne by the consumer and the citizens alike.

The simple solution, of course, would be to employ labor resources required to meet the average harbor demand. Recognize that labor is a market-driven supply-vs.-demand commodity. Hold overall total labor expense constant – no net change. Propose an across the board top-to-bottom percentage-based wage and/or benefit cut to pay for the additional labor necessary to maximize utilization of recent investment in harbor infrastructure and technology. Of course labor is not going to like this proposal at all. In response, focus employees on the solution by inviting them to minimize the cuts through viable innovation and changes in existing policies that accomplish the same end.

Just to give you some idea of how out of whack we are here. The average annual wage in Los Angeles is $44,000 (derived from the 2nd quarter 2004 U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reports for Los Angeles – http://www.bls.gov/news.release/cewqtr.toc.html). Notwithstanding the wages of harbor supervision and management, an “entry-level” dockworker wage is 33 percent higher than the average wage earner in Los Angeles. August 2004 Iww.org reported that there were over 250,000 applicants for 3,000 casual entry level dockworker jobs paying $28.00 an hour (http://lists.iww.org/pipermail/iww-news/2004-August/006095.html). We could have double the amount of employees at half the wage ($14 per hour) and still have a 40 to 1 applicant to job ratio. It would surely put a dent in unemployment. I’d venture to say it would reduce crime too.

Our present course of idling ships, containers, cranes, railcars and trucks is literally watching our investment and resources go up in smoke. Our port should be a first choice among other developing west coast ports. Ships are already rerouting through other U.S. ports. It is just a matter of time before NAFTA permits viable competitive alternatives around Los Angeles and through U.S. borders. If Mexico can unload a ship in three days and truckers can get those containers to destination in one or two days, no shipper will wait in the harbor for eight. Work transferred to other ports is the same as handing over revenue streams to our competitors forever. If we fail to improve the present situation, our competitors will use the revenues to pay for further development, improvement, and growth. Our services have grown so self-serving, costly, and inefficient that we are fostering our own extinction.

If it were just a matter of clearing the smoke, a viable solution would be to start dismantling the piers and cranes and shipping them to Mexico. At least we will recoup some of our harbor infrastructure development investment. Shippers will find more cost-efficient avenues to unload their ships. Transporters will get goods to market faster. Consumers will pay less. And consequently the ships will not be waiting in the harbor spewing tons of pollutants.

Of course there is a lot of revenue coming through the port, airports and DWP and it is in our best community interest to keep it that way. The longer-sighted solution should focus on keeping the business here through efficiency, cost-effectiveness, and focus on the citizens (the stockholders and customers).

The interim transition is likened to dealing with any infestation of weeds, pests, or vermin, we need to be thorough and resolute else they grow back. Hold officials accountable from the mayor on down through his minions. The results of illegitimate management appointments demonstrates the old union adage “a manger is a manager is a manager” is not true. Hold these illegitimate managers accountable. Remove officials that have mismanaged city resources and have not acted in a manner serving in the public best interest. Re-establish the safeguards in the Charter, and ultimately establish a new cost-effective mutually-beneficial equilibrium for labor, management, and the citizens at large with a focus on the greater public good.

Your thoughts?