The union claims ICTSI’s behaviour in this ‘effort to force equipment operators to operate equipment in a manner that conflicts with safety standards’ is also currently under investigation by the U.S. Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), which issued a Notice of Alleged Safety or Health Hazards against ICTSI and held an initial hearing last week. If the ALJ recommendation is adopted by the NLRB and then enforced in court, the latest ALJ decision would force therefore attempt to have workers operate cranes in a manner that is in direct conflict with industry and OSHA safety standards. Considering the fine incurred by ICTSI earlier this year for 18 breaches of health and safety regulations this is likely to be taken very seriously. ILWU’s Coast Committeeman Leal Sundet, said:“Basically, ICTSI has successfully duped the Board into employing its Administrative Law Judges for the purposes of sanctioning ICTSI’s abuse of the safety standards that have been developed over decades and are designed to protect the men and women who risk their lives daily in this dangerous occupation. ICTSI arbitrated complaints of slowdowns ten times during the nine months that this latest ALJ decision covers and ILWU Local 8 won eight times, this ALJ ignored it.
“Last week, an industry arbitrator told ICTSI that their position on operating in bypass mode was a threat to safety and a violation of our collective bargaining agreement. The ALJ’s preliminary decision says we should operate in bypass mode, risk our lives and the lives of others, lifting cargo with a crane higher than the cranes established maximum lift capacity. I have to hand it to ICTSI, it’s a pretty clever use of the Board as a hammer on working people here in the US.”
The ILWU filed exceptions to the first ALJ decision, which remains pending and non-binding. The ILWU says it will file exceptions to the latest ALJ decision, which is also non-binding and that it believes that it will be years until there is a final outcome in this matter. Unfortunately we can’t see anyone arguing that particular point.