Maritime Union of New Zealand

The Maritime Union says the announcement of a new extended international shipping service at the Ports of Auckland is great news.

An expanded service operated by global shipping lines OOCL and CMA CGM has been announced as part of its ANZEX service covering the New Zealand and Far East markets, that will boost shipping calls in Auckland.

Maritime Union National President Garry Parsloe says the decision is a vote of confidence in the port.

He says it reinforces the case made by the New Zealand Herald in a recent editorial that occasional labour disputes were an “improbable” factor for global shipping lines deciding their ports of call.

Mr Parsloe says it was unusual that the Maritime Union was having to welcome the new service, since Ports of Auckland management had been mute on the positive development.

“Ports of Auckland CEO Tony Gibson’s bad news media machine has spent the last month bagging his own port, criticizing the workforce, saying its productivity is no good, praising up his competition and going out to bat for Maersk. But when they get some good news, they go all quiet. It’s like they want to promote all the negative stuff and ignore the successes.”

Mr Parsloe says the extended shipping service is a great boost for the Ports of Auckland and proved that the port had an excellent future.

He says that the announcement could be embarrassing for the Ports of Auckland CEO, given his recent comments that blamed the Maritime Union for loss of shipping calls at the port.

“However a little personal embarrassment is not important compared to the big picture that Ports of Auckland continues to attract new shipping and this reflects well on the port and its workforce.”

Mr Parsloe says he hopes that management would now concentrate on a successful conclusion to current employment negotiations rather than promoting non-issues.

The Maritime Union has dismissed comments by global shipping line Maersk about the merger of Port of Lyttelton and Port of Otago.

The two ports announced a planned merger of operations yesterday, subject to approval by the Chamber of Commerce.

Maersk New Zealand managing director Julian Bevis was reported today as saying he had concerns about the “dominance” of the new port structure and how this would affect prices, services and market competition.

Mr Fleetwood says it is hard to take such concerns with a straight face.

“Maersk is a massive operation, the world’s largest shipping and container terminal conglomerate, and they must really be short of things to worry about if this is all they can come up with.”

He says that Maersk’s ongoing global growth through mergers and acquisitions indicated that they had no concerns with any effect on competition by their own operations.

Mr Fleetwood says the goal of any capitalist corporate like Maersk was to dominate the market and reduce their risk and exposure to competition.

“Let’s face it, the reality is that they are the ones dominating the market and threatening competition, not two ports in the South Island of New Zealand.”

Mr Fleetwood says the problem with New Zealand ports was the exact opposite of Mr Bevis’ claims.

“New Zealand ports have long been played off against each other by powerful shipping companies, and even large local corporates such as Fonterra.”

This has resulted in serious disruption to regional ports, which had many negative implications for New Zealand’s economy and social stability.

Mr Fleetwood says the Maritime Union was cautiously optimistic about the merger between Port of Lyttelton and Port of Otago.

“Obviously it is early days, but ports working together like this could have benefits, as long as it does not lead to any regional ports being undermined.”

He says the Union would like to see ports remain under public ownership, but also come under some form of national co-ordination, a concept which the Union calls “Kiwiport.”

“Ports are not just another business, they are key infrastructure, and the gateway for New Zealand exports and imports. They need to be operated in the national interest.”

The Maritime Union had been active in the Keep Our Port Public campaign in 2006 during an unsuccessful attempt to part-privatize Port of Lyttelton through a deal with global terminal operator Hutchison.

The Maritime Union’s comments on the effect on ports of decisions by Fonterra and shipping companies have featured widely in the news.

TVNZ reports that “the Maritime Union of New Zealand is calling for national co-ordination of port strategy, arguing that Fonterra is exerting such power as a customer it is effectively rationalising the port industry.”

The Taranaki Daily News writes that “Zealand’s waterfront workers and seafarers have savaged Fonterra’s decision to drop Port Taranaki, warning it has the potential to ‘rip the guts out’ of the port” following a “a bombshell decision last week, the dairy giant said it would be railing Whareroa product to Auckland and Tauranga instead.”

The Maritime Union says Fonterra’s decision to stop shipping containerized exports through Port Taranaki and Port Timaru was an example of how entire regional economies within New Zealand were being disrupted.

The recent announcement by Fonterra means the loss of 25,000 boxes of cargo to Port Taranaki in New Plymouth, and the loss of 24,000 boxes to Port Timaru annually.

Maritime Union General Secretary Trevor Hanson says the “overnight decisions” by Fonterra and major shipping companies are harming regional communities and regional ports through a process of “destructive competition” where ports experienced major and unpredictable changes in shipments.

“We have a situation where a major producer Fonterra and global shipping lines are working together for their own interests, but their decisions are wreaking havoc on ports and port communities which are subsidizing the profits of these conglomerates.”

Mr Hanson says the losers in the game are New Zealand ports, which were driven by short-sighted parochial competition and were played off against one another.

“It is a crazy situation. There needs to be oversight and regulation so we have a planned port industry that has stability rather than the massive waste of resources that goes into duplicating infrastructure and machinery for the sake of destructive competition, and the instability that it creates for skilled employment in New Zealand ports.”

He says the Union is arguing for a “KiwiPort” concept, where ports were integrated and nationally co-ordinated with a level of public ownership.

“Ports are New Zealand’s trading connection with the world, and as essential national infrastructure they are far too important to be left open to the short-term manipulations of private corporations.”

Mr Hanson says the big catch cry in the industry for the last 15 years is that smaller regional ports will work with major hub ports to gain efficiencies.

“The recent announcement is a complete change of direction.”

He says Port Taranaki and the Port of Timaru are close to production areas, whereas goods would now be sent hundreds of kilometres away by rail.

“The cost to the Port Taranaki is horrendous. This port when it was advised of the introduction of “4100 type” container ships to New Zealand went ahead and expended $20 million to deepen the port in order to accommodate these vessels.”

Mr Hanson says since port reform in the late 1980s, successive Governments have had a “hands off” approach to ports which has led to an unstable industry.

“There are heavy repercussions for the regions of New Zealand. Ports are surrounded by infrastructure that require the services of ports, ports have invested heavily in plant and port modifications to service container exports from their region, and business decisions in the regions are made on the basis of both these ports in full operational mode.”

But when companies that had virtual monopolies on shipments made overnight decisions that could “rip the guts” out of ports, it was impossible to run a rational long-term industry.

Mr Hanson says because of the dominant position of a company like Fonterra, it was immune to criticism as it could literally hold ports to ransom.

“What we are seeing is the destructive rationalisation of New Zealand ports regardless of national interest, secure jobs, economic development and stable regional communities, to suit global shipping companies and the short term interests of a dairy conglomerate.”