whether

whether a number of laws weren't broken by the port administration?


by Steve Martinot
August 20, 2014

Here's something else that I think we need to look into.

With respect to the return of the boat to Oakland, I think we should look into whether a number of laws weren't broken by the port administration. There were two elements of collusion that could amount to malfeasance. The first is that the port listed the ships next destination, knowing that it was not going there, but was to return to a different berth 4 hours later. The second was assigning two work crews to a different ship, and then reassigning one of them to the Zim right after it docked, as a way of doing an end run around any possible pickets that had followed the ships return to port.

The port belongs to the city of Oakland. The community that picketed the ship were in large part Oakland residents, or community members. So on top of the police illegally prohibiting a legal picket line, the city through that agency has acting in direct confrontation with a sentiment of its own community. Whatever the by-laws or rules of the port are, I have a feeling they violated something with their duplicity and collusion. In addition, by assigning the two crews to a ship not being picketed, and then reassigning one of those crews to the Zim, the port was intentionally acting for the shipping line against the union's clearly expressed sentiment with respect to this ship. Whatever excuse the union had to use not to cross, they are part of the Oakland community, being done dirty by the city of Oakland.

STEVE MARTINOT