# Unions and Bias
**URL:** https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354
**Category:** Unbounded
**Created:** [October 12, 2021, 6:18pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354 "2021-10-12T18:18:41Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 12, 2021, 6:18pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/1 "2021-10-12T18:18:41Z")
**Topic Summary:** Can you spot the bias in this tweet? [https://twitter.com/zackkanter/status/1447376938805432321](https://twitter.com/zackkanter/status/1447376938805432321)
**Goal:** See if others can/will spot issue.
**Why are you posting this in Unbounded?** I like goal-relevant criticism.
**Do you want unbounded criticism? (A criticism is a reason that an idea decisively fails at a goal. Criticism can be about anything relevant to goal success, including methods, meta, context or tangents. If you think a line of discussion isn’t worth focusing attention on, that is a disagreement with the person who posted it, which can be discussed.)** Yes.
* * *
The tweet:
[Zack Kanter (zackkanter.edi)
@zackkanter](https://twitter.com/zackkanter)
> The ““supply chain crisis”” is a clever rebrand. It makes it seem like there are grand exogenous forces at work rather than the unions holding ports for ransom while dozens of ships pile up, working just 2 shifts with a 2 hour break in between, the country at their mercy.
>
> > Before any changes this coming week, the longshore routine at the ports involve two shifts: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 3 a.m. An overnight shift of five hours is available, but it is up to 50% more expensive and rarely used, say liner and terminal operators who foot the bill. Cargo pickups on Saturday are also rare, being charged as premium shifts, and there is no work on Sundays.
> >
> > The International Longshore and Warehouse Union, which represents the dockworkers, said its members would work a third shift or on weekends, but the pileup of containers must first be fetched out of the port, so there is space to unload more from ships.
---
### Author:  [@JustinCEO](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/JustinCEO)
#### Post date: [October 12, 2021, 8:57pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/2 "2021-10-12T20:57:33Z")
From the image in the tweet:
> The International Longshore and Warehouse
> Union, which represents the dockworkers, said
> its members would work a third shift or on
> weekends, but the pileup of containers must
> first be fetched out of the port, so there is
> space to unload more from ships.
So the tweeter is blaming the unions and saying they’re “holding ports for ransom” and have “the country at their mercy”, but it seems like the union is actually willing to work extra if the logistical problem of the piled up containers is resolved.
---
### Author:  [@alanforr](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/alanforr)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 7:13am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/3 "2021-10-13T07:13:43Z")
The tweet sez:
> The ““supply chain crisis”” is a clever rebrand. It makes it seem like there are grand exogenous forces at work rather than the unions holding ports for ransom while dozens of ships pile up, working just 2 shifts with a 2 hour break in between, the country at their mercy.
Other text shown in the tweet sez:
> Before any changes this coming week, the longshore routine at the ports involve two shifts: 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. and 6 p.m. to 3 a.m.
This sounds like their working patterns haven’t changed from what they were like before the supply chain issues started. If they’re just working the same way as before, then why shouldn’t they renegotiate if their employers want a change? Maybe there are reasons why they don’t want to change: working in the dark might be more dangerous.
---
### Author:  [@alanforr](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/alanforr)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 7:23am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/4 "2021-10-13T07:23:45Z")
Also the tweet doesn’t link to the source of the quote so we don’t know any information that might put the problem in context.
---
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 7:30am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/5 "2021-10-13T07:30:31Z")
> [@alanforr](#):
>
> If they’re just working the same way as before, then why shouldn’t they renegotiate if their employers want a change?
I don’t think you read closely? There is no need to renegotiate. The information in the tweet already mentions pre-existing options specified in the contract due to past negotiation. Can you find that if you look again?
> [@alanforr](#):
>
> Also the tweet doesn’t link to the source of the quote so we don’t know any information that might put the problem in context.
Probably googlable but I didn’t try because I thought it was notable that the information the tweeter provided as evidence refuted his own position.
---
### Author:  [@alanforr](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/alanforr)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 7:38am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/6 "2021-10-13T07:38:05Z")
> I don’t think you read closely? There is no need to renegotiate. The information in the tweet already mentions pre-existing options specified in the contract due to past negotiation. Can you find that if you look again?
The material quoted in the tweet mentions an overnight shift.
---
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 7:54am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/7 "2021-10-13T07:54:02Z")
Yes and another type of extra shift too!
Any idea why that isn’t being used?
The tweeter seems to think it’s because the unions are evil.
---
### Author:  [@alanforr](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/alanforr)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 9:12am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/8 "2021-10-13T09:12:48Z")
> [@Elliot](#):
>
> Yes and another type of extra shift too!
>
> Any idea why that isn’t being used?
>
> The tweeter seems to think it’s because the unions are evil.
They might want more pay cuz of inflation. There might be some other change of conditions, like if lots of stuff is building up on the dock that might make their work more dangerous.
---
### Author:  [@alanforr](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/alanforr)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 2:24pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/9 "2021-10-13T14:24:03Z")
The material quoted in the tweet sez stuff is building up on the dock, so that’s the union’s stated problem.
---
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 6:20pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/10 "2021-10-13T18:20:37Z")
> [@alanforr](#):
>
> They might want more pay cuz of inflation.
You’re just guessing instead of using the information tweeted?
---
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 6:21pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/11 "2021-10-13T18:21:11Z")
> [@alanforr](#):
>
> The material quoted in the tweet sez stuff is building up on the dock, so that’s the union’s stated problem.
Does that seem reasonable to you?
---
### Author:  [@alanforr](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/alanforr)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 8:31pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/12 "2021-10-13T20:31:33Z")
> [@Elliot](#):
>
> > [@alanforr](#):
> >
> > The material quoted in the tweet sez stuff is building up on the dock, so that’s the union’s stated problem.
>
> Does that seem reasonable to you?
If they work an additional shift they will have more time to move stuff but more stuff might come in. The workers could prioritise moving stuff off the dock more on the extra shift to make their work safer until the situation was improved. So I don’t see how refusing to work the extra shift makes the situation worse and it could make the situation better. So their stated reason doesn’t make sense.
---
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 8:34pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/13 "2021-10-13T20:34:42Z")
> [@alanforr](#):
>
> If they work an additional shift they will have more time to move stuff but more stuff might come in.
I don’t think the dock workers move the stuff out of the way to enable unloading more. I think they unload it but have limited places to put it, e.g. dock warehouses or areas of ground. Then other people, e.g. truckers, have to do the next step and take it away from the port.
---
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 8:36pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/14 "2021-10-13T20:36:42Z")
> [@alanforr](#):
>
> but more stuff might come in
What? Might? There is a backlog. There’s a queue of ships waiting with stuff they want to unload.
---
### Author:  [@alanforr](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/alanforr)
#### Post date: [October 13, 2021, 8:47pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/15 "2021-10-13T20:47:51Z")
> [@Elliot](#):
>
> > [@alanforr](#):
> >
> > If they work an additional shift they will have more time to move stuff but more stuff might come in.
>
> I don’t think the dock workers move the stuff out of the way to enable unloading more. I think they unload it but have limited places to put it, e.g. dock warehouses or areas of ground. Then other people, e.g. truckers, have to do the next step and take it away from the port.
If there is a truck shortage and the trucks are needed to unload the dock, then the trucks are the bottleneck not the dockers, so their stated reason for not working the extra shift makes sense.
> [@Elliot](#):
>
> > [@alanforr](#):
> >
> > but more stuff might come in
>
> What? Might? There is a backlog. There’s a queue of ships waiting with stuff they want to unload.
The stuff on the ship doesn’t go onto the dock until the dockers put it there. I thought that if there was something the dockers could do to reduce the amount of stuff on the dock they could choose to prioritise that over unloading the ships.
---
### Author:  [@Lebowski](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Lebowski)
#### Post date: [October 15, 2021, 3:21am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/16 "2021-10-15T03:21:59Z")
I think the bias is in presuming that the presence of extra ships to be unloaded obligates the union members to work extra without any further agreement from the people who pay them, and them failing to unilaterally do so amounts to “holding ports for ransom”.
---
### Author:  [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)
#### Post date: [October 15, 2021, 3:45am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/17 "2021-10-15T03:45:37Z")
What? It says in the tweeted information that no further agreement is needed:
1. There is already a written, contractual agreement that covers working more.
2. The union already said they are willing to work more.
---
### Author:  [@Lebowski](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Lebowski)
#### Post date: [October 15, 2021, 4:58pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/18 "2021-10-15T16:58:37Z")
> [@Elliot](#):
>
> - There is already a written, contractual agreement that covers working more.
> - The union already said they are willing to work more.
I think agreement by the employers to authorize the extra work is also necessary.
---
### Author:  [@ingracke](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/ingracke)
#### Post date: [October 16, 2021, 2:24am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/19 "2021-10-16T02:24:46Z")
> [@Lebowski](#):
>
> I think agreement by the employers to authorize the extra work is also necessary.
So in your original statement did you mean that the original tweet was saying that the union members should be working extra shifts despite their employers not allowing them to work extra shifts?
So the bias of the original tweeter is that he thinks that the union members are obligated to show up to work shifts that they aren’t supposed to be working (according to their employers), and that since they aren’t showing up and working (without the permission of their employers), then they are holding ports for ransom?
---
### Author:  [@Lebowski](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Lebowski)
#### Post date: [October 17, 2021, 12:16am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354/20 "2021-10-17T00:16:19Z")
> [@ingracke](#):
>
> So in your original statement did you mean that the original tweet was saying that the union members should be working extra shifts despite their employers not allowing them to work extra shifts?
>
> So the bias of the original tweeter is that he thinks that the union members are obligated to show up to work shifts that they aren’t supposed to be working (according to their employers), and that since they aren’t showing up and working (without the permission of their employers), then they are holding ports for ransom?
Yes.
[Next page](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/unions-and-bias/354.md?page=2)