Maritime Terminals Create Good Jobs, Says Research Institute; Idea to "Double-Deck" 10th Ave. Terminal Would Hurt Economy

Sorry johnny, you're just ignorant of the facts. It was 3000 jobs: http://www.pmanet.org/?cmd=main.category&id_categ… Pacific Maritime Association announces pact with ILWU to augment workforce -- 3,000 new “casuals” to begin work on docks http://www.pmanet.org/?cmd=main.content&id_conten… And it was over 300k not 500k: Lottery Is Port of Entry for Applicants http://articles.latimes.com/2004/aug/20/business/… The jobs were part time because at the time longshore officials estimated they are short 600 to 700 workers each day, due to the record freight volumes during that period result of increasingly robust trade with Asia. These workers were not guaranteed full-time work, but were eligible to work whenever the need was sufficient. By agreement 1000 of these jobs were cycled thru to registered Union jobs while the rest were considered temporary The 750 "insider" jobs you refer to is also incorrect. The 3000 applicants chosen were culled from 2 "lottery" drawings. The lotteries included well over 300,000 postcards from the public and as many as 8,000 ``industry recommendation''cards(the pre-addressed ``industry recommendation'' cards were mailed to union members and shipping officials several days in advance of newspaper ads detailing the hiring process to the general public). All of the approximately 8,000 cards from the maritime industry went directly into the final drawing, while the cards from the public went through two drawings. The first drawing whittled the cards down to a number of public cards equivalent to the number of ``industry recommendation'' cards. All of the industry cards were entered into the final lottery. Those equal sets of cards, about 16,000, were then be combined in the final drawing for the 3,000 positions. There were no "reserved" insider jobs; all cards had to go thru the final draing. The only guarantee was that if you returned an ``industry recommendation'' card you would make the final drawing along with an equal number of cards from the public. You can also find an extensive list of articles in Long Beach Press Telegram Archive http://www.presstelegram.com/archivesearch I guess you could also call the President of ILWU Local 29 in National City. I'm sure he could answer any questions you might have.
— August 21, 2008 10:50 p.m.

Maritime Terminals Create Good Jobs, Says Research Institute; Idea to "Double-Deck" 10th Ave. Terminal Would Hurt Economy

#21 As a quick perusal of their respective websites illustrates the Port of Los angeles is actually larger. It encompasses more acreage, handles more containers with more tonnage with a higher cargo value the Long Beach. The little error is really no big deal. From the July, 29,2004 PMA press release: "The agreement provides for the addition of 3,000 new “casual” workers, who are covered by the labor agreement between the PMA and ILWU but are not registered members of the workforce. The agreement further provides for the promotion of about 1,000 existing casuals into the registered ranks." In 2004, because of record volumes during an early onset to the traditional peak summer shipping season and at the insistance of of the ILWU, the PMA decided to hire 3000 workers for both the L.A. and Long Beach ports. This was done via postcard lottery and they received over 300,000 post cards instead of the 25-30,000 they had expected. However these were NOT longshoreman jobs. They were part time, non-union casual dock worker positions with a starting wage of $20.66, no health or retirement benefits or guarentee of hours. About 1000 of those who were hired did have the chance to become card carrying members of the ILWU. But let's take a look at those union longshoremen. According to the ILWU, in 1998 the average wage for longshoremen working at least 2000 hours was $99,016. As of June 30, 2007 the basic straight time wage was $30.68 for workers with 4001 or more hours of experience, or about 2 years. Newhires start at $22.11. Currently, Longshoremen have healthcare benefits with no monthly premiums and $1.00 prescription drug benefits. Under the terms of the new 3 year contract agreed to in principle last month, and expected pass in a coastwide vote, longshoremen will receive a wage increase of $1 an hour in the first year of the contract, and increases of 50 cents an hour in the second and third years. That amounts to an increase of 7.8% over three years and brings the union base wage to $27.68 an hour. Now what about those pensions. The pension for longshoremen who retire beginning this July 1 is $80 per month for every year of service, to a maximum of $2,800 a month. This increases over the life of the contract to $95 per month per year of service, to a maximum of $3,325. And for those who retired before 1993 pension increases that will raise their benefits from as low as $40 per month per year of service to $65. Let's not forget the longshore 401(k) fund. The contract calls for contributions to be made to the accounts of each registered longshoreman in the amount of $1.00 per hour for each hour paid to the employee up to a maximum of 2000 hours. I don't know Johnny. When you add it all up, it sure sounds like a $100,000 blue collar job to me. Since all Pacific coast longshoremen are members of the same union, that obviously applies to San Diego as well, so alot of $100,000 blue collar San Diego jobs as well.
— August 21, 2008 5:55 p.m.

Maritime Terminals Create Good Jobs, Says Research Institute; Idea to "Double-Deck" 10th Ave. Terminal Would Hurt Economy

#15: In what sense do you consider Long Beach he largest port on the west coast? Are you referring to acreage, cargo volume, jobs, renenue generated? Please be more specific.
— August 21, 2008 2:36 p.m.

Sempra spins Sunrise Powerlink in the Union-Tribune

Response to post #212: I think any normal person understands that a reliable energy supply an extremely important requirement for the economic future of ANY community. For some reason you seem to be making Sempra/SDG&E as the root evil for allof San Diego's problems and it just ain't so.
— August 21, 2008 1:32 p.m.

Sempra spins Sunrise Powerlink in the Union-Tribune

Response to post #210: A NEW MANHATTAN PROJECT FOR CLEAN ENERGY INDEPENDENCE...give me a break. this guy didn't even vote in favor of the Renewable Energy and Job Creation Act of 2008 or the Energy Independence and Security Act of 2007. He jumps on the band wagon and starts preaching about clean energy independance, just like every other politician by the way, but he votes against a bill extends and expands tax credits for improving energy efficiency and producing renewable energy and renews and increases credits for business investment, individuals, and households with children and one that represents a major step toward redirecting U.S. energy usage in a cleaner, more sustainable direction saving American consumers money at the fuel pump and on their heating bills, reduce air and water pollution, and mitigate the threat of global warming. Does the word hypocrite come to mind? He voted against Amendment #3 to the Military Construction and Veterans Affairs and Related Agencies Appropriations Act that expands the higher education benefits available to service members under the GI Bill and extends unemployment insurance. Not suprising from someone who never served in the military. Is it at all suprising that he voted in favor of the Estate Tax Repeal Amendment? I think not. Lamar Alexander also supported sending troops to Iraq, and has opposed efforts in the Senate to end the Iraq War or reduce the number of troops. He voted against an amendment to a bill that would have required that soldiers be given minimum periods of rest before being redeployed to Iraq. He has stated he believes that Bush will be viewed as a Truman-esque figure. I could go on and on ad nauseum but I would run out of room. Suffice it to say guy is just another bush lackey, whose career in politics has been marked by changing positions to fit the current tide. He has spent his entire career playing the role of the common man political outsider when in reality he has been politically connected the whole time. He has used his politics to line his pockets by fleecing the public and aligning himself with those he can benefit the most from personally. In otherwords, he is one of your corrupt, cashocracy paid, political bloodsuckers who cares more about the pursuit of his own avarice that serving his constiuency.
— August 21, 2008 1:19 p.m.

Sempra spins Sunrise Powerlink in the Union-Tribune

Response to post # 142/183: While you say "It is way past due time for Sempra to build nuclear power plants in San Diego to provide power for our long term future" you seem to be ignorant of the fact that they can't. Since 1975, California state law has barred new construction of nuclear power plants until the federal government agrees on disposal issues involving radioactive spent fuel, California Public Resources Code Section 25524. The moratorium can only be lifted when there is a demonstrated method for the "permanent and terminal disposition" of high-level nuclear waste by the Federal Government. Under the law, the state will not even consider granting permits for the construction of new nuclear plants. With that being the case,what is the incentive for Sempra/SDG&E or anyone else for that matter to put money (4 billion +) time or energy into developing a proposal for a new nuclear plant in California. A Fresno-based group, Nuclear Energy Group LLC, it is considering a ballot initiative to overturn the law, but they seem to have little chance for success. In 2007, a bill was introduced in California's state legislature calling for the moratorium to be lifted. However, the bill didn't come close to receiving the necessary support to make it into law. I have lived within a few miles of San Onofre for over 20 years and have no qualms about more nuclear plants, provided there is a plan in place to SAFELY dispose of the waste, because I DO care about what happens 20 years down the road. Unfortunately, even though the state is split about 50-50 on using nuclear energy, most people surveyed don't want the plants near them. So since you have said Sempra/SDGE should be "Building nuclear power plants along our coast", I'll ask you directly again: In exactly which of the beautiful coastal communities in San Diego do you propose that Sempra build these plants, should the moratoreum ever be lifted. And should they not be built, what exactly are all of these "economic opportunities and chances for a quality of life future in San Diego " that the "Bloodsucker Establishment will export to China"?
— August 21, 2008 12:09 a.m.

Sempra spins Sunrise Powerlink in the Union-Tribune

Response to #202: Don Believe it or not anon is partially correct. Peavey joined SCE as a senior executive in 1984 and was president of Edison International and SCE from August of 1990 thru March of 1993. He was, however, never CEO of either. I'm not sure about the power stucture within Edison, but normally the President of a company has far less powers than the CEO. The biggest difference normally is the President's power is generally limited to matters that arise within the ordinary course of business and are in the "best interests of the company", and the CEO has general supervision over the company, and has the power to sign all corporate documents, share certificates, and other instruments. Certainly there could be utility industry specific differences but in general, unless the same person is both CEO and President, their duties and responsiblities are different.
— August 20, 2008 6:30 p.m.

Sempra spins Sunrise Powerlink in the Union-Tribune

Response to post #178: "I gave the "Solutions to San Diego's Sempra and Power/Water Supply Problems" back in my post #142": "It is way past due time for Sempra to build nuclear power plants in San Diego ", "Building nuclear power plants along our coast". And in exactly which beautiful coastal communitiesin San Diego do you propose that Sempra build these plants? I live 15 miles from one and can't think of enough available land between San Onofre and the border to build any more. Do you really expect Sempra to shell out 4+ billion, per plant, over 8-10 years, with no return on investment for that 8-10 years. That's not to mention any environmental issues with builing along the coast. I don't see that happening anytime soon. Nuclear power may be a solution, but many, many people, and not just the "Bloodsucker Establishment" are not sure it's the correct one. And can we afford to wair at least 8-10 years for this particular "solution" to become useful? And by the way,in reference to not building nuclear power plants in San Diego, exactly what does "Otherwise the Bloodsucker Establishment will export all of our economic opportunities and any chance for a quality of life future in San Diego to China" mean. That maeks absolutely no sense at all.
— August 17, 2008 12:46 p.m.

San Diego Is Chargers' Problem

#29 The Rams left L.A after the 1979 season beacause the Coliseum Commission members were dragging their feet on their promise to Ram's owner Carroll Rosenbloom to build luxury boxes at the Coliseum, which Rosenbloom saw as essential to future success. The Raiders left for basically the same reason. Al Davis wanted a new, more modern stadium away from the Coliseum and the dangerous neighborhood that surrounded it at the time. In addition to sharing the venue with USC , the Coliseum was aging and stilldidn't have the luxury suites and other amenities that had also been promised by the Coliseum Commission when he moved the Raiders to Los Angeles. In both cases, promises of improvements were made before the teams got there.
— August 15, 2008 11:57 p.m.

Sempra spins Sunrise Powerlink in the Union-Tribune

Resonse to 164: Don, If I recall correctly, Elvis actually "performed" the song in his movie, while in Ocean's Eleven it was part of the sound track and heard in the backround during scenes in the movie. Actually these days it's not uncommon for songs to be used in more than one movie. I read once that in many cases it was cheaper to pay royalties to use a song if it fit the particular scene than to hire someone to write, perform and actually do the recording of a new song just for a small scene in a movie. A couple of examples are Forrest Gump and The Big Chill. With all of the great classic songs used in those to movies, it surely would have been an impossible task to write new songs that would have the same impact.
— August 15, 2008 11:27 p.m.