DP World, a Dubai Royal family-owned logistics company, controls a third of Australia’s port infrastructure. The company has recently announced that it plans to spend $600 million replacing skilled Australian wharf workers with automated processes. The announcement was made without regard to the consultation requirements of their own Enterprise Agreement.
Evidence from international container operations shows that automated container terminals are not as productive as those employing highly skilled Stevedores, are consistently slower and more expensive, and are less safe for workers.
The Maritime Union of Australia (MUA) National Secretary Paddy Crumlin said, “Dubai Ports has a poor track record in this country of triggering disputes with its workers, jacking up prices for its customers, and mismanaging essential supply chain infrastructure which the community rightly expects to be operated more in the national interest than in the financial interest of the Dubai Royal family”.
The company wants to cut Australian workers’ jobs driving straddle-cranes in Brisbane and Melbourne ports and replace them with slower, less accurate and less safe robotic cranes.
The proposed automation of Dubai Ports’ Australian operation also depends on machinery which is adversely affected by heat, rain, insects, radiofrequency interference and software glitches. DP World was also struck by a nationwide cybersecurity crisis in 2023 when hackers took control of DP World port computer systems resulting in a three-day Australian container terminal shut down, leading to concerns for the future management and security of Australian port infrastructure.
“With 99% of our imports coming by sea, almost every consumer good you can imagine is dependent on containerised freight, all of which is unloaded and transported within our ports by members of the MUA working around the clock, in all weather. DP World know that Australian wharfies are faster, safer and more consistent in this highly skilled work than any robot, so this plan is not about productivity it's about politics,” Mr Crumlin added.
This is an example of the dangers of employers rushing to utilise new technology in their workplaces without consideration of the hazards that may be created by the use of that technology. Substantial risks are created at the points where employees will need to interface with the automated processes. Proper consultation on new technology before implementation gives the opportunity for affected workers to share their opinions and perspectives with management, leading to a more measured approach to introducing ‘improvements’ that may, in fact, be more harmful than helpful.