I write with reference to the letter 'Government driven to double standards by truckers' protest' (South China Morning Post, February 15). The letter expressed dissatisfaction that the Government seemed to do little about container drivers blocking roads, and disrupting traffic. It stated: 'Official inaction has shown that it is permissible to blockade a company and stop its normal operations as a method of protest.'
The writer and many other people are probably not familiar with the issues involved, and they are not aware of what this 'company' and others which are known as mid-stream operators (MSO) are trying to do.
MSOs' business is to move containers from mid-stream operator terminals, which they own, to ships berthed at sea. They get paid by shipping companies who have contracts with them to provide this service. The importers, exporters and manufacturers (shippers) pay the shipping companies freight charges, which include this service of moving containers from mid-stream terminals onto ships.
This is a fair and free-market way of doing business. The shippers can negotiate with shipping companies regarding freight, as they are free to choose which shipping company to use. The shipping companies have contracts with MSOs for their services which are negotiated under free-market conditions.
The drivers' actions were caused by the MSOs who feel that their free-market negotiated contracts with the shipping companies give them below what they feel are reasonable profits. They thus resorted to a cartel operation of charging drivers $40 per container to enter their terminals. They knew full well it is unfair to charge the drivers this fee and the drivers would never agree to pay it.
What they told the drivers was to pay this fee first and the shippers would refund them the money. The shippers' position is that they have already paid the shipping companies in full for this service. Why should they be burdened with another charge, especially one which is non-negotiable?
Through this impasse, the drivers had no other option but to cause the disruption. This played right into the hands of the MSOs. The people who had to back down were the shippers, as goods cannot be delayed indefinitely. The shippers agreed to discuss ways of absorbing the $40 charge and the industrial action was called off.
