Politics and Administration in the Israeli Port of Ashdod' Leonard Mars to the IPA. This promise threatened the men from Tel Aviv-J aif a who had already been offered The Israel Ports Authority and the Port 9f Ashdod employment in the new port. They were veteran The port of Ashdod, which is located 25 miles Israelis and experienced port workers who did south of Tel Aviv, was opened to commercial not see why their livelihood should be jeopardised traffic in November, 1965, and its opening resulted by new immigrants with no experience of port inthe closing of two of the country's small work. The dilemma facing the IPA, that of com- Mediterranean ports, Jaffa, which had been in mencing operations during a trade recession with operation for at least 3,000 years,2 and Tel Aviv, anexcessof labour, was partlyresolved by which had begun operationsin1936.Haifa, offering severance pay which exceeded anything hitherto Israel's only large port, situated in the hitherto paid to redundant workers. Even so, 319 north of the country also felt, though less drasti- dockworkers made the move south and 485 Sold cally, the impact of Ashdod's competition, since it Boneh labourers joined the IPA. suffered an immediate decline in the volume of cargo that it handled. One consequence of thisstrike was that port workers realised their power to put pressure on The first men to be employed as permanent port their employer, the IPA, by virtue of their crucial workers in Ashdod were recruited from two dif- position in the national economy. Government ferent backgrounds: from the defunct ports of action signified the overruling of port manage- Tel Aviv and Jaffa, and from the ranks of the ment on what it had regarded hitherto as one of labourers who had been employed by the building its prerogatives, namely the recruitment of man- contractors, Sold Boneh3 during the four years power. This submission was reaffirmed in 1967 thatithad takento construct the port. The when workers exerted pressure on the IPA, via the original intention of the Israel Ports Authority government, to accept yet more port workers. (IPA) had been to recruit its labour from the ports of Tel Aviv and Jaffa and to augment The IPA, which is a state-owned corporation, was thisforcegraduallyastheport of Ashdod established in1961 after the Israeli Parliament developed. However,thelabourersengaged had passed the Ports Authority Law earlier that intheconstruction of the new port,mainly year. Although responsible to the Ministry of new immigrants, became concerned about their Transport, the IPA is independent in its finances future employment as the port neared completion, and operations, and is governed by a 15-member and staged a strike in October, 1965. Their chief board, eight of whom represent public economic demand was that they be granted employment bodies (shipping lines, the Export Institute, the as dock workers whentheport commenced Citrus Marketing Board, the Histadruth or General operation. This strike occurred shortly before the Federation of Labour, the Manufacturers' Asso- general electionof 2nd November, 1965 and ciation and the Haifa Labour Council) and six during a period of economic recession so that of whom represent government ministries,all there was considerable pressure on the govern- presided over by an independent chairman. ment not only to act promptly, but also to be seen to act promptly. The government quickly According toits statute, the IPA must manage responded to the strike and promised that the the country's three ports (Haifa, Ashdod and workers would be transferred from So/el Boneh Eilat) in general and each one separately as a viableeconomicunit,byatleastbalancing revenue and expenditure,thelatterincluding 1 The research was carried out in1970/71 under the direction development costs, interest and depreciation. The of the lateProfessor Max Gluckman of the Universityof Manchester on Reseatch Grant 779/1 of the Srcial Science IPA must therefore be a profit-making concern Research Counci, of reat Britain.Ittthe summer cf 1977 a furthert ant HR5209 from the SSRC has enabled me to without recourse to government subsidies and pursue a limited follow-up study. rising costs must be met either by raising tariffs 2 Jaffa (Jopua in Creek), 2 Chronicles Chap. 2 v16 and Ezra Chap. 3 v7. or increased productivity. Higher tariffs are bound 3 Sole!Bonehthe largestcenstructioncompanyinIsrael, to affect the sectional interests of at least some owned by 'he Htstadruth (the General Federation of Labour). of the members of the board, though ultimate 33 decision on proposals to raise tariffs would have published in September, 1970, Gahal had already to be ratified by the Government. This is one withdrawn from the coalition government and the of the basic issues pertaining to the IPA on which Ministry of Transport was once again in the the Government retains the final say (another is hands of the Achdut Avodah faction, now a the development budget). The Government also member of the Labour party. appoint members of the IPA's board, the Director of the IPA and the managers of the individual The IPA, its employees and the Government are ports. allsensitiveto public opinion, which each of them attemptstoinform andtomobilise in Hence the same statutethat grants the IPA support of its case in dockland disputes. Hence independence alsorestrictsthat autonomy by in 1970 the largest Works Committee in the port reserving certain basic issues for the Government. of Ashdod appointed a local newspaper owner as Apart from thesestatutory limitations on its its public relations adviser in view ol the un- independence the Authority is also susceptible to favourable publicity thatit had incurred as a the influence and policies of the Government and result of a series of strikes in the port; the Works to pressures that groups and organisations can Committee madethisappointment because of exert on the Government so that in fact the IPA what it considered to be the biased statements of is a government agency. Thus the wider national thepublicrelationsofficers employed by the interests that the Government has to take into Authority at Head Office and at each of the three consideration may further infringe what senior ports. officials J the Authority regard as their preroga- tives. Labour leaders in the ports as well as man- Because of the need for regular consultations agement are aware of the real locus of decision- between the 1PA on the one hand and government making in disputes between them. From experience ministries, banks, the Histadruth, and clients on labour leaders know that pressure can be exerted the other, IPA headquarters were located in Tel on the IPA by the Histadruth and by government Aviv. Proximity to these bodies is indicative of ministries, particularly those of Labour and Trans- the role of headquarters inrelation toits con- port. The IPA and its employees also recognise stituents, the three ports. Although each port is the power of the Histadruth and each has sought independent in its operations and free to compete its aid in settling disputes in the port of Ashdod wïth the other ports in attracting clients, head- and in other ports. quarters determines development projects, man- power policy, wage policy, and budgets, and there- Prior to general elections the power of workers in fore requires close and immediate contact with relation to that of management is enhanced, as the institutions that deal with these matters. Port was revealed by the strike of the construction workers interpretthis location as indicative of workers who built the port. Party politics also the remoteness of the IPA from the daily life of affecttherelations between management and the ports, and regard the officials in Tel Aviv as labour in Israel where government ministries are bureaucrats who know little,if anything, about divided among the political parties that form the the waterfront. They consider that 1-lead Office ruling coalition. Thus change in the composition should have been situatedin either Ashdod or of the cabinet can result in a shuffling of minis- Haifa though this would have inevitably aroused terial posts among the parties. For example, after the indignation of one of the two ports. the1969 electionsthe Ministry of Transport, which since 1948 had been a preserve of Achdut Avodah4, was allocated to Ga/ia!, a right-wing The town of Ashdod political party that had first entered the govern- The town of Ashdod has experienced rapid growth ment shortly before the Six Days War in June, sinceitscreationin1956, especially after the 1967. The new ministerreceived leading port subsequent decisiontoconstruct adeep-water in workers from Ashdod the home ofthe port there. From 4,600 in1961the, population mayor of Ashdod, who was also a member of rose to23.300 in1965 and to approximately Galia!, and subsequently agreed to set up an 38,000 in1971. Most of this increase was due to inquiryintolabourrelationsinthe portof immigration, particularly of new immigrants to Ashdod. However, by the time the report was Israel. Thus in1965 over half of the population (12,000) had conic to Israel since 1961. Not only 4 Ach'Jut Avodah--a left-wing party which in 1965 was a mem- were the town's inhabitants new immigrants but ber of the Alignment with Mapai which in 1969 was a con- stituentfounder ofthe Irael Labour Party with Rai j and they were young: one half below the age of 19 Mapai. and two-thirds below the-age of 30. Thus Ashdod 34 is a rapidly growing new town, populated mainly officials at Histadruth HQ in Tel Aviv, and to by young immigrants and their numerous children. government ministries in Jerusalem. As the largest single employer in the town, the In short, because of the divided allegiance of its port with its workers is of great concern to local members, its inadequate manpower resources, and politicians, who see it as a strong base for their thestrategic national importance of the port parties, who show considerableinterestinits leading to the direct involvement of national affairs.