The Los Angeles/Long Beach port strike deadline has been postponed to next week—what should cross-border e-commerce sellers do in the coming days?

This postponement shifts the original strike start date of November 1 to a new window of uncertainty—November 4–5. For sellers, it does not bring reassurance, but rather a low-cost, 3–4-day action window. The rationale rests on three layers: First, the current situation: The delay is real—and so are the underlying disagreements. On October 30, the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA), representing terminal operators, and ILWU Local 26, representing approximately 250 port security guards, agreed to extend negotiations. The originally scheduled strike commencement at 5:00 p.m. PT on November 1 has thus been pushed back (as reported by Reuters, gCaptain, and the LA Daily News; media consensus places the new negotiation deadline around November 4–5, subject to official announcements from both parties). Two points merit attention: ① The previous temporary agreement was extended week-by-week in similar fashion, and PMA itself acknowledges that 'major disagreements' persist on core issues—wages and pensions; ② Though these 250 guards represent only ~2% of ILWU members across the two ports, U.S. maritime law—the Maritime Transportation Security Act—requires certified security personnel for terminal operations. Without them, terminals cannot legally open. Moreover, other ILWU members traditionally observe picket lines—a practice known as 'not crossing the line.' The union’s notice covers eight terminal locations: APMT, LBCT, TTI, PCT, SSA (three sites), and OH55. PMA cites six terminals, collectively handling roughly 85% of Long Beach’s cargo volume and ~33% of Los Angeles’ volume. Thus, the leverage effect remains fully intact—it has merely been paused. Second, why freight rates have already surged ahead of schedule. Last week, Drewry reported spot rates from Far East to U.S. East Coast rose +9% to USD 10,565 per FEU—a new annual high—while U.S. West Coast rates climbed +3% to USD 8,368. These increases followed the October 27 publication of strike authorization news. Carriers, anticipating risk realization, preemptively imposed blank sailings and General Rate Increases (GRIs). Conversely, even if an agreement is reached next week, any rate correction would require at least one full sailing cycle to materialize.

Breaking news: Over 35,000 containers are backed up—and now strike threats loom again! Major congestion may erupt at the U.S. West Coast ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach!

In response to this situation, COSCO Shipping has recently issued a customer advisory warning. COSCO: 'We hereby notify you that inland intermodal (IPI) cargo transiting through the Port of Los Angeles/Long Beach continues to face ongoing challenges in rail transportation. For Mini-Land Bridge (MLB) cargo, weekly available rail car allocations and booking slots are insufficient to accommodate current import volumes, resulting in continued constraints on rail capacity. Both BNSF Railway and Union Pacific Railroad are affected.' 'Consequently, some shipments are experiencing significant delays while awaiting rail bookings and transport.' Additionally, North American freight media FreightWaves has published a detailed report on the inland logistics challenges confronting the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach—revealing that, as of October 26, a total of 35,688 containers were awaiting rail transport (19,626 at the Port of Los Angeles and 16,062 at the Port of Long Beach). Of these, 10,562 containers had already been stranded at the terminals for at least nine days! Even without considering the strike threat, this inland congestion alone has triggered a red alert for both ports. Yet compounding the crisis is the looming strike risk amid already severe container pileups. Strike Threat Looms over U.S. West Coast Ports According to the Long Beach Press-Telegram, this strike stems from a vote by ILWU Local 26—the union has formally authorized its members to strike, tentatively scheduled for November 1 local time. Approximately 250 security personnel are involved. At first glance, the number appears small—but the actual impact is substantial. As warned by the PMA (Pacific Maritime Association), although these workers constitute only ~2% of ILWU’s total workforce across the two ports, they operate at terminals handling about 85% of Long Beach’s cargo and ~33% of Los Angeles’ cargo. Eight major container terminals across both ports—including those operated by APMT, LBCT, TTI, PCT, SSA, and OH55—are under threat. Moreover, the potential disruption extends far beyond the security staff themselves. Per PMA, if the strike proceeds and picket lines are established, other ILWU members are expected to honor Local 26’s picket lines—refusing to cross them. This could halt all vessel operations, yard activities, and gate functions at affected terminals. In short, given the deep-rooted union traditions at U.S. West Coast ports, even non-striking ILWU workers will likely show solidarity. Should these 250 guards walk off the job, more than half of the container terminals across the twin ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach could grind to a complete standstill!

Port Watchmen Negotiations Continue to Avert Strike at US Ports of LA/LB

2 days ago

Negotiations continue to prevent a potential strike by port watchmen at Los Angeles and Long Beach, which could disrupt the supply chain for polymers and titanium dioxide used in the chemical industry.

icis

2026-11-03

Port Watchmen Negotiations Continue to Avert Strike at US Ports of LA/LB

Port Watchmen Negotiations Continue to Avert Strike at US Ports of LA/LB

FAQ