by Manal Barakat, SeaNewsEditor

Earlier this month, California Governor Gavin Newsom declined to sign a bill prohibiting the use of automated or remotely operated cargo-handling equipment connected to the state’s power grid.

The governor's decision regarding Senate Bill 34, which could have been seen as favouring those opposed to port automation in the state, sparked both positive and negative reactions.

The International Longshore and Warehouse Union (ILWU), the largest labour union representing dockworkers on the West Coast, expressed concern that Newsom’s decision will result in job losses for dockworkers.

Similarly, the East Coast's dockworkers' labour union, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), expressed disappointment with Newsom's decision, describing it as a setback for organised labour.

The ILA has long actively opposed port automation. Next month, it plans to hold a “Global Anti-Automation Conference” in Lisbon, Portugal, to address the impact of automation on dockworkers.

On the other hand, maritime employers welcomed Newsom’s decision, viewing it as a reinforcement to the competitiveness and efficiency of California's ports.

Stephen Hennessey, President of the Pacific Maritime Association (PMA), told the Journal of Commerce that the decision "sends an important message to consumers, workers, farmers, small business owners and many others that strong, competitive ports are essential to California’s economy and its role in global trade.”

Senate Bill 34 also included provisions that would have prevented state funding from being used to promote automated equipment. It would have also hindered ports' applications for grants supporting zero-emissions transition projects.

Governor Newsom explained his veto by stating that the bill would interfere with the Air Quality Management District's (AQMD) approach to reducing air and climate pollution.