Page 180 - Mellinato, Giulio, and Aleksander Panjek. Eds. 2022. Complex Gateways. Labour and Urban History of Maritime Port Cities: The Northern Adriaticin a Comparative Perspective. Koper: University of Primorska Press.
P. 180
plex Gateways
the handling of technical equipment relatively early, while the GHB start-
ed training drivers of the container gantry crane from 1978 onwards.
The second significant transformation process set in after the arriv-
al of the first full container ships in Hamburg in May 1968. As early as
1967, one year before its appearance, the newspaper Das Sprachrohr, ed-
ited by the GHB, published a programmatic article about the increasing
importance of the box, to familiarize the workers with this kind of activ-
ity. With headlines such as ‘Don’t be afraid of the container’ (GHB 1967,
3), the GHB promoted a more comfortable manner of working with it.
Possible concerns on the side of the workers about the effects of container
transport on their workplace, as mentioned in the quotation, seem com-
prehensible, since containerized cargo increased rapidly. Whereas in 1968
container cargo was only 2.1% of total cargo handling, it was 18.2% in 1973
and reached 42.4% in 1982. Although the container divided public opinion
and initially had enthusiastic advocates and fierce opponents, there were
already three terminals in the early 1970s.
Politicians and unionists, who collaborated rather closely, were con-
scious of the need for skilled workers soon after the appearance of the
first containers, not only to train specialized staff that were essential but
also to attract more junior employees as there were not enough workers
in the port in the 1970s (Grobecker 1985, 138). Official reports of the Joint
Dock Company claim that workers’ shortages can be traced back to the
job’s poor reputation due to hard or dirty work and its casual status (GHB
Annual Report 1979). Thus, in 1975, traditional professions were restruc-
tured, with special training for water and landside activities, resulting in
state-approved skilled occupations. The reorganization was important to
increase income, and strengthen the workers’ rights and the profession’s
image.
Concerning the technical transformation, several interview part-
ners vividly talk about the change of work procedures, of workspaces,
and the development from teamwork to more individualistic and isolated
workflows. However, they do not describe these transformations as sud-
den ruptures, but as a slow process. For decades, there had been a coex-
istence of self-learned practical work knowledge (Hörning 2004) and con-
tainerized movement of goods (Figure 2). Thus, parallel work practices
may be one of the reasons why technological changes are never described
as a complete break in the biographies. At second glance, though, a lot
of ambiguity can be traced in the narratives. Furthermore, the evalua-
180
the handling of technical equipment relatively early, while the GHB start-
ed training drivers of the container gantry crane from 1978 onwards.
The second significant transformation process set in after the arriv-
al of the first full container ships in Hamburg in May 1968. As early as
1967, one year before its appearance, the newspaper Das Sprachrohr, ed-
ited by the GHB, published a programmatic article about the increasing
importance of the box, to familiarize the workers with this kind of activ-
ity. With headlines such as ‘Don’t be afraid of the container’ (GHB 1967,
3), the GHB promoted a more comfortable manner of working with it.
Possible concerns on the side of the workers about the effects of container
transport on their workplace, as mentioned in the quotation, seem com-
prehensible, since containerized cargo increased rapidly. Whereas in 1968
container cargo was only 2.1% of total cargo handling, it was 18.2% in 1973
and reached 42.4% in 1982. Although the container divided public opinion
and initially had enthusiastic advocates and fierce opponents, there were
already three terminals in the early 1970s.
Politicians and unionists, who collaborated rather closely, were con-
scious of the need for skilled workers soon after the appearance of the
first containers, not only to train specialized staff that were essential but
also to attract more junior employees as there were not enough workers
in the port in the 1970s (Grobecker 1985, 138). Official reports of the Joint
Dock Company claim that workers’ shortages can be traced back to the
job’s poor reputation due to hard or dirty work and its casual status (GHB
Annual Report 1979). Thus, in 1975, traditional professions were restruc-
tured, with special training for water and landside activities, resulting in
state-approved skilled occupations. The reorganization was important to
increase income, and strengthen the workers’ rights and the profession’s
image.
Concerning the technical transformation, several interview part-
ners vividly talk about the change of work procedures, of workspaces,
and the development from teamwork to more individualistic and isolated
workflows. However, they do not describe these transformations as sud-
den ruptures, but as a slow process. For decades, there had been a coex-
istence of self-learned practical work knowledge (Hörning 2004) and con-
tainerized movement of goods (Figure 2). Thus, parallel work practices
may be one of the reasons why technological changes are never described
as a complete break in the biographies. At second glance, though, a lot
of ambiguity can be traced in the narratives. Furthermore, the evalua-
180
