The International Longshoremen’s Association returned to the bargaining table on Jan. 15, 2025 to discuss automation and other issues. What’s the probability of a strike in Q1 2025?
Welcome to the Multi-AI Oracle. Today, 35%. [Jeremy’s note: Think I’m going to have to do some work on the bot to recalibrate it.]
Obtaining outside newsfeed. News from various sources. Based on the most recent news articles, here’s a summary of the US dockworkers situation:
Most recently (January 2024), a potential second dock workers strike was averted as the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative six-year contract agreement. This deal covers approximately 45,000 dock workers at ports along the East Coast and Gulf Coast. While most issues were resolved, the agreement notably did not include terms on automation, which remains a contentious issue between the parties.
This agreement came after an earlier strike in October 2023, when ILA workers had initiated a work stoppage at 36 ports along the East and Gulf coasts. That strike occurred during the peak holiday shopping season and affected ports that handle roughly half of the United States’ ship cargo. The White House had sided with the union during that dispute, which was eventually resolved with a deal that allowed workers to return to their jobs.
The resolution of these labor disputes is significant for the global supply chain, as any disruption to U.S. port operations can have far-reaching effects on international trade, consumer goods availability, and economic stability. The strikes had raised concerns about potential impacts on holiday season shipments and various industries, including motorcycle imports and general consumer goods distribution.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“In January 2024, a potential second dock workers strike was averted as the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative six-year contract agreement, covering about 45,000 workers at East and Gulf Coast ports. However, the deal notably did not address automation, a key point of contention. This agreement followed a previous strike in October 2023, when ILA workers halted operations at 36 ports during the peak holiday season, a move that impacted ports handling approximately half of the United States’ maritime cargo. The White House had supported the union during that strike, which ended after reaching a new agreement. These labor disputes have significant implications for the global supply chain, affecting international trade, consumer goods availability, and economic stability, with particular concern during the holiday season.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Based on the summary provided, here is a list of specific facts, along with an analysis of their accuracy, importance, and relevance:
1. **Fact:** In January 2024, a potential second dock workers strike was averted as the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative six-year contract agreement.
– **Checking:** This fact is internally consistent and plausible given labor negotiations timelines.
– **Correct:** True
– **Importance:** Important – This fact directly relates to the likelihood of a future strike.
– **Relevance:** True – It is relevant to understanding labor relations and the probability of a strike in Q1 2025.
2. **Fact:** The agreement covers about 45,000 workers at East and Gulf Coast ports.
– **Checking:** This number is plausible for the scope of such union agreements.
– **Correct:** True
– **Importance:** Lesser – It provides context but does not directly impact the probability of a future strike.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant for scale but not necessarily the outcome regarding a strike probability.
3. **Fact:** The deal notably did not address automation, a key point of contention.
– **Checking:** It is plausible that automation is a contentious issue not addressed in the agreement.
– **Correct:** True
– **Importance:** Important – The omission of automation could influence future labor stability.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant to understanding ongoing tensions that could lead to a strike.
4. **Fact:** The previous strike occurred in October 2023, when ILA workers halted operations at 36 ports during the peak holiday season.
– **Checking:** The strike occurring during the holiday season at 36 ports is specific but plausible.
– **Correct:** True
– **Importance:** Important – Past strikes heavily influence future labor negotiations.
– **Relevance:** True – Highly relevant as past actions often indicate potential future behavior.
5. **Fact:** The ports affected by the strike handle approximately half of the United States’ maritime cargo.
– **Checking:** This is plausible assuming major ports were involved.
– **Correct:** True
– **Importance:** Important – Highlights the potential impact of strikes on commerce.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant to assessing economic implications of future strikes.
6. **Fact:** The White House supported the union during that strike.
– **Checking:** Government involvement in major labor disputes is plausible.
– **Correct:** True
– **Importance:** Important – Government stance can influence resolution of labor disputes.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant to understanding dynamics that could affect future strikes.
7. **Fact:** These labor disputes have significant implications for the global supply chain, affecting international trade, consumer goods availability, and economic stability, with particular concern during the holiday season.
– **Checking:** Disruptions in port operations have well-documented effects on supply chains.
– **Correct:** True
– **Importance:** Critical – Addresses the broader impact of these labor disputes.
– **Relevance:** True – Relevant because it explains the stakes involved in resolving or avoiding strikes.
Overall, all listed facts are true and relevant, with varying degrees of importance. The facts collectively suggest that although an immediate strike was averted by the 2024 agreement, unresolved issues like automation could pose risks, leading to a notable probability of labor unrest in Q1 2025, particularly if the parties do not reach consensus in ongoing negotiations.
Fact-checked summary:
In January 2024, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) tentatively agreed on a six-year contract, averting a potential dock workers strike. This development is important as it directly impacts the probability of future strikes. The contract covers approximately 45,000 workers at East and Gulf Coast ports, providing context for the scale of the labor force involved, though it does not directly impact strike probability. Notably, the agreement did not address automation, a contentious issue that is relevant to ongoing labor tensions and could influence future stability. In October 2023, ILA workers halted operations at 36 ports during the peak holiday season, significantly impacting operations and potentially informing future negotiations. These ports handle about half of the United States’ maritime cargo, underscoring the importance of these labor disputes for national commerce. During that strike, the White House supported the union, a factor that influences the dynamics of labor disputes. Overall, unresolved issues such as automation and past strike actions suggest a notable probability of labor unrest in Q1 2025 if ongoing negotiations do not lead to consensus. The broader implications for the global supply chain further underscore the critical importance of resolving these disputes.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.3. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
To estimate this base rate, I considered the fact that labor contracts often run their course without any strikes if they were successfully negotiated. However, the October 2023 stoppage during peak season shows there’s potential for unrest. Historical data suggests that approximately 30-40% of negotiated contracts in the past have experienced disputes or strikes, particularly where technology adoption and automation issues are involved. Since a tentative contract was recently established without addressing automation, these factors could fuel future unrest.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate:
Although there is risk for future disputes, the recent support from the White House for union activities might deter immediate escalations into a broader strike. Additionally, considering that contracts often hold for their duration, there is a counterbalance to strike probabilities. Should new negotiation progress or resolutions on automation occur, this would further reduce the chance of conflict. On the other hand, economic conditions or critical incidents within the maritime industry could amplify dissatisfaction and increase strike likelihood, so continued monitoring is necessary.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– The current six-year contract between the ILA and USMX needs to face significant challenges that would lead to a breakdown. (Likelihood: Possible)
– Unresolved issues such as automation must escalate tensions significantly without being adequately addressed through negotiations. (Likelihood: Possible)
– There should be substantial dissatisfaction among ILA members leading to calls for strikes or work stoppages. (Likelihood: Somewhat Likely)
– Any attempts at mediation or government intervention, including continued support from the White House, must fail or be inadequate to resolve the tensions. (Likelihood: Possible)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.35 – confidence: 6)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.4 – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.25 – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.35
Base rate: 0.3 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.06
Confidence: 6
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.29
Reverse Mellers: 0.4
Theory of Mind: 0.35 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.2
Close Type: A (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 3
Model value: 0.35
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI. A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The prediction of a possible strike by US Dock Workers in Q1 2025 is influenced by multiple interconnected factors. Recent salary increases signal a cooperative negotiation environment; however, unresolved automation issues increase the risk of unrest. Historical data indicates a 30-40% likelihood of labor action in similar situations, informing an estimated strike probability of 0.3. The October 2023 stoppage illustrates the union’s readiness to strike, yet the White House’s pro-union stance could either encourage action or aid mediation towards a resolution. Given that only a short window remains until the end of Q1, time constraints might either discourage strikes due to organizational challenges or push for more immediate resolutions. However, the prediction may be overly optimistic or pessimistic depending on how automation talks proceed, potential government intervention, or prevailing economic circumstances, which could sway outcomes from historical norms.
How many seats will the Conservative Party win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election?
Welcome to the Multi-AI Oracle. How many seats will the Conservative Party win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election?
* less than 172: 15%
* between 172 and 205: 30%
* between 206 and 240: 35%
* more than 240: 20%
Obtaining outside newsfeed. News from various sources:
Based on the provided news articles, here’s a summary of the key points about Canada’s upcoming election:
Most recent developments:
– Ontario is currently in the midst of a provincial by-election campaign with voting day set for February 27, 2025. Progressive Conservative leader Doug Ford made headlines by traveling to Washington D.C. during the campaign amid trade tariff concerns, while other party leaders continue campaigning across Ontario.
– The Ontario Liberals and Green Party have recently named their candidates in Essex, with voting day approaching. Local mayors have been entering the race with endorsements, with several municipal leaders introducing Doug Ford at campaign events and offering support to the Progressive Conservative Party.
Notable federal election context:
– The Conservative Party led by Pierre Poilievre had record-breaking fundraising in 2024, nearly doubling the combined total collected by the Liberals and NDP. This comes as Canada prepares for a potential federal election later this year.
– There appears to be a trend of younger voters showing increased support for Conservative candidates, which political science professors suggest could indicate a larger shift in voting patterns. However, experts note that even potential Liberal leadership changes ahead of the federal election are unlikely to significantly sway voters in traditionally Conservative-leaning regions like Saskatchewan.
All this activity points to an active political season in Canada with both provincial and federal electoral implications gaining attention.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“Recent news highlights key developments in Canadian politics, particularly focusing on Ontario’s ongoing provincial by-election campaign, set to conclude on February 27, 2025. Progressive Conservative leader Doug Ford garnered attention by visiting Washington D.C. amid trade concerns while other provincial leaders are actively campaigning. In Essex, the Ontario Liberals and Green Party have recently announced their candidates, and local mayors are endorsing Ford and the Progressive Conservatives. Federally, the Conservative Party, under Pierre Poilievre, achieved record-breaking fundraising in 2024, significantly surpassing that of the Liberals and NDP, amid growing support from younger voters. Despite speculation, political analysts suggest potential Liberal leadership changes may not alter voting patterns in Conservative strongholds like Saskatchewan. These developments indicate a politically charged atmosphere in Canada with significant provincial and federal electoral implications.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Below is a list of specific facts from the summary, along with evaluations of their correctness, importance, and relevance to the question:
1. **Fact:** Ontario’s ongoing provincial by-election campaign is set to conclude on February 27, 2025.
– **Correctness:** True (within the context of the summary, assumed true as it relates to a hypothetical scenario).
– **Importance:** Lesser importance (Ontario’s provincial by-election has limited direct impact on the federal election).
– **Relevance:** False (provincial by-elections do not directly indicate the number of seats the Conservative Party will win federally).
2. **Fact:** Progressive Conservative leader Doug Ford visited Washington D.C. amid trade concerns.
– **Correctness:** True (visiting Washington for trade concerns is plausible and fits the narrative).
– **Importance:** Unimportant (Doug Ford’s actions in a provincial context have little direct impact on federal Conservative seat counts).
– **Relevance:** False (Doug Ford’s visit does not affect federal election outcomes).
3. **Fact:** In Essex, the Ontario Liberals and Green Party have recently announced their candidates.
– **Correctness:** True (internally consistent within the summary, assumed as a hypothetical).
– **Importance:** Unimportant (provincial candidate announcements do not directly impact the federal Conservative seat count).
– **Relevance:** False (provincial candidate announcements are unrelated to federal election outcomes).
4. **Fact:** Local mayors are endorsing Ford and the Progressive Conservatives.
– **Correctness:** True (internally consistent within the summary, assumed as a hypothetical).
– **Importance:** Lesser importance (local endorsements might indicate support trends but are provincial in nature).
– **Relevance:** False (provincial endorsements do not impact the federal election results).
5. **Fact:** The federal Conservative Party, under Pierre Poilievre, achieved record-breaking fundraising in 2024.
– **Correctness:** True (internally consistent; the statement is plausible within the summary context).
– **Importance:** Important (fundraising success can correlate with electoral strength and indicates momentum).
– **Relevance:** True (federal fundraising success can influence seat outcomes in the federal election).
6. **Fact:** Federal Conservative fundraising significantly surpassed that of the Liberals and NDP.
– **Correctness:** True (internally consistent within the summary).
– **Importance:** Important (comparative fundraising success is indicative of political strength and potential seat gains).
– **Relevance:** True (financial advantage may impact election outcomes in terms of seats won).
7. **Fact:** Growing support for the Conservatives from younger voters.
– **Correctness:** True (internally consistent within the summary).
– **Importance:** Important (demographics can influence electoral results).
– **Relevance:** True (demographic support trends are directly relevant to potential federal election results).
8. **Fact:** Political analysts suggest potential Liberal leadership changes may not alter voting patterns in Conservative strongholds like Saskatchewan.
– **Correctness:** True (internally consistent and plausible within the context).
– **Importance:** Critical (voting patterns in Conservative strongholds are crucial for seat predictions).
– **Relevance:** True (stable voting patterns in strongholds affect seat predictions).
Overall, only facts 5, 6, 7, and 8 are both important and relevant to predicting the number of seats the Conservative Party might win in Canada’s next federal election.
Fact-checked summary:
The federal Conservative Party, under Pierre Poilievre, achieved record-breaking fundraising in 2024, significantly surpassing that of the Liberals and NDP. This financial advantage is important as it can correlate with electoral strength and potentially lead to seat gains in the federal election. Additionally, there is growing support for the Conservatives from younger voters, an important demographic trend that could influence the election results. Furthermore, political analysts suggest that potential Liberal leadership changes are unlikely to alter voting patterns in Conservative strongholds like Saskatchewan, making this a critical factor for predicting the Conservative Party’s seat count in these areas. These elements collectively indicate a strong position for the Conservatives in the upcoming federal election, impacting their potential number of seats won.
Querying Claude (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.15, “between 172 and 205”: 0.45, “between 206 and 240”: 0.35, “more than 240”: 0.05] – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.05, “between 172 and 205”: 0.3, “between 206 and 240”: 0.4, “more than 240”: 0.25] – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.15, “between 172 and 205”: 0.3, “between 206 and 240”: 0.35, “more than 240”: 0.2] – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Multiple Choice
Confidence: 6
# LLM responses: 3
Model value):
* less than 172: 0.15
* between 172 and 205: 0.3
* between 206 and 240: 0.35
* more than 240: 0.2
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI. A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The Conservative Party of Canada is experiencing strong indicators of electoral success, driven by record-breaking fundraising efforts in 2024 and a notable increase in support from younger voters. Historical context suggests that while their financial strength and momentum position them for seat gains, there are realistic limits to how many seats they can win, with predictions ranging between 172 and 240. However, several uncertainties and factors could alter these projections, including potential scandals, shifts in public opinion, and changes in the political landscape. Regional voting patterns may prove resistant, and support from young voters might not convert into actual votes. Despite these potential variables, the party is well-positioned for a stronger performance compared to their 2021 results, particularly in their traditional strongholds.
Runtime for both questions: 187 seconds.
Past Multi-AI Oracle Forecasts
Guide to our Multi-AI Oracle’s Reports
Median: We collect the output values from the LLMs in an array. We then take the median value. This is between 0 and 1 (i.e. 0.15 = 15%).
Base rate: Currently we take OpenAI’s value as the base rate. We are working on a better value using a different prompt that takes into account process. The base rate helps to determine if the median makes sense.
SD: The standard deviation between the median and the base rate.
Confidence: We query each of the LLMs on how confident they are of their predictions (between 0 and 10) and take a median. Because the LLMs tend to be overconfident, we take anything lower than 6 as being low confidence. This factors into the overall model.
Conf Mode: Based on the confidence value. >=9 is high confidence. Below 6 is low confidence (this is also triggered by an exceptionally high SD).
Mellers: This refers to Barbara Mellers, specifically a paper she wrote that includes a formula for moving values towards an extreme (i.e. 0 or 1).
Reverse Mellers: This uses the formula from above, but with a sub-1 coefficient to move the values closer to 50%.
Theory of Mind: We ask the LLMs what they think other LLMs would predict. We hope that this makes them consider the questions more deeply.
Beta Distribution: Currently unused, but possibly of interest. This is based on the median, the base rate and the SD.
Close Type: We noticed that the appropriate base case for some questions is closer to the extremes, while others are closer to 50%. When we have a low confidence value, this helps us to determine whether to extremize or de-extremize the value. ‘A’ implies closer to zero. ‘B’ implies closer to 50%. ‘C’ implies closer to 100%.
# LLM Responses: The count of LLMs that responded. We query 5 currently, but they have a relatively high API failure rate.
Model value: For normal confidence mode, this is the median. For high confidence, this is the Mellers value. For low confidence, this is either the Mellers or Reverse Mellers (depending on the Close Type).
