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, 8%, down from Friday’s 24%.
Obtaining outside newsfeed. News from various sources. Based on the most recent news articles, here’s a summary of the key developments.
A potential major strike at East and Gulf Coast ports was averted in mid-January 2025 when the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative agreement on a new six-year contract.
The main point of contention had been the issue of automation at ports, with approximately 45,000 dockworkers concerned about losing their jobs to automated systems.
[Carolyn‘s
note: the Multi-AI Oracle is contradicting itself by giving a 5%
likelihood of a strike yet claiming the strike has been “averted.”
Definition of avert: “prevent something bad from happening.” The strike has only temporarily been averted, a distinction this AI leaves out.]
The deal appears to include some compromises on automation, with limits placed on technology adoption at U.S. ports while still allowing for some modernization. ILA President Harold Daggett notably praised President-elect Donald Trump for his support of the workers’ position, calling him a “hero” after Trump publicly aligned with the dockworkers and warned about the human cost of automation. The agreement came just before a January 15 deadline that could have resulted in a strike affecting roughly half of all U.S. port operations.
The successful negotiation represents a significant development for U.S. supply chains, as a strike would have potentially crippled shipping operations at major East and Gulf Coast ports. The compromise appears to balance the shipping companies’ desire to modernize operations with the union’s goal of protecting jobs, though specific details of the agreement were not fully disclosed in the available coverage.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“In January 2025, a potential strike by dockworkers at East and Gulf Coast ports was averted when the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative six-year contract agreement. The main issue was the adoption of automation at ports, raising concerns among approximately 45,000 workers about job security. The deal reportedly includes limits on automation while allowing for some modernization, though specific terms were not disclosed. ILA President Harold Daggett praised President-elect Donald Trump for his supportive stance towards the workers. This agreement prevented a strike that could have disrupted half of U.S. port operations, marking a crucial development for U.S. supply chains. However, as this is a newsfeed, the information may contain unverified details or rumors.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Here is a list of specific facts from the summary, along with their checks for correctness and relevance to the original question about the probability of a strike in Q1 2025:
1. **Fact:** A potential strike by dockworkers at East and Gulf Coast ports was averted in January 2025.
– **Correctness:** True, assuming the summary accurately reflects actual events.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Critical, as it directly addresses the prevention of a strike.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as it indicates a reduced likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025.
2. **Fact:** The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative six-year contract agreement.
– **Correctness:** True, assuming the summary accurately reflects actual events.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, as a long-term agreement impacts labor stability.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as it suggests labor peace and decreases strike probability.
3. **Fact:** The main issue was the adoption of automation at ports, raising concerns among approximately 45,000 workers about job security.
– **Correctness:** True (common industry issue), assuming the numbers are accurate.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, as automation is a key issue in negotiations.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as addressing worker concerns affects strike likelihood.
4. **Fact:** The deal reportedly includes limits on automation while allowing for some modernization, though specific terms were not disclosed.
– **Correctness:** True, based on common negotiation outcomes, if summary is accurate.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Important, as the terms impact worker approval.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as it suggests that compromises were reached.
5. **Fact:** ILA President Harold Daggett praised President-elect Donald Trump for his supportive stance towards the workers.
– **Correctness:** False internally, as Donald Trump would not be a President-elect in January 2025, since the presidential election would have been held in November 2024, and the President-elect would assume office on January 20, 2025.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Lesser importance, as the praise does not directly impact negotiation outcomes.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** False, as political endorsements do not significantly influence the immediate strike probability.
6. **Fact:** The agreement prevented a strike that could have disrupted half of U.S. port operations, marking a crucial development for U.S. supply chains.
– **Correctness:** True, given the potential impact described aligns with industry patterns.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Critical, as it highlights the significance of the agreement.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as it emphasizes the importance of avoiding disruptions.
7. **Fact:** Information in the summary may contain unverified details or rumors, as it is from a newsfeed.
– **Correctness:** True, as it is a general disclaimer about the reliability of the information.
– **Importance to Resolution:** Lesser importance, as it comments on the summary’s reliability rather than the factual content.
– **Relevance to Outcome:** True, as it affects the certainty of conclusions drawn.
Overall, the relevant facts suggest a low probability of a strike in Q1 2025, given the contract agreement.
Fact-checked summary:
A potential strike by dockworkers at East and Gulf Coast ports was averted in January 2025, which is critical in reducing the likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025. The International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative six-year contract agreement, an important factor suggesting labor stability and peace, thereby decreasing the probability of a strike. The primary issue in negotiations was the adoption of automation at ports, raising job security concerns among approximately 45,000 workers, which is significant as addressing such concerns affects the likelihood of a strike. The agreement reportedly includes limits on automation while allowing for some modernization, suggesting that compromises were reached, further indicating a reduced strike probability. Additionally, the agreement prevented a strike that could have disrupted half of U.S. port operations, highlighting its significance in maintaining stability in U.S. supply chains.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.05. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The recent news suggests a low likelihood of a dockworkers’ strike in Q1 2025 due to the tentative agreement reached between ILA and USMX. Historically, dockworker strikes are significant but relatively rare events often preceded by protracted negotiations and unresolved disputes. The successful averting of an immediate strike through a multi-year contract suggests stability. The key issue, automation, has been addressed with limits, which aligns with historical resolutions that avoid immediate strikes. The base rate also reflects past incidences of dockworker strikes under similar circumstances.
Some potential divergent considerations that might effect the base rate:
Although the agreement decreases the likelihood of a strike, unexpected events such as significant economic changes, unforeseen disputes regarding agreement terms, or failures in ratification could still lead to a strike. Additionally, internal discontent within the union that is not widely reported could result in unforeseen actions. Monitoring any dissenting opinions from union members and their reactions as the agreement is rolled out will be crucial. However, given the current conditions and progress, these considerations have a very minor impact on the resolved likelihood.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– Failure of the tentative six-year contract agreement between the ILA and USMX to be ratified or implemented. (Unlikely)
– Resurgence of significant unresolved conflicts or new issues between the dockworkers and management, particularly concerning automation or job security concerns. (Unlikely
– A breakdown in ongoing communications or relations between the ILA, USMX, and other stakeholders leading to dissatisfaction. (Very Unlikely)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.08 – confidence: 7)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.1 – confidence: 7)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.05 – confidence: 8)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.08
Base rate: 0.05 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0.02
Confidence: 7
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.03
Reverse Mellers: 0.17
Theory of Mind: 0.1 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.08
Close Type: A (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 3
Model value: 0.08
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI
A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The likelihood of a dockworker strike in Q1 2025 appears low due to several stabilizing factors. A tentative six-year contract agreement between the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) has been reached, addressing significant issues like salary increases and automation limits, which are common causes of labor disputes. Historically, once such agreements are in place, the probability of strikes diminishes, suggesting stability in the near term. However, potential risks remain if the agreement fails ratification or if internal union discontent arises, possibly due to dissatisfaction with automation compromises. Economic shifts or disputes over implementation details could also increase tensions, though these risks are generally considered low under the current circumstances.
How many seats will the Conservative Party win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election?
Welcome to the Multi-AI Oracle. Today:
* less than 172: 18.75%
* between 172 and 205: 43.75%
* between 206 and 240: 31.25%
* more than 240: 6.25%
Obtaining outside newsfeed. News from various sources. Based on the most recent news articles, here’s a summary of the key developments in Canadian politics:
Recent polling suggests strong support for the Conservative Party ahead of a potential 2024/2025 federal election. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre’s party is leading in polls, with promises to eliminate recent capital gains tax changes and defund the CBC if elected. The Liberals appear to be distancing themselves from Justin Trudeau, with Liberal MPs and leadership reportedly viewing him as politically toxic.
Some key policy battlegrounds are emerging:
– Climate policy and carbon tax (Conservatives promise to eliminate it)
– CBC funding (Conservatives pledge to defund)
– Capital gains taxation
– Foreign interference in elections (new Liberal rules being criticized as insufficient)
The Leaders’ Debates Commission has also released new rules requiring parties to meet 2 of 3 requirements to participate in the official election debates. While an election must be held by October 2025, there is speculation it could come sooner. Additionally, Ontario Premier Doug Ford has suggested he may call an early provincial election, citing a need for a new mandate to deal with potential Trump presidency impacts.
These developments suggest Canada is entering pre-election mode with clear policy differences emerging between the Conservatives and Liberals on several major issues. The Conservative Party appears to be in a strong position while the Liberals grapple with leadership questions and defending key policies like the carbon tax.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“Recent news from Canada indicates that the Conservative Party is gaining support ahead of a potential federal election in 2024 or 2025, with polls showing them leading under leader Pierre Poilievre. The Conservatives have pledged to eliminate the capital gains tax changes, defund the CBC, and remove the carbon tax. Meanwhile, the Liberal Party is facing internal challenges, with MPs reportedly viewing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as a liability. Key issues emerging between the parties include climate policy, CBC funding, and election integrity, with new Liberal rules on foreign interference facing criticism. Additionally, the Leaders’ Debates Commission has updated rules for party participation in debates, and there is speculation about an early provincial election in Ontario. These developments signal a pre-election atmosphere in Canada, with significant policy debates and political positioning underway.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Based on the summary provided, here is a list of specific facts, along with checks for their correctness, importance to the resolution of the original question, and relevance to the outcome:
1. **Fact:** The Conservative Party is gaining support ahead of a potential federal election in 2024 or 2025.
– **Correctness:** True (Correct based on current polling trends in Canadian politics)
– **Importance:** Important (A key factor in predicting election outcomes)
– **Relevance:** True (Relevance is high as it directly pertains to the election outcome)
2. **Fact:** Polls show the Conservatives leading under leader Pierre Poilievre.
– **Correctness:** True (Consistent with recent polling data showing the Conservative Party ahead)
– **Importance:** Critical (Poll positioning is a crucial determinant of potential election results)
– **Relevance:** True (Directly influences predictions about election seat wins)
3. **Fact:** The Conservatives have pledged to eliminate the capital gains tax changes.
– **Correctness:** True (Consistent with platform promises by the Conservative Party)
– **Importance:** Lesser (While relevant to voter support, it’s not directly about seat prediction)
– **Relevance:** True (Could influence voter behavior, indirectly affecting outcomes)
4. **Fact:** The Conservatives have pledged to defund the CBC.
– **Correctness:** True (Accurate according to stated party policy)
– **Importance:** Lesser (Specific policy could affect public perception more than election outcome)
– **Relevance:** True (May impact voter decisions indirectly)
5. **Fact:** The Conservatives have pledged to remove the carbon tax.
– **Correctness:** True (Aligned with Conservative policy announcements)
– **Importance:** Lesser (Relevant to voter support; less directly to seat prediction)
– **Relevance:** True (Indirectly influences election dynamics)
6. **Fact:** The Liberal Party is facing internal challenges, with MPs reportedly viewing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as a liability.
– **Correctness:** True (There have been reports of internal party dissent and challenges)
– **Importance:** Important (Internal dynamics can significantly affect election outcomes)
– **Relevance:** True (Could influence the effectiveness of the Liberal campaign)
7. **Fact:** Key issues emerging between the parties include climate policy, CBC funding, and election integrity.
– **Correctness:** True (These are indeed significant points of debate between parties)
– **Importance:** Important (These issues shape voter preferences and overall party support)
– **Relevance:** True (Directly impacts political campaign strategies and potential outcomes)
8. **Fact:** New Liberal rules on foreign interference are facing criticism.
– **Correctness:** True (The Liberal government has worked on rules about foreign interference, receiving critique)
– **Importance:** Lesser (While relevant, secondary to the larger election outcome)
– **Relevance:** True (Could affect political discourse and shaping of voter opinions)
9. **Fact:** The Leaders’ Debates Commission has updated rules for party participation in debates.
– **Correctness:** True (Consistent with recent procedural updates)
– **Importance:** Lesser (Indirectly affects visibility and voter decisions)
– **Relevance:** True (Influences party exposure and debates, thereby impacting election results indirectly)
10. **Fact:** There is speculation about an early provincial election in Ontario.
– **Correctness:** True (There have been discussions about the timing of provincial elections)
– **Importance:** Unimportant (Not directly related to the federal election seat prediction)
– **Relevance:** False (Irrelevant to the federal election question asked)
These facts collectively contribute to understanding the political landscape in Canada ahead of the federal election and inform predictions regarding the Conservative Party’s performance in terms of seat acquisition.
Fact-checked summary:
The Conservative Party is currently gaining support ahead of a potential federal election in 2024 or 2025, as evidenced by recent polling trends. Currently, polls indicate the Conservatives leading under their leader Pierre Poilievre, which is a critical determinant in predicting their potential results in terms of seat wins. The Liberal Party, in contrast, faces internal challenges, with some MPs reportedly viewing Prime Minister Justin Trudeau as a liability, which could significantly affect their election outcomes. Additionally, key issues dividing the major parties, such as climate policy, CBC funding, and election integrity, are shaping voter preferences and overall party support, further influencing campaign strategies and potential election results. These elements are essential for understanding the Canadian political landscape and forecasting the Conservative Party’s performance in the upcoming federal election.
Querying Claude (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.45, “between 172 and 205”: 0.35, “between 206 and 240”: 0.15, “more than 240”: 0.05] – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.15, “between 172 and 205”: 0.55, “between 206 and 240”: 0.25, “more than 240”: 0.05] – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.15, “between 172 and 205”: 0.35, “between 206 and 240”: 0.35, “more than 240”: 0.15] – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Multiple Choice
Confidence: 6
# LLM responses: 3
Model value:
* less than 172: 0.1875
* between 172 and 205: 0.4375
* between 206 and 240: 0.3125
* more than 240: 0.0625
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI
A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The Conservative Party, under Pierre Poilievre’s leadership, is currently leading in the polls, suggesting a strong possibility of gaining seats in the next Canadian federal election. The Liberal Party is facing internal challenges, with Justin Trudeau perceived as a liability, further boosting Conservative prospects. Key issues such as climate policy, CBC funding, and election integrity are influencing voter preferences and creating partisan divisions, possibly favoring the Conservative platform. However, historical patterns show that a lead in polls doesn’t always result in significant seat shifts due to electoral complexities and regional dynamics. The prediction of Conservative success could be overturned if the Liberal Party resolves its issues, if there are unexpected national events, or if regional dynamics, particularly in Quebec and the Atlantic provinces, shift. Additionally, polls may not fully capture the true voter sentiment due to potential discrepancies in voter turnout and last-minute opinion changes.
Runtime for both forecasts on this page: 181 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).