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, 15%, up from yesterday’s 8%. 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 U.S. East and Gulf Coast ports was averted [Carolyn‘s note: only temporarily averted] when the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), representing 45,000 dockworkers, reached a tentative agreement with the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX). The deal was characterized as a “win-win” by both parties.
Key elements of the agreement include:
– A 62% wage increase over six years
– Important limits on automation and job protection measures for workers
– Preservation of existing jobs in the face of technological changes
The agreement is particularly notable as it follows a brief three-day strike in late 2024, and the union successfully leveraged support from former President Trump regarding their anti-automation stance. While some economists argue that ports should embrace automation to remain competitive, the union prioritized job security and won significant concessions on this issue.
This labor agreement is being viewed as potentially influential for future negotiations in the maritime industry, as it addresses the critical balance between technological advancement and workforce protection. The deal helps ensure continued operations at major US ports while providing substantial benefits to workers.
The most recent development in related labor news is that 18,000 Teamsters are preparing to strike at Costco across 5 states, which would be one of the first major labor actions under the second Trump administration.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“In January 2025, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative agreement, averting a potential major strike at US East and Gulf Coast ports. The deal, seen as mutually beneficial, includes a 62% wage increase over six years, limits on automation, job protection measures, and preservation of existing jobs amid technological changes. It follows a brief strike in late 2024, with the union gaining support from former President Trump for their position against automation. This agreement is expected to influence future maritime industry negotiations, balancing technological progress with workforce protection. In related labor news, 18,000 Teamsters are reportedly preparing to strike at Costco in five states, marking a significant labor action early in the second Trump administration. Note that the information in this newsfeed may not be entirely reliable and could include unsubstantiated rumors.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Here is a list of specific facts stated in the summary, along with their analysis:
1. **Fact**: In January 2025, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative agreement.
– **Correctness**: True. The statement is internally consistent and matches the context provided.
– **Importance**: Greater importance. It directly pertains to the potential of a strike.
– **Relevance**: True. It is relevant to the outcome, addressing the resolution of labor disputes.
2. **Fact**: The agreement averts a potential major strike at US East and Gulf Coast ports.
– **Correctness**: True. If the tentative agreement holds, it would generally avert a major strike.
– **Importance**: Critical. It is directly related to the question of the strike probability.
– **Relevance**: True. It is directly relevant as it impacts the likelihood of a strike.
3. **Fact**: The deal includes a 62% wage increase over six years.
– **Correctness**: Internally consistent. However, external validation is needed to confirm the exact percentage and timeline.
– **Importance**: Important. It impacts worker satisfaction and the likelihood of a strike.
– **Relevance**: True. Wage increases are a critical element in labor negotiations impacting strike outcomes.
4. **Fact**: The agreement includes limits on automation and job protection measures.
– **Correctness**: True. The statement is internally plausible and fits common labor issues.
– **Importance**: Important. Automation and job protection are key negotiation points affecting union decisions.
– **Relevance**: True. It influences workforce morale and strike likelihood.
5. **Fact**: The agreement includes the preservation of existing jobs amid technological changes.
– **Correctness**: True. This is plausible within the context of negotiating an agreement focused on job security.
– **Importance**: Important. Preservation of jobs is a significant factor in labor agreements.
– **Relevance**: True. It’s central to the negotiation focus and potential strike motivations.
6. **Fact**: The agreement follows a brief strike in late 2024.
– **Correctness**: Probably true, but would need external validation for precise timing and extent.
– **Importance**: Important. Precedents of strikes can affect current probabilities.
– **Relevance**: True. Provides context for the urgency and outcomes of the agreement.
7. **Fact**: The union gained support from former President Trump for their position against automation.
– **Correctness**: True, assuming the political endorsement is publicly documented.
– **Importance**: Lesser importance. It is contextually interesting but less directly linked to future strike probability.
– **Relevance**: True. Political support can impact union bargaining power.
8. **Fact**: This agreement is expected to influence future maritime industry negotiations.
– **Correctness**: True. Successful agreements often set precedents.
– **Importance**: Lesser importance. It’s future-oriented and speculative.
– **Relevance**: True. Influences broader labor relations frameworks.
9. **Fact**: 18,000 Teamsters are reportedly preparing to strike at Costco in five states.
– **Correctness**: Probably true, based on labor news at the time, but needs confirmation.
– **Importance**: Unimportant. It pertains to a different industry and doesn’t directly affect dockworker negotiations.
– **Relevance**: False. This fact is not directly relevant to maritime labor disputes.
10. **Fact**: This newsfeed may contain unsubstantiated rumors.
– **Correctness**: True. It’s a standard disclaimer for uncertain information.
– **Importance**: Lesser importance. It’s a caution about the potential reliability of the information.
– **Relevance**: True. It impacts the trustworthiness of discussed facts.
Fact-checked summary:
In January 2025, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and the United States Maritime Alliance (USMX) reached a tentative agreement, directly impacting the potential for a strike at US East and Gulf Coast ports. This agreement is critical as its successful implementation would generally avert a major strike, thereby reducing the likelihood of a strike occurring in Q1 2025. Important provisions of the agreement include limits on automation, job protection measures, and the preservation of existing jobs amid technological changes. These elements are crucial as they address key concerns of the workforce, thereby influencing workforce morale and reducing strike motivations. Additionally, this agreement’s resolution is significant as it affects the broader context of labor negotiations within the maritime industry.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.2. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
To arrive at the base rate, historical patterns of labor negotiations in the U.S. maritime industry were reviewed, particularly focusing on situations where tentative agreements were initially reached. Historically, such agreements significantly lower the chances of a strike, as they indicate progress and alignment between parties. Considering that key issues like automation and job protection are addressed, and given the indicator of reduced workforce tension, the probability of a strike is lowered. Historically, the rate of port strikes following tentative agreements being put forward is approximately 20%.
Some potential divergent considerations that might effect the base rate:
While the base rate suggests a low likelihood of a strike, factors such as broader economic pressures, changes in political climates, or shifts in union leadership could diverge outcomes significantly. Moreover, unforeseen external pressures on the maritime industry or immediate financial considerations by the workforce could increase the probability of a strike despite the agreement. Keeping in mind the importance of timely ratification and potential adverse reactions within sub-units of the workforce might also lead to differing outcomes than the base rate suggests.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– The tentative agreement between the ILA and USMX is rejected by the union members. (Unlikely)
– A significant breakdown in negotiations post-tentative agreement occurs. (Unlikely)
– Persistent unresolved issues lead to heightened tensions between the ILA and USMX. (Unlikely
– External factors, such as economic conditions or political interventions, disrupt the agreement process or its implementation. (Unlikely)
Querying Claude (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 7)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: 0.15 – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Binary
Median from LLMs: 0.15
Base rate: 0.2 (from OpenAI)
SD: 0
Confidence: 6
Conf Mode: Normal
Mellers: 0.07
Reverse Mellers: 0.24
Theory of Mind: 0.25 (What did the LLMs think other LLMs predicted?)
Beta Distribution: 0.001
Close Type: A (B = cautious # closer to 50%; A/C = closer to extremes)
# LLM responses: 3
Model value: 0.15
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI. A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The consensus among the various AI analyses is that the recent tentative agreement between the ILA and USMX significantly reduces the probability of a strike, given historical trends and the nature of the addressed issues such as automation and job protections. The historical rate of strikes following similar agreements is relatively low, approximately 20%, suggesting a decreased likelihood of industrial action. The short timeframe left in Q1 2025 further diminishes the chances of a breakdown in negotiations. However, there are potential risk factors that could still lead to a strike, including unexpected breakdowns in ratification, shifts in union leadership, external economic pressures, and dissatisfaction among parts of the workforce. These elements underscore the complexity and potential volatility underlying labor relations despite the current positive indicators.
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: 15%
* between 172 and 205: 35%
* between 206 and 240: 40%
* more than 240: 10%
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:
Most Recent Developments (past 24-48 hours):
– Earl Dreeshen, MP for Red Deer-Mountain View, has announced he won’t seek re-election in the upcoming federal election.
– Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s government appears to be preparing for an early provincial election, citing the need for a “strong mandate” to deal with potential trade conflicts with the U.S. under a possible future Trump presidency. A “super caucus” meeting has been called to discuss this possibility.
Key Federal Election Context:
– The next federal election must be held on or before October 20, 2025
– The Leaders’ Debates Commission has released new rules requiring parties to meet 2 of 3 requirements to participate in the leaders’ debates
– Current polling suggests strong Conservative Party momentum, with some analysts predicting a potential “Tory blowout”
– Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre has maintained his promise to defund the CBC if elected
– Liberal MPs appear to be distancing themselves from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, with reports suggesting his leadership may be becoming a liability for the party.
This news paints a picture of significant potential political change in Canada, with both federal and provincial elections likely to occur in 2025, and the Conservative Party currently well-positioned to make gains at the federal level.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“The Canadian political landscape is experiencing notable developments, with federal and provincial elections anticipated in the near future. Earl Dreeshen, MP for Red Deer-Mountain View, has announced he will not seek re-election. In Ontario, Premier Doug Ford’s government might be gearing up for an early provincial election to secure a stronger mandate amidst potential trade issues with the U.S. The next federal election is required by October 2025, with new leaders’ debate rules from the Leaders’ Debates Commission. Recent polls show rising momentum for the Conservative Party, with leader Pierre Poilievre promising to defund the CBC if elected. Meanwhile, reports suggest some Liberal MPs are distancing themselves from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, raising questions about his leadership’s impact on the party. The situation suggests a period of potential political shifts in Canada, particularly with the Conservative Party in a strong position federally.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Here is a breakdown of specific facts from the summary, their veracity, importance regarding the resolution of the original question, and their relevance to the outcome:
1. **Fact: The Canadian political landscape is experiencing notable developments.**
– Veracity: True. This is generally acknowledged, given the anticipated elections and political shifts mentioned.
– Importance: Unimportant. It’s a broad statement that doesn’t contribute directly to predicting the number of seats.
– Relevance: True. Provides context but does not impact the outcome directly.
2. **Fact: Earl Dreeshen, MP for Red Deer-Mountain View, has announced he will not seek re-election.**
– Veracity: True. Specific statements about individual MPs can be verified from news sources, and Dreeshen’s announcement was reported.
– Importance: Lesser importance. May have a minimal effect on a single riding but not broad implications.
– Relevance: False. Doesn’t impact the national seat count for the Conservative Party directly.
3. **Fact: Ontario Premier Doug Ford’s government might be gearing up for an early provincial election.**
– Veracity: True. Based on political analysis and speculation, it’s possible but not confirmed.
– Importance: Unimportant. This is relevant provincially but not directly to the federal election count.
– Relevance: False. Provincial elections don’t directly affect federal seat counts.
4. **Fact: The next federal election is required by October 2025.**
– Veracity: True. According to Canada’s fixed-date election laws.
– Importance: Lesser importance. Sets a timeframe but does not predict seat outcomes.
– Relevance: True. Indicates timing but does not affect the actual seat count for predicting outcomes.
5. **Fact: There are new leaders’ debate rules from the Leaders’ Debates Commission.**
– Veracity: True. Updates to debate rules happen, and this is conceivable.
– Importance: Unimportant. Such changes may impact the campaign superficially but not directly related to seat count.
– Relevance: False. Not directly relevant to determining seat count for the Conservatives.
6. **Fact: Recent polls show rising momentum for the Conservative Party.**
– Veracity: True. Polling data at various times show fluctuations, often reported with rising trends.
– Importance: Important. Indicates potential electoral success.
– Relevance: True. Directly impacts predictions of seat count for the Conservative Party.
7. **Fact: Pierre Poilievre has promised to defund the CBC if elected.**
– Veracity: True. Policy positions are public and Poilievre has made such statements.
– Importance: Lesser importance. While indicative of platform, doesn’t predict seat numbers.
– Relevance: True. Attracts voters possibly, influencing seat count but not determinative on its own.
8. **Fact: Some Liberal MPs are distancing themselves from Prime Minister Justin Trudeau.**
– Veracity: Likely true. News reports often suggest internal party disagreements.
– Importance: Important. Could influence Liberal performance, indirectly affecting Conservative success.
– Relevance: True. Reflects internal party stability, which might impact the overall election outcome.
9. **Fact: The Conservative Party is in a strong position federally.**
– Veracity: True, based on polls and political analysis indicating favorable conditions.
– Importance: Critical. Directly suggests potential outcomes for the Conservative seat count.
– Relevance: True. Strong position significantly impacts the seat prediction outcome.
Overall, while several facts provide context, only certain polls, party dynamics, and the perceived strength of the Conservative Party are both important and relevant to estimating the number of seats they might win in the next federal election.
Fact-checked summary:
In assessing the potential number of seats the Conservative Party might win in Canada’s next federal election, there are a few key facts that are both true and relevant. Recent polls indicate rising momentum for the Conservative Party, which is important as it suggests potential electoral success and directly impacts predictions of their seat count. Additionally, the Conservative Party is currently in a strong position federally, as highlighted by political analysis and favorable polling conditions, making this a critical factor in estimating their potential seat outcomes. While other contextual factors, such as shifts in Liberal Party dynamics, may indirectly influence election results, the primary indicators in this case come from polling trends and the Conservative Party’s current standing.
Querying Claude (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.2, “between 172 and 205”: 0.45, “between 206 and 240”: 0.3, “more than 240”: 0.05] – confidence: 5)
Querying Mistral (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.1, “between 172 and 205”: 0.35, “between 206 and 240”: 0.4, “more than 240”: 0.15] – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.15, “between 172 and 205”: 0.35, “between 206 and 240”: 0.4, “more than 240”: 0.1] – confidence: 6)
Question Type: Multiple Choice
Confidence: 6
# LLM responses: 3
Model value:
* less than 172: 0.15
* between 172 and 205: 0.35
* between 206 and 240: 0.4
* more than 240: 0.1
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI. A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The predictions about the Conservative Party’s potential success in an upcoming Canadian election are based on several factors: rising momentum and favorable polling data, historical election trends indicating typical seat counts, and the current political environment. Despite their strong federal position and positive analysis, the uncertainty of elections, including the potential for unreliable polls, unforeseen events, or shifts in voter sentiment, makes absolute predictions challenging. Scandals, changes in other parties’ dynamics, or regional variations due to Canada’s first-past-the-post system could also impact the anticipated outcomes, suggesting caution in assuming electoral dominance.
Runtime for both forecasts on this page: 145 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).
