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%, down from 30% yesterday.
[Jeremy says: This forecast is back down to its previous value. I think the spike yesterday was due to largely unrelated news about other docks/unions.]
Obtaining outside newsfeed. News from various sources. Based on the most recent news articles, here’s a summary of the US dockworkers situation:
A major crisis was averted in January 2025 when the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA), representing 45,000 dockworkers on the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts, reached a tentative deal with port employers on a new six-year contract. This came after three days of strikes and intense negotiations primarily centered around the issue of automation at ports.
The key point of contention was automation of port operations, with ILA President Harold Daggett and the union strongly opposing additional automation at East and Gulf Coast ports. The dispute highlighted the ongoing tension between technological advancement in port operations and job security for dockworkers. The union has been particularly concerned about protecting human jobs from being replaced by automated systems.
The resolution appears to have involved some form of compromise regarding automation, with discussions about a “jobs-for-automation offer.” The agreement helps avoid major economic disruption, as these ports handle roughly half of all U.S. maritime cargo. The deal shows how labor unions continue to have significant influence in negotiating the terms of technological advancement in crucial infrastructure sectors, while also demonstrating the importance of finding balance between modernization and workforce protection.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“In January 2025, a potential economic crisis was averted when the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and port employers reached a tentative six-year contract agreement, following three days of strikes. The central issue was the automation of port operations, with the union, led by President Harold Daggett, opposing further automation on the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts due to concerns over job security for dockworkers. The resolution involved a compromise possibly linked to a “jobs-for-automation offer,” reflecting the ongoing tension between technological progress and employment rights. This agreement emphasizes the significant role of labor unions in negotiating technological changes in key infrastructure sectors, highlighting the necessity of balancing modernization with protecting the workforce. However, as always, details emerging from the situation should be reviewed cautiously, given the potential for rumors and misinformation.”
Fact-checking news summary:
Below is a list of specific facts from the summary, along with checks for their correctness, importance to the resolution of the question, and relevance to the outcome:
1. **Fact:** In January 2025, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and port employers reached a tentative six-year contract agreement.
– **Correctness:** True. The summary states that such an agreement was reached.
– **Importance (to the resolution of the question):** Important, as reaching this agreement is significant for determining the probability of a strike in Q1 2025.
– **Relevance to outcome:** True. This fact is directly relevant because it suggests that a strike is less likely post-agreement.
2. **Fact:** The agreement followed three days of strikes.
– **Correctness:** True. The summary explicitly states that there were three days of strikes preceding the agreement.
– **Importance:** Important, as the fact that the strikes ended upon reaching this agreement influences the probability of further strikes.
– **Relevance to outcome:** True. This fact is relevant since it indicates a potential resolution to the immediate labor disputes.
3. **Fact:** The central issue in discussions was the automation of port operations.
– **Correctness:** True. The summary identifies this as the central issue.
– **Importance:** Critical, as disputes over automation were key in causing the strikes, implying its resolution is central to preventing future strikes.
– **Relevance to outcome:** True. This is highly relevant as it impacts whether similar disputes might occur in the near future.
4. **Fact:** The union, led by President Harold Daggett, opposed further automation on the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts.
– **Correctness:** True. The summary indicates that Harold Daggett led the union in opposing automation.
– **Importance:** Important, as understanding union opposition helps gauge the likelihood of further disputes.
– **Relevance to outcome:** True. The union’s stance on automation is relevant to the likelihood of future labor actions.
5. **Fact:** The resolution involved a compromise possibly linked to a “jobs-for-automation offer.”
– **Correctness:** Partially True. The summary suggests this as a possible interpretation, but details are not confirmed.
– **Importance:** Important, because the nature of the compromise could affect the probability of future disagreements.
– **Relevance to outcome:** True. Understanding the terms of the compromise is relevant to predicting the likelihood of future strikes.
6. **Fact:** The agreement emphasizes the significant role of labor unions in negotiating technological changes in key infrastructure sectors.
– **Correctness:** True. This is a general statement about the situation depicted in the summary.
– **Importance:** Lesser importance, as it is more descriptive of the broader context rather than directly impacting the specific probability of a strike.
– **Relevance to outcome:** False. While broadly informative, it does not directly affect the likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025.
7. **Fact:** Details emerging from the situation should be reviewed cautiously, given potential for rumors and misinformation.
– **Correctness:** True. This is prudent advice rather than a factual claim.
– **Importance:** Unimportant to the immediate question, as it does not alter the factual basis for evaluating strike likelihood.
– **Relevance to outcome:** False. It does not directly impact the probability of a strike but is a cautionary note for interpreting information.
Based on these factual evaluations, the information in the summary suggests that the resolution of key issues and reaching of a contract decreases the probability of a strike in Q1 2025, but close monitoring of the situation is still advised.
Fact-checked summary:
In January 2025, the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and port employers reached a tentative six-year contract agreement following three days of strikes, significantly decreasing the likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025. The central issue in the discussions was the automation of port operations, with the union, led by President Harold Daggett, opposing further automation on the U.S. East and Gulf Coasts. The resolution of these automation disputes is critical in preventing future strikes, making this agreement particularly relevant. While the agreement points towards a reduced probability of a strike, the union’s opposition to automation suggests that monitoring developments remains advisable.
OpenAI gives a base rate of 0.1. The following were considered in order to produce this base rate:
The base rate of 0.1 is derived from examining historical strike occurrences in the port industry following a tentative agreement. Historically, once a tentative agreement is reached, the probability of immediate strikes in the following quarter tends to be low unless significant unanticipated conflicts arise. The fact that the ILA and port employers reached a comprehensive agreement suggests a strong commitment to resolve key issues, reducing the likelihood of strikes.
Some potential divergent considerations that might affect the base rate:
Despite the agreement and the reduced likelihood of strikes, the persistent opposition to automation by the union remains a potential flashpoint for conflict. If technological advancements or policy changes were to occur quickly and without consensus, it might lead to renewed tensions. Additionally, unexpected economic downturns or geopolitical events could create external pressures leading to dissatisfaction among union members, prompting strike action despite current agreements.
The following chain of events are necessary for the question to resolve positively:
– The tentative six-year contract agreement must fail to be ratified by the union members. unlikely
– A significant unresolved issue resurfaces or new issues emerge before the end of Q1 2025. unlikely
– A lack of effective communication or unexpected external pressures prompts further strikes. 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: 0.1 (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 various AI analyses is that the likelihood of a strike in Q1 2025 is relatively low due to the recent tentative six-year contract agreement reached between the International Longshoremen’s Association (ILA) and port employers. Historically, the probability of strikes occurring immediately after such agreements is quite low. However, the union’s strong opposition to automation and potential external pressures, such as economic downturns or geopolitical events, could still pose risks. While the immediate resolution of salary and automation concerns points to continued labor peace, union dynamics and unforeseen economic or technological changes could potentially disrupt this stability, leading to a slight elevation in strike probability. The brief time remaining in Q1 2025 further reduces the chance of a strike escalating within such a short period.
How many seats will the Conservative Party win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election?
Welcome to the Multi-AI Oracle. Today: How many seats will the Conservative Party win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election?
* less than 172: 45%
* between 172 and 205: 35%
* between 206 and 240: 15%
* more than 240: 5%
[Jeremy says: The major drop on this forecast is due to updated polling that shows some shifts back in the direction of the Liberal Party. This is reversion to the mean, mostly.]
Most recently (within the last 24 hours), Ontario Premier Doug Ford has called a snap election for February 27, 2025. The key issue driving this early election call is Ford’s desire to fight against potential tariffs threatened by former U.S. President Trump. Ford is positioning himself as the best economic steward to handle this international trade challenge. The Progressive Conservative leader is also promoting an energy-focused platform, announcing a $17.8 billion investment in nuclear and hydro power as part of his vision to make Ontario an “energy superpower.”
The opposition parties, particularly the NDP led by Marit Stiles, are focusing their campaigns on healthcare issues rather than the tariff dispute. Ford has drawn some criticism for planning two visits to Washington D.C. during the campaign period, with opponents calling these trips “partisan” despite their official governmental purpose.
In other election-related news, Elections BC has suspended its investigation into Conservative Party claims of voting violations due to ongoing legal proceedings. The probe was halted because a party candidate named the chief electoral officer in a court filing. Additionally, there’s discussion about Mark Carney’s potential impact on federal politics, with reports suggesting his presence has Canada’s Conservative Party concerned about their electoral prospects.
Summarizing outside newsfeed:
“Recent developments in Canadian politics include Ontario Premier Doug Ford calling a snap election for February 27, 2025, primarily to address potential tariffs threatened by former U.S. President Trump, positioning himself as an economic leader. Ford is promoting a $17.8 billion energy initiative focusing on nuclear and hydro power. Opposition parties, such as the NDP, are focusing their campaigns on healthcare issues. Ford’s planned visits to Washington D.C. during the campaign have been criticized as potentially partisan. Meanwhile, Elections BC has paused its investigation into allegations of voting violations involving the Conservative Party due to ongoing legal proceedings. Additionally, discussions continue over Mark Carney’s potential influence on federal politics, with speculation about its impact on the Conservative Party’s electoral prospects.”
Fact-checking news summary: Based on the provided summary, here is a list of facts with their analyses:
1. **Fact**: Ontario Premier Doug Ford has called a snap election for February 27, 2025.
– **Correct?**: False (Doug Ford is the Premier of Ontario, and cannot call federal elections. Additionally, no snap election is scheduled for this date to the best of current knowledge).
– **Importance**: Lesser (This is a provincial event and not directly related to federal elections).
– **Relevant?**: False
2. **Fact**: The reason for the snap election is to address potential tariffs threatened by former U.S. President Trump.
– **Correct?**: False (There is no evidence of a snap election being called to address potential tariffs; plus, tariffs would be a federal issue, not provincial).
– **Importance**: Unimportant
– **Relevant?**: False
3. **Fact**: Doug Ford is promoting a $17.8 billion energy initiative focused on nuclear and hydro power.
– **Correct?**: Cannot be determined from given information (There would need to be external verification of this claim).
– **Importance**: Lesser
– **Relevant?**: False
4. **Fact**: Opposition parties, such as the NDP, are focusing their campaigns on healthcare issues.
– **Correct?**: Potentially True (It is common for opposition parties to focus on healthcare, but this would require further verification).
– **Importance**: Lesser
– **Relevant?**: False
5. **Fact**: Ford’s planned visits to Washington D.C. during the campaign have been criticized as potentially partisan.
– **Correct?**: Cannot be determined (This would require external information to verify).
– **Importance**: Unimportant
– **Relevant?**: False
6. **Fact**: Elections BC has paused its investigation into allegations of voting violations involving the Conservative Party due to ongoing legal proceedings.
– **Correct?**: Cannot be determined (Requires verification from current investigation details by Elections BC).
– **Importance**: Important (Could have implications for the Conservative Party if true).
– **Relevant?**: True
7. **Fact**: Discussions continue over Mark Carney’s potential influence on federal politics.
– **Correct?**: True (Mark Carney has been a figure of public interest in Canadian politics and discussions about his influence are plausible).
– **Importance**: Lesser
– **Relevant?**: False
8. **Fact**: There is speculation about Mark Carney’s impact on the Conservative Party’s electoral prospects.
– **Correct?**: True (Speculation about political figures’ impacts on parties is common).
– **Importance**: Important (Speculative impacts could affect the party’s strategy).
– **Relevant?**: True
The summary primarily discusses non-federal events and speculation, which are not directly relevant to the outcome of how many seats the Conservative Party will win in the federal parliamentary election.
Fact-checked summary:
Based on the fact-checking analysis, here are the true and relevant facts related to the question of how many seats the Conservative Party might win in Canada’s next federal parliamentary election: Elections BC has paused its investigation into allegations of voting violations involving the Conservative Party due to ongoing legal proceedings. This fact is important, as it could have implications for the Conservative Party if true. Additionally, there is speculation about Mark Carney’s impact on the Conservative Party’s electoral prospects, which is also important because such speculative impacts could affect the party’s strategy.
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”: 0.45, “between 172 and 205”: 0.35, “between 206 and 240”: 0.15, “more than 240”: 0.05] – confidence: 6)
Querying OpenAI (AI predicts: [“less than 172”: 0.3, “between 172 and 205”: 0.35, “between 206 and 240”: 0.25, “more than 240”: 0.1] – confidence: 5)
Question Type: Multiple Choice
Confidence: 5
# LLM responses: 3
Model value:
* less than 172: 0.45
* between 172 and 205: 0.35
* between 206 and 240: 0.15
* more than 240: 0.05
We queried Claude, Mistral, OpenAI. A summary of what the responding AIs considered is as follows:
The Conservative Party in Canada faces several uncertainties that could impact its future electoral performance. Current dynamics include the uncertainty from Elections BC’s investigation into voting violations, the potential political entry of Mark Carney, and ongoing legal proceedings that may influence public perception and support. Historically, Canadian federal elections typically experience moderate seat shifts rather than dramatic changes, and recent polls suggest that the Conservatives might see modest gains, but likely not reach a majority of 170 seats. Despite some predictions indicating potential seat increases, factors such as leadership issues, internal dynamics, and external challenges like economic conditions and public sentiment shifts could significantly influence outcomes. Moreover, the volatility of voter sentiment, potential scandals, and other unforeseen events could result in outcomes that deviate from historical trends and current polling predictions.
Runtime: 148 seconds for both forecasts on this page.
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).