Editorial Team Maersk’s latest North American update is a huge red flag for the logistics sector, spelling out persistent port congestion risks at key U.S. and Canadian gateways. The shipping giant’s assessment, first put out in late 2025 and hammered home again in early 2026, describes a nasty mix of labor disputes, strained infrastructure, and a flood of imports that could destabilize supply chains all year. So, how ready is anyone for another round of this?
Key Takeaways
- Maersk is warning of continued port congestion across North America through 2026, thanks to labor talks, high import volumes, and shaky infrastructure.
- The Ports of Prince Rupert and Vancouver are hot spots for labor friction and rail capacity problems, threatening cargo headed for Canada and the U.S. Midwest.
- U.S. East Coast ports like New York and Savannah are getting swamped with diverted cargo and don’t have enough trucks to handle it.
- Shippers need to be looking at multiple port entry points and using intermodal rail to get around potential West Coast meltdowns.
- Getting real-time visibility with tracking platforms and pre-clearing your customs documents are practical ways to cut down delays when your cargo finally hits a clogged terminal.
Past Crises: A Troubling Repetition
Maersk’s warning brings on a serious case of deja vu, reminding us of the supply chain chaos from 2020 to 2022. Back then, the Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach became parking lots, with dozens of container ships sitting offshore for weeks on end. The immediate cause was a pandemic-fueled buying spree and labor shortages, but the real problem, the fragile port infrastructure and intermodal networks in North America, was never fixed. Maersk’s report suggests we’re facing a new set of problems that could easily match, or even beat, the last crisis. This is a systemic risk, plain and simple.
The big wildcard right now is labor. Even though the ILWU contract got sorted out in 2023, the whole situation left a bad taste. Now, the focus is on other parts of the chain. For instance, the negotiations with Canadian rail workers, especially those at Canadian National Railway (CN) and Canadian Pacific Kansas City (CPKC), are a massive variable. A big strike there would paralyze cargo moving out of Prince Rupert and Vancouver, which are critical funnels for Asian imports going to both Canadian and U.S. Midwest markets. A brief but nasty strike at the Port of Vancouver in mid-2025 showed exactly how fast things can grind to a halt, creating instant backlogs and forcing ships to divert, as reported by Reuters. The shockwaves from that kind of shutdown hit factory schedules and store shelves across the continent.
West Coast Vulnerabilities: Beyond the ILWU
Maersk’s update points to broader issues beyond the historical focal point of Los Angeles and Long Beach. The entire system’s dependence on those two ports for so much trans-Pacific trade means any little hiccup there has huge consequences. Drayage capacity is still under pressure, with chassis shortages and the ongoing truck driver availability problem being constant headaches. Even when terminals are running perfectly, if there aren’t enough trucks to pull boxes out, you get bottlenecks that cause yard congestion and slow down how fast ships can be turned around. Data from the Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA) backs this up, consistently showing that while ships aren’t waiting as long as they did at the 2021 peak, the average time an import container sits in a Southern California terminal is still way too high compared to before the pandemic. This subtle congestion significantly impedes velocity.
On top of that, the shift to mega-ships keeps hammering terminal infrastructure. Many terminals simply weren’t designed to have thousands of containers dumped on them all at once from a single vessel. This creates massive peaks of activity that just overwhelm the gates and the on-dock rail ramps. Look at the Port of Oakland, it’s smaller than the SoCal ports, but it battles localized congestion all the time because of these capacity gaps. I’ve seen it in the operational data myself. A single gantry crane breakdown can have an outsized impact on a terminal’s throughput for days.
East Coast and Gulf Coast: The New Pressure Points
Shippers who made the strategic shift to redirect cargo away from the West Coast, using the “all-water route” through the Panama Canal or Suez (which has its own geopolitical headaches), have simply moved the point of failure. Maersk is flagging potential trouble at the Port of New York and New Jersey and the Port of Savannah for this very reason. These ports, despite infrastructure expansion, are not immune to congestion. Savannah, for example, has done dredging and installed new cranes to boost capacity, but the landside logistics just can’t keep up. Drayage capacity in the Southeast remains tight, and warehouse vacancy rates in key distribution hubs like Atlanta are at historic lows, meaning there’s no slack in the system to absorb a surge.
The Port of Houston, a key gateway for the energy sector and now more consumer goods, has its own set of issues. Its reliance on barge traffic and limited rail connectivity compared to some East Coast ports means landside efficiency is paramount. Any disruption to inland waterway navigation or rail service can quickly cause terminal congestion. And people consistently underestimate the risk from extreme weather in long-term planning. A hurricane in the Gulf of Mexico can force closures and create backlogs that take weeks to untangle.
Mitigation Strategies for Shippers and Logistics Providers
So, with Maersk’s warning, what can you actually do? First, diversifying your port entry points is a necessity. Relying on one or two main gateways is just asking for trouble. You have to actively look at alternative ports, even if the sticker price on transport is a little higher, to build some resilience into your network. That could mean using smaller regional ports or just having relationships with multiple logistics providers who can give you different routing options when things go sideways.
Second, visibility and proactive communication are paramount. You need to implement real-time tracking for your containers that follows them from the vessel all the way to the final-mile delivery, which gives you a fighting chance to spot delays before they happen. Platforms like project44 or FourKites provide analytics that can help predict where the choke points will be. On top of that, keeping an open line with your carriers, forwarders, and drayage companies allows for faster plan adjustments when disruptions hit. Anticipate where cargo might get stuck.
Third, you should evaluate intermodal rail alternatives, especially for freight moving inland from the West Coast. Rail has its own service issues, sure, but a well-thought-out intermodal plan can let you bypass some of the worst drayage and terminal congestion right at the port. This requires coordination with rail providers and ensuring you have sufficient inland distribution center capacity. For instance, shipping a container by rail directly from Los Angeles to Chicago is often far more predictable than trying to string together truck legs through congested port-area roads.
Finally, and this is a detail people miss all the time, optimizing your customs and documentation can shave critical days off your import cycle. Pre-clearing cargo when you can, making sure all your paperwork is digital and 100% accurate, and working with customs brokers who have solid relationships at different ports will drastically cut how long your box sits after it’s off the ship. A container sitting at a port because of a paperwork mistake is a completely self-inflicted wound.
Maersk’s North American update is a call to action for everyone in the supply chain. The mix of labor uncertainty, ongoing infrastructure limits, and high import volumes creates a volatile environment that requires you to be proactive and flexible. Businesses that fail to adapt their shipping and logistics planning to these realities risk substantial delays, higher costs, and damage to their market competitiveness.
What are the primary causes of current North American port congestion risks?
The main causes are ongoing labor talks (especially with Canadian rail workers), a surge in imports from Asia, existing infrastructure that can’t keep up, and landside problems like truck and warehouse shortages.
Which North American ports are most at risk according to Maersk’s assessment?
Maersk flags major risks at Canadian ports like Prince Rupert and Vancouver because of potential rail labor issues. In the U.S., East Coast ports like New York and Savannah are under pressure from diverted cargo, while West Coast hubs like Los Angeles and Long Beach are still dealing with drayage and terminal capacity problems.
How can shippers mitigate the impact of potential port congestion?
Shippers can lessen the blow by using more than one port of entry, investing in real-time cargo tracking, using intermodal rail for inland moves, and getting customs paperwork in order for faster clearance. Having strong relationships with several logistics providers also adds important flexibility.
Is the current situation similar to the congestion experienced during 2020-2022?
The triggers are different (less about a pandemic buying surge, more about labor risk), but the weak points in port infrastructure, landside logistics, and rail networks are the same. This means the potential for massive, cascading delays is just as high, making proactive planning essential.
What role do labor negotiations play in the current port congestion outlook?
Labor negotiations are a huge risk factor, particularly with the rail unions in Canada. A strike or slowdown there could instantly stop cargo from leaving major ports, causing ships to back up, containers to pile up, and creating major shockwaves through supply chains for both Canadian and U.S. bound goods.
