|
selec posted:If the union is not allowed to strike to get paid sick days, when it has enough power and solidarity to actually maybe win the fight, do you have a union at all?
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 17:56
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:34 |
|
|
A part of the timing here is that the rail companies have a practice of shutting down parts of their infra a week in advance of any anticipated strike date, as a protective measure. This has some legitimate purpose, but it's also a great way for them to apply a quietly advanced leverage date.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:00
|
|
|
Rigel posted:I really don't understand what Biden is doing at all. I could sort of understand if we had an election in 2 months or something, but he's not facing the voters for another 2 years so its not like he even has any political pressure right now. A temporary transportation disruption this winter is not going to send us off into a multi-year recession tailspin. There's no reason at all to do this, unless you don't think labor unions should ever strike if it inconveniences the public. This is the normal, baseline functioning dipshitery of Joe Biden. This is who he is and has always been. The good things that have happened in his Presidency are the weird aberration in the true believing, but "noble", system stooge that is Joe Biden. Always remember that while every other member of congress gets paid to lick the boots of capital, Joe Biden was the poorest Senator for his entire career because he'll lick those boots for free.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:01
|
|
|
ColdPie posted:The Hawaii stuff lead to the best no-context headline I've seen in some time: Lava heading positively towards the negative
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:04
|
|
|
is the lava hot, from the standpoint of lava? break out the sharpie and change the direction of flow (straight to mar-a-lago)
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:06
|
|
|
FlapYoJacks posted:If rail is a national security concern then perhaps the rail companies should be nationalized? That would likely require Congress to pass a law authorizing it, as the existing legal avenues for the president to unilaterally nationalize are unlikely to apply here. And if he had 60 votes for nationalizing the railway industry (or even 50 votes for nationalization + lifting the filibuster), he'd probably have 60 votes for just imposing the union demands on industry in the first place.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:09
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:That would likely require Congress to pass a law authorizing it, as the existing legal avenues for the president to unilaterally nationalize are unlikely to apply here. And if he had 60 votes for nationalizing the railway industry (or even 50 votes for nationalization + lifting the filibuster), he'd probably have 60 votes for just imposing the union demands on industry in the first place. I don’t think he’d do that because I believe he ideologically identifies with the owners, not the workers.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:11
|
|
|
Gyges posted:This is the normal, baseline functioning dipshitery of Joe Biden. This is who he is and has always been. The good things that have happened in his Presidency are the weird aberration in the true believing, but "noble", system stooge that is Joe Biden. Always remember that while every other member of congress gets paid to lick the boots of capital, Joe Biden was the poorest Senator for his entire career because he'll lick those boots for free. Similarly, this is always who the Democratic party leadership has been. They lined up the votes in both chambers to gently caress the unions days ago.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:12
|
|
|
I thought railways already had a mechanism for the federal government to step in and dictate terms, which is why we're in the current situation where the White House is brokering the labor contract in the first place? You don't need to nationalize it, just tell the railway companies that workers get two call offs a year or whatever extremely reasonable request is the current hold up now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:14
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:I thought railways already had a mechanism for the federal government to step in and dictate terms, which is why we're in the current situation where the White House is brokering the labor contract in the first place? How do you tell them to do this?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:19
|
|
|
selec posted:I don’t think he’d do that because I believe he ideologically identifies with the owners, not the workers. Maybe, but I'm talking about legal requirements and Congressional support, which are a little easier to have a discussion about than delving into what each of us personally believes are the core beliefs held by a person we've never met. Tibalt posted:I thought railways already had a mechanism for the federal government to step in and dictate terms, which is why we're in the current situation where the White House is brokering the labor contract in the first place? There is a mechanism to step in and dictate terms, but it requires a Congressional vote to invoke that mechanism. The president can't just do it unilaterally. And while Biden himself has long been known as a big supporter of unions, I don't really expect Senate Dems to stand unanimously against industry and fully back the unions - especially when imposing the deal would require either overturning the filibuster or flipping ten GOP votes.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:21
|
|
|
Tibalt posted:I thought railways already had a mechanism for the federal government to step in and dictate terms, which is why we're in the current situation where the White House is brokering the labor contract in the first place. They are asking for four whole measly days—an insanely unreasonable request.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:29
|
|
|
The President of the United States is calling on Congress to pass a bill telling unions to gently caress off with their desire for a benefit that Taco Bell provides their employees.
Gyges fucked around with this message at 18:42 on Nov 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:37
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The President of the United States is calling on Congress to pass a bill telling unions to gently caress off with their desire for a benefit that Taco Bell provides their staff. Like, remember that Quebec town that got burned by an oil train? I don't want someone delirious on the front of megatonnes of hazmat.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:43
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:Maybe, but I'm talking about legal requirements and Congressional support, which are a little easier to have a discussion about than delving into what each of us personally believes are the core beliefs held by a person we've never met. This doesn’t explain the choice to support the bosses. Seems like if Biden is pro-union he has options: 1. Be pro union and convince the congress to support the union with their votes (currently not possible, ok) 2. Be pro union and convince congress to not take up the vote and let the strike work as intended But that he chose to support the bosses makes it clear he is not pro-worker, to me. What I’m missing here is your understanding that he’s pro-union, which doesn’t fit with his actions. Nancy Pelosi could just not bring this to a vote, which Biden could support her doing to let the strike play out. But he’s not doing that, so why?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 18:43
|
|
|
selec posted:This doesn’t explain the choice to support the bosses. Seems like if Biden is pro-union he has options: Yeah, he might have a pro-labor reputation but nothing about the public statement is pro-labor. You can't acknowledge that the railroads are greedy and then say Congress needs to force the workers to accept the terms because Christmas is coming up and we can't have the economy stop for the workers who apparently make it run and have it be a pro-labor statement. As a topic of discussion, what third options are there? What could be done by Congress and the Democrats to support striking rail workers while minimizing the knock on effects they're worried about?
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 19:05
|
|
|
If Congress forces through the deal there needs to be a wild cat strike and it needs to be militant.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 19:09
|
|
|
The 3rd option is Biden and Congress came out with strong statements to the press that they were on the worker's side right up until the point where the trains no longer choo choo, and then folding like a house of cards. It's still lovely and fucks over the Union, but at least it doesn't tank the gently caress out of the negotiations and embolden the Railway Cartel to be even more evil.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 19:11
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The 3rd option is Biden and Congress came out with strong statements to the press that they were on the worker's side right up until the point where the trains no longer choo choo, and then folding like a house of cards. It's still lovely and fucks over the Union, but at least it doesn't tank the gently caress out of the negotiations and embolden the Railway Cartel to be even more evil. Jeez yeah I didn't even think of something as simple as "They don't need to blink yet" but yep, they don't.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 19:28
|
|
|
selec posted:This doesn’t explain the choice to support the bosses. Seems like if Biden is pro-union he has options: I thought I was being clear that I was referring to his past history of being pro-union in both words and actions. "Siding with the bosses" is a bit exaggerated, isn't it? This was the deal negotiated by union leadership. When the deal went up for membership votes, four unions rejected it (and eight others accepted it), but it's not like this is a "unions are told gently caress off, management gets literally everything they want with no concessions" situation. As for the current situation, I think there are two main issues you're not really considering:
IMO, it'd be nice if Biden would pull a Truman or a LBJ and privately threaten the railways into making more concessions. But by nature, we wouldn't know if that's happening till much later. And given item #2 above, I don't know that he actually has the leverage to credibly make those kinds of threats right now. Truman had a much more advantageous position, with a bigger Senate margin, an ongoing war, and a Supreme Court that was entirely made up of Truman appointees and Roosevelt appointees.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 19:30
|
|
|
FlapYoJacks posted:They are asking for four whole measly days—an insanely unreasonable request. It's less specifically about "sick days" and more about the railroads reversing or modifying their new attendance policy they implemented in 2020. The new contract gives them 24 days of paid leave. The main issue is that the railroads use a new attendance policy that severely penalizes day-of call outs - which are usually family emergencies or serious illness - because it can delay the entire train if the person calls out right before they are supposed to run it. The train companies absolutely do not want to budge on this because it makes it easier for people to call out on the day of and they would rather gently caress over people with emergencies than go back to a system where people can call out on the day of and throw the schedule for the entire train system off. They have medical leave, but they have to schedule it in advance or they get penalized. If you accrue too many penalizations, then you have a mandatory review, and after that you get fired. The union doesn't want the first 4 day-of call outs for medical or family issues to count towards that total each year. It's not about the actual number of PTO days. That is why it is a lot more complicated than just "add 4 sick days" and neither side wants to buckle. For the union, it means being able to handle emergencies without it going on your record. For the train companies, it means going back to a system where people can call out on the day-of a few times a year with no penalty and throw the entire rail schedule for every train that day off. That is why they gave them the 24% raise, the extra days of PTO, caps on health insurance premiums, two person engineering teams, and ability to schedule your days where you aren't on call, but they are digging in so hard on this. The train engineers are essentially on call 24/6 right now and if they can't/don't show up to a call, then it counts against them. So, it is a lot higher stakes than just "4 sick days" and why neither side wants to back down on this. Once they sign the contract, then they probably aren't re-negotiating for another 5 years, so both sides want to lock in their preferred outcome now.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 19:48
|
|
|
Rigel posted:I really don't understand what Biden is doing at all. I could sort of understand if we had an election in 2 months or something, but he's not facing the voters for another 2 years so its not like he even has any political pressure right now. A temporary transportation disruption this winter is not going to send us off into a multi-year recession tailspin. There's no reason at all to do this, unless you don't think labor unions should ever strike if it inconveniences the public. Rail lines have a lot of cash and a disruption at xmas means people say mean things about Joe. The union members are going to have to vote for Dems no matter how much they get screwed because their only other option wants to destroy unions(not that conservative white union folk don't vote for Republicans, but it's always been stupid for them to do so). So money, protecting himself, and knowing there's no other choice for the voters.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 19:51
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:I thought I was being clear that I was referring to his past history of being pro-union in both words and actions. 1. If this is true (which I don’t stipulate) then this means it’s even more important to support the workers. If they’re that vital they deserve the ability to call in sick. If mistreating workers could lead to a recession then it seems pretty important to give them the support they need rather than risk a wildcat strike. You can’t have a railroad without workers, so it’s obvious who is essential to the country (the workers) and who is expendable (the owners) 2. Then let the GOP be the bad guy and just pretend to support labor, which while lovely doesn’t make you the person directly loving over the voters. Then you could even support the wildcat strike if you really walked the walk. It’s all just adding up to a guy who doesn’t support the working class, as his natural instinct, and how that instinct forecloses on other viable political options that also happen to be The Right Thing. /
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:00
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:It's less specifically about "sick days" and more about the railroads reversing or modifying their new attendance policy they implemented in 2020. I would prefer to take the workers side of “not having to schedule sick days 24 hours in advanced up to 4 times a year.” Edit: If one person calling out puts an entire train out of commission perhaps the railroads should hire more people??? FlapYoJacks fucked around with this message at 20:02 on Nov 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:00
|
|
|
Seems like that could be most easily resolved with more redundancy in scheduling, but it would cut into profits and we can’t have that
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:02
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:[*] the GOP will take the House in a week, which will make it much more difficult to have any kind of Congressional intervention (either in the strike itself or any of the issues caused by it) without making concessions to the GOP
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:06
|
|
|
Scheduling sick days and being on call for your entire work cycle is absolute horse poo poo, and simply the lazy way for the company to handle shift scheduling. If your entire business is flipped upside down when someone wakes up with the flu or when you aren't able to randomly call employees at 2 am to tell them to get their rear end in by 6, then maybe it's time you rework your business model.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:07
|
|
|
haveblue posted:Seems like that could be most easily resolved with more redundancy in scheduling, but it would cut into profits and we can’t have that The problem with that is it takes years to properly train a train engineer. Not that this isn't the correct answer, just that it isn't like you can just put an ad in the paper and fill that position in two weeks + 3 mos of on the job training.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:09
|
|
|
Jaxyon posted:The union members are going to have to vote for Dems no matter how much they get screwed because their only other option wants to destroy unions(not that conservative white union folk don't vote for Republicans, but it's always been stupid for them to do so). Ah, but: they in fact don't have to vote for Democrats, we have recent demonstration that many of them in fact won't, and the damage done is very long lasting. And as this is about as clear a demonstration as possible that Democrats are also extremely hostile to the interests of membership, you've got some pretty significant potential knock-on effects in terms of organizing/fundraising and ability to head off direct action/labor militancy that's antithetical to your political success. LGD fucked around with this message at 20:14 on Nov 29, 2022 |
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:09
|
|
|
FlapYoJacks posted:I would prefer to take the workers side of “not having to schedule sick days 24 hours in advanced up to 4 times a year.” Same. I just wanted to clarify that it is a higher stakes thing than "4 sick days" and that is why the union and railroad companies are still fighting over it even when they agreed to the other major changes on how the engineering teams work, got extra PTO, got more money, etc. with much less controversy. Those were small potatoes comparatively. The train companies are thinking about a "worst case scenario" where engineers are calling out day-of 4 times per year every year. There's only one track, so one delay hits everything using the tracks. The unions are thinking about how this attendance system didn't exist until two years ago and it can be reversed if they strike while they have leverage. And they don't want to put members in situations where their jobs are potentially at risk if their parents die or they get really sick before a shift. Especially since this system was implemented during Covid to keep trains running on time and they are less strict about it now, but the companies want to keep it forever. Four sick days is kind of underselling the significance and why they are fighting so hard for it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:11
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Same. They aren't sick days if you have to schedule them in advance so it really kind of is about 4 sick days.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:18
|
|
|
LGD posted:Ah, but: they in fact don't have to vote for Democrats, we have recent demonstration that many of them in fact won't, and the damage done is very long lasting. On the other hand, if the entire economy explodes over a protracted railroad strike Biden is gonna have a hell of a lot more problems than "the left is mad at him." It's a lose-lose situation.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:18
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:On the other hand, if the entire economy explodes over a protracted railroad strike Biden is gonna have a hell of a lot more problems than "the left is mad at him." It's a lose-lose situation. Sadly this is correct. The left is functionally marginalized in this country, so Biden isn't going to suffer any real consequences for pissing them off. It makes political sense to gently caress over the workers here, even if it doesn't make moral sense.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:31
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:On the other hand, if the entire economy explodes over a protracted railroad strike Biden is gonna have a hell of a lot more problems than "the left is mad at him." It's a lose-lose situation. backing the unions was an option available to Joe Biden, op.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:31
|
|
|
You have to love how fast things can get done in this country when capital demands it https://twitter.com/elwasson/status/1597633648618270720?s=46&t=74a-6xQDMS8iAde7uGr3RA Meanwhile we’re still looking at a potential default in the summer because Dems won’t push through a limit increase in the lame duck
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:34
|
|
|
Fister Roboto posted:Sadly this is correct. The left is functionally marginalized in this country, so Biden isn't going to suffer any real consequences for pissing them off. It makes political sense to gently caress over the workers here, even if it doesn't make moral sense. The real problem honestly is that it doesn't make logistical sense. The problem isn't that we can't let the workers strike because we need the trains to ship things but that something as important as our rail lines are in the control of people who's primary goal in their position isn't shipping things by train but making profit from it.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:35
|
|
|
Acebuckeye13 posted:On the other hand, if the entire economy explodes over a protracted railroad strike Biden is gonna have a hell of a lot more problems than "the left is mad at him." It's a lose-lose situation. Sure, but this wasn't some sort of sudden and unforeseen crisis he was powerless to intervene in (despite the recent resurgence of "the president is a powerless smol bean" rhetoric), nor was (or is) choosing to gently caress over workers the only way to resolve it. No one should be surprised that the Democratic party in general and Biden specifically ultimately put themselves in a losing position via laissez-faire deference to capital, but likewise they also should be cognizant of the fact that this behavior does in fact have significant long-term political repercussions.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:37
|
|
|
Oracle posted:The problem with that is it takes years to properly train a train engineer. Not that this isn't the correct answer, just that it isn't like you can just put an ad in the paper and fill that position in two weeks + 3 mos of on the job training. Perhaps the railroads should have started to hire more engineers several years ago? I fail to see how this is labors problem.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:46
|
|
|
Oracle posted:Congress convenes on Jan. 3 every year unless that's on a Sunday (usually). Sorry, I meant "in a month". selec posted:1. If this is true (which I don’t stipulate) then this means it’s even more important to support the workers. If they’re that vital they deserve the ability to call in sick. If mistreating workers could lead to a recession then it seems pretty important to give them the support they need rather than risk a wildcat strike. You can’t have a railroad without workers, so it’s obvious who is essential to the country (the workers) and who is expendable (the owners) #1 is a moral case to make at Congress, not me. If it's impossible to line up 60 senators behind telling industry to eat poo poo (or 50 senators for that plus overturning the filibuster), then it's not happening, regardless of who deserves what. As for #2, I think you're trying to impose a black-and-white view on something that isn't quite so clear as you're trying to make it out to be. Spiking prices, goods shortages, and a probable recession aren't exactly good for the working class either. Especially under a split Congress that's unlikely to do anything useful about them. And it seems like you've completely glossed over the bits about how this isn't just employer demands being unilaterally imposed on the unions, either.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:49
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 25, 2024 21:34 |
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:As for #2, I think you're trying to impose a black-and-white view on something that isn't quite so clear as you're trying to make it out to be. Spiking prices, goods shortages, and a probable recession aren't exactly good for the working class either. Especially under a split Congress that's unlikely to do anything useful about them. And it seems like you've completely glossed over the bits about how this isn't just employer demands being unilaterally imposed on the unions, either. these sound like excellent reasons for the Democrats to back the union's demands in the hope of avoiding a shutdown. for some reason they have chosen to do the opposite of this thing.
|
|
#
?
Nov 29, 2022 20:50
|
|