Register a SA Forums Account here!
JOINING THE SA FORUMS WILL REMOVE THIS BIG AD, THE ANNOYING UNDERLINED ADS, AND STUPID INTERSTITIAL ADS!!!

You can: log in, read the tech support FAQ, or request your lost password. This dumb message (and those ads) will appear on every screen until you register! Get rid of this crap by registering your own SA Forums Account and joining roughly 150,000 Goons, for the one-time price of $9.95! We charge money because it costs us money per month for bills, and since we don't believe in showing ads to our users, we try to make the money back through forum registrations.
 
  • Post
  • Reply
Dapper_Swindler
Feb 14, 2012

Im glad my instant dislike in you has been validated again and again.

pencilhands posted:

drat I would love to be a train conductor. I already work a job where I travel all the time and have no life so I think I could handle it. Gonna file this away in the back of the noggin to think about later.

Before someone gets mad I am not implying I will be a scab.

id go for it(not for scabbing, gently caress that poo poo), but doubt i could get it with my disabilities.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

FlamingLiberal
Jan 18, 2009

Would you like to play a game?



They’re putting this out there way beforehand and as far as I can tell Dems still aren’t going to get a debt limit passed in the next two months

https://twitter.com/lauralitvan/status/1597722555863138304?s=46&t=74a-6xQDMS8iAde7uGr3RA

Mendrian
Jan 6, 2013

Also one side effect of strikes, labor disagreements and government intervention is that some people will quit. If you force the unions by law to cave, people will leave the industry. This isn't unskilled labor where there arI. disposable assets waiting in the wings.

It's in everyone's worst interest to outlaw the strike. Even if nobody gets arrested, I am sure a significant number of people would quit. If the job became more attractive, more people would apply. Forcing people to work isn't the masterstroke to keep the economy flowing, it's going to make a bad problem slightly worse at best.

Rigel
Nov 11, 2016

Bring it the gently caress on. The debt limit hostage negotiation has always been a big loser for the GOP, they always cave, they will cave again.

edit: The Senate GOP doesn't have any leverage anyway, it'll be a showdown against the house, and they are not going to hold together.

achillesforever6
Apr 23, 2012

psst you wanna do a communism?
https://twitter.com/JonahFurman/status/1597735612773126145?t=EMI5CRtzDxflK3K0ocbGMw&s=19
Union bosses suck so much poo poo

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




Cross posting this OP ED that came up in CSPAM.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/09/opinion/business-economics/freight-train-mismanagement.html?referringSource=articleShare

It’s a good background on the nature of the systemic problem. And the authors a goon!

Edit: and my opinion, they’re correct.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




And to repeat arguments I’ve made previously. We need a National Port Authority one large and strong enough to tell carriers marine, truck, and rail to go gently caress themselves when they try to optimize structurally for shareholders rather than a functioning society.

The underlying issues and problems caused by ever longer trains is the same as those caused by ever larger vessels.

Acebuckeye13
Nov 2, 2010
Ultra Carp
Man, I wish there was more stomach in this country to nationalize certain industries like rail and utilities.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




They gently caress this up bad enough there might be.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Rigel posted:

Bernie Sanders is trying to pull off a miracle. Would be amazing if he could rally the GOP against Biden on this one issue.

https://twitter.com/NancyVu99/status/1597716142235140097

Imagine being such a piece of poo poo in your negotiations that you cause John Cornyn to whip the Republicans in favor of unions

FlamingLiberal posted:

They’re putting this out there way beforehand and as far as I can tell Dems still aren’t going to get a debt limit passed in the next two months

https://twitter.com/lauralitvan/status/1597722555863138304?s=46&t=74a-6xQDMS8iAde7uGr3RA

Never forget that one of Biden's greatest dreams is to cut Social Security and other benefits. A thing he has given many passionate speeches in favor of on the Senate floor.

Shooting Blanks
Jun 6, 2007

Real bullets mess up how cool this thing looks.

-Blade



Bar Ran Dun posted:

Cross posting this OP ED that came up in CSPAM.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/09/opinion/business-economics/freight-train-mismanagement.html?referringSource=articleShare

It’s a good background on the nature of the systemic problem. And the authors a goon!

Edit: and my opinion, they’re correct.

Do you have a nonpaywalled link, or can you summarize? My usual trick of opening in an incognito window doesn't seem to work any more.

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017

Exploration is ill-advised.

Bar Ran Dun posted:

And to repeat arguments I’ve made previously. We need a National Port Authority one large and strong enough to tell carriers marine, truck, and rail to go gently caress themselves when they try to optimize structurally for shareholders rather than a functioning society.

The underlying issues and problems caused by ever longer trains is the same as those caused by ever larger vessels.

Optimising for shareholders rather than a functioning society is literally the ruling ideology of the western world.

B B
Dec 1, 2005

Shooting Blanks posted:

Do you have a nonpaywalled link, or can you summarize? My usual trick of opening in an incognito window doesn't seem to work any more.

https://archive.ph/Jht4t

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




Shooting Blanks posted:

Do you have a nonpaywalled link, or can you summarize? My usual trick of opening in an incognito window doesn't seem to work any more.

Use archived article but

“NYTs article” posted:


The United States averted a national freight rail strike a few weeks ago, when the Biden administration stepped in to broker a deal between rail companies and their union employees. Rail workers have not yet ratified that agreement, and a strike is still on the table. According to a railway trade group, a shutdown could cost the economy more than $2 billion a day. Among the disasters that could ensue, power plants would lack the coal needed to produce electricity and water treatment plants would lack the chemicals needed to provide clean water. If the companies don’t come to an agreement with rail workers, eventually, grocery shelves would go empty.

Rail workers’ demands are not outrageous — union members have little to no predictability in their schedules and are subjected to draconian attendance policies. But the current standoff is about more, and is the result of a deliberate, half-century-long conversion of the nation’s rail system from a network that could deliver many kinds of goods to market (while also hosting hundreds of passenger train lines), to a fleet of land barges that are good for coal and containers — not much else.

After World War II, railroad companies ceded freight, including mail and perishables, to semi trucks and instead favored goods like newsprint, chemicals and steel coils, which could sit in rail yards for days. Many freight companies made this change enthusiastically; trucking’s rise gave them a strong reason to stop servicing goods that were financial and logistical pains to ship. So long to the rail cars full of livestock.

Despite shifting to nonperishable goods, railroads did not stay profitable. By 1976, several railroad companies had gone bankrupt, threatening to collapse rail shipping along with them. Sensing disaster, Congress stepped in to create Conrail, a mostly government-owned company to keep service functional in the Northeast and Midwest. Its executives saw austerity as the way to profitability.

Conrail cut costs everywhere it could, abandoning redundant tracks. It took a while, but it worked. The company was making strong profits by the ’80s and was reprivatized in 1987. Conrail may have begun by trimming excesses, but soon railroads across the industry would take those lessons in cost cutting to an extreme.

In pursuit of efficiency, railroad companies across the entire industry adopted the theory of precision scheduled railroading (P.S.R.), developed by the railroad executive E. Hunter Harrison in the 1990s. Before P.S.R., freight shipping meant rail cars full of goods typically crossed the country on multiple trains, getting dropped off and picked up in yards and terminals in a time-consuming process. Harrison, seeing idle train cars and sitting inventory as waste, envisioned a system of shipping freight directly to its destination with consistent schedules for crew and customers. Goods, in theory, could arrive just in time for our lean supply chains.

If only it worked out. Alas, the actual implementation of P.S.R. led neither to precision nor scheduling nor railroading.

When companies implemented P.S.R., they also adopted new technology that allowed for locomotive engines to be placed along the length of a train. Now, instead of engines pulling the train from the front, additional engines in the middle and the back help move even more train cars. Average train length grew around 25 percent from 2008 to 2017, and companies now regularly run trains that are three miles long.

Our infrastructure isn’t built for these monster trains, which are now so long that many no longer fit the tracks designed to allow trains to pass one another. These trains are almost always overseen by a crew of just two people, who must walk for miles if a problem is found, in all kinds of weather. The trains are difficult to control, and if weight is unevenly distributed along them, they may break apart or even derail.

Precision schedules imply that trains run on some semblance of a schedule. But monster trains and longer distances often lead to a series of small delays that can easily cascade into much longer ones. This means that when a rail crew’s shift ends, its replacement is often called at odd hours to their station, usually with less than two hours’ notice.

Ten years ago, railroading was a middle-class job in which workers might not get typical weekends but they could at least get some equivalent time off. With new attendance policies, conductors and engineers would be disciplined for activities such as visiting a doctor or attending a funeral. Effectively, for these workers, a weekend or an eight-hour workday does not exist.

These problems are rarely highlighted on companies’ accounting metrics. During union contract negotiations, rail companies asserted that their capital investment, not worker’s labor, led to their profits. Union Pacific and B.N.S.F., two of the largest rail companies in the country, posted record figures in 2021. However, simply looking at profits hides a more complicated story.

Nearly two decades ago, companies used to spend around 80 percent of their revenues on running trains and covering operating expenses like payroll, fuel and maintenance. The remaining 20 percent could then be used for stock dividends and buybacks for shareholders. Today that operating ratio is much closer to 60 percent. Since 2010, rail companies have spent $196 billion in stock dividends and buybacks for shareholders. Pursuing these financial goals has actively surrendered railroads’ market share to trucks, delayed trains and angered both unions and customers. It’s not sustainable.

Capping the length of our monster trains should be the first step that the United States takes toward reform, and it should take lessons from other countries as it pursues substantive change. Countries with huge levels of freight — including China, Russia and India — have nationalized railroads that reduce the financial incentives that clog up tracks with the longest trains possible. Switzerland has resisted trucking dominance through a herculean effort that combines upgrades to tracks and stations with centralized management. This benefits railway shippers and passengers, not just the private profit of shareholders.

Rail companies seem set on their self-destructive tendencies, often proposing one-person crews in labor negotiations that would further squeeze workers. Even with a successful negotiation, train yards and mainlines would still be full of long, slow, trudging trains on congested tracks with overworked crews. Through disinvestment, private rail management has shown for decades a disinterest in building a rail system that works for workers and shippers. If they can’t figure out how to run a functioning railroad, maybe it’s time to take it out of their hands.

Rakeris
Jul 20, 2014

Also if your browser allows you to block JavaScript, just block it for the domain and you're gtg.

Shooting Blanks
Jun 6, 2007

Real bullets mess up how cool this thing looks.

-Blade



Thanks y'all!

Svanja
Sep 19, 2009
My husband and I own our truck and contract with a national carrier. I absolutely support the railworkers and hope they can get what they want - the ability to call in day-of without penalty. I am just wondering if anyone knows how this might effect truckers? We have savings that can cover us for a couple of months, but if I need to look ahead for a protracted strike, I'll need to look into being able to cover our cost of living for longer than that. Any input on this would be appreciated. I am unsure I can get an unbiased opinion on the situation from trucking forums and corporate, due to the conservative slant there.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




It will push some cargoes from intermodal to dtd trucking.

Kalit
Nov 6, 2006

The great thing about the thousands of slaughtered Palestinian children is that they can't pull away when you fondle them or sniff their hair.

That's a Biden success story.

Svanja posted:

My husband and I own our truck and contract with a national carrier. I absolutely support the railworkers and hope they can get what they want - the ability to call in day-of without penalty. I am just wondering if anyone knows how this might effect truckers? We have savings that can cover us for a couple of months, but if I need to look ahead for a protracted strike, I'll need to look into being able to cover our cost of living for longer than that. Any input on this would be appreciated. I am unsure I can get an unbiased opinion on the situation from trucking forums and corporate, due to the conservative slant there.

TBH, I would wait a few days and keep in close contact with the national carrier you're contracted with. I would be shocked if Congress ends up not passing legislation to force the unions/railroad companies to adopt the tentative agreement.

Kalit fucked around with this message at 05:17 on Nov 30, 2022

Svanja
Sep 19, 2009

Bar Ran Dun posted:

It will push some cargoes from intermodal to dtd trucking.

Ok, we do over-the-road throughout the US.


Kalit posted:

TBH, I would wait a few days and keep in close contact with the national carrier you're contracted with. I would be shocked if Congress ends up not passing legislation to force the union/railroad companies to adopt the tentative agreement.

I really, really hope that doesn't happen. I'm hoping the railroad companies get pressured. The more I learn about the lives of railroad workers and their engineers, I realize how good my family has it, even though I only see my husband 7 days a month.

Gyges
Aug 4, 2004

NOW NO ONE
RECOGNIZE HULK

Svanja posted:

My husband and I own our truck and contract with a national carrier. I absolutely support the railworkers and hope they can get what they want - the ability to call in day-of without penalty. I am just wondering if anyone knows how this might effect truckers? We have savings that can cover us for a couple of months, but if I need to look ahead for a protracted strike, I'll need to look into being able to cover our cost of living for longer than that. Any input on this would be appreciated. I am unsure I can get an unbiased opinion on the situation from trucking forums and corporate, due to the conservative slant there.

If there is a strike, most of what will be affected are freight items. A short term strike will likely result in you getting less loads, assuming it goes for a few days. A medium to long term strike would likely result in you getting more loads offered since everything that can be transitioned to trailers on the road will be.

Right now it looks like the most likely result is Congress forcing a deal.

Svanja
Sep 19, 2009

Gyges posted:

If there is a strike, most of what will be affected are freight items. A short term strike will likely result in you getting less loads, assuming it goes for a few days. A medium to long term strike would likely result in you getting more loads offered since everything that can be transitioned to trailers on the road will be.

Right now it looks like the most likely result is Congress forcing a deal.

Thank you so much for your thoughts. Maybe its good he'll be heading home for my graduation and our son's graduation for a couple of weeks. It'll help us at least watch what happens and plan ahead if things slow down. Right now he averages 3000 miles a week. We're trying to sell our house and leave Texas and headed to Minnesota (our grandson is there with our daughter and son-in-law). Son-in-law moves goods for US Foods... this may affect him more. We can help them in the meantime.

I hate that Congress is going to get involved, but the things people were sharing earlier, it looks like labor does have some support. I keep thinking about their families.

Svanja fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Nov 30, 2022

Discendo Vox
Mar 21, 2013

We don't need to have that dialogue because it's obvious, trivial, and has already been had a thousand times.
The food industry has probably been one of the biggest leverage sectors on the rail strike because they're especially vulnerable to the harms of a strike (and the downstream effects are also especially direct and clear). Chamber of Commerce has actively courted them on letters to Congress and, earlier, the administration to settle the dispute even after the first no vote. From the food and ag industry perspective, a rail dispruption is especially frightening...on the other hand, the sophisticated actors in that sector recognized that an actual strike was vanishingly unlikely to ever happen. The industry using rail networks don't like the rail industry, and may or may not care about their labor practices (the folks I've spoken to tend to agree that the rail industry is running itself into the ground for no real benefit- note the letter from Chamber linked above is relatively neutral on terms- if CoC had their way it would be more anti-union). But their immediate interest is in keeping the food supply, and thereby their industries, stable.

Discendo Vox fucked around with this message at 06:00 on Nov 30, 2022

Ghost Leviathan
Mar 2, 2017

Exploration is ill-advised.
It's the story literally every time with key infrastructure being privatised. It's always run into the ground in every fashion, workers squeezed to their limits until they quit and infrastructure collapsing, while the owners, investors and management make out like bandits- and the absolute worst they can fear is being paid huge amounts of money to gently caress off.

Bar Ran Dun
Jan 22, 2006




Discendo Vox posted:

The food industry has probably been one of the biggest leverage sectors on the rail strike because they're especially vulnerable to the harms of a strike (and the downstream effects are also especially direct and clear). Chamber of Commerce has actively courted them on letters to Congress and, earlier, the administration to settle the dispute even after the first no vote. From the food and ag industry perspective, a rail dispruption is especially frightening...on the other hand, the sophisticated actors in that sector recognized that an actual strike was vanishingly unlikely to ever happen. The industry using rail networks don't like the rail industry, and may or may not care about their labor practices (the folks I've spoken to tend to agree that the rail industry is running itself into the ground for no real benefit- note the letter from Chamber linked above is relatively neutral on terms- if CoC had their way it would be more anti-union). But their immediate interest is in keeping the food supply, and thereby their industries, stable.

To this I would add delay and events like strikes strikes are often policy exclusions on inland marine policies. Even a relatively short strike could potential cause huge losses in refrigerated or time sensitive food cargoes that might not get covered if a while bunch happen all at once and can clearly be connected to a specific strike event. Those losses are and have already been happening from the rail labor shortages.

rscott
Dec 10, 2009

I really wish someone would ask Liz Shuler how many sick days a year she gets

Name Change
Oct 9, 2005


If a rail strike would result in empty power plants and grocery stores, then yeah you should nationalize rail etc. It's insane that this isn't handled in the way other critical infrastructure is.

bird food bathtub
Aug 9, 2003

College Slice

Sodomy Hussein posted:

If a rail strike would result in empty power plants and grocery stores, then yeah you should nationalize rail etc. It's insane that this isn't handled in the way other critical infrastructure is.

That sounds like doing a socialism. Those kinds of thoughts are not allowed, citizen. Please report to the nearest TV with Fox playing for re-education.

DarkCrawler
Apr 6, 2009

by vyelkin

Do they vote for union bosses in American unions or are they appointed by a board or something?

Nucleic Acids
Apr 10, 2007

Gyges posted:

Imagine being such a piece of poo poo in your negotiations that you cause John Cornyn to whip the Republicans in favor of unions

Never forget that one of Biden's greatest dreams is to cut Social Security and other benefits. A thing he has given many passionate speeches in favor of on the Senate floor.

He might get the Grand Bargain Obama couldn’t.

Rigel
Nov 11, 2016

DarkCrawler posted:

Do they vote for union bosses in American unions or are they appointed by a board or something?

They are elected by their members

FlapYoJacks
Feb 12, 2009

Sodomy Hussein posted:

If a rail strike would result in empty power plants and grocery stores, then yeah you should nationalize rail etc. It's insane that this isn't handled in the way other critical infrastructure is.

It’s worse than that. A rail strike would also mean water treatment plants wouldn’t get chlorine and other needed chemicals to keep the water clean.

Seyser Koze
Dec 15, 2013

Mucho Mucho
Nap Ghost

Rigel posted:

They are elected by their members

I think the AFL-CIO head is chosen by an executive board.

so technically yes they're chosen by members, but

Nucleic Acids
Apr 10, 2007
https://mobile.twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1597739899200983041

I cannot conceive of a single reason why these bills would be split other than to ram through the rail bosses’ deal and then kill the sick leave provision.

Here’s the full statement: https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/112922-2

selec
Sep 6, 2003

Nucleic Acids posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1597739899200983041

I cannot conceive of a single reason why these bills would be split other than to ram through the rail bosses’ deal and then kill the sick leave provision.

Here’s the full statement: https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/112922-2

Yeah that’s my assumption too. Astonishing levels of craven, despicable cruelty.

quote:

The average American would not know that we get fired for going to the doctor…We have guys who were punished for taking time off for a heart attack and COVID. It’s inhumane.


https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2022/09/13/rail-strike-economy-impact/

Papercut
Aug 24, 2005

Nucleic Acids posted:

https://mobile.twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1597739899200983041

I cannot conceive of a single reason why these bills would be split other than to ram through the rail bosses’ deal and then kill the sick leave provision.

Here’s the full statement: https://www.speaker.gov/newsroom/112922-2

To insure that at least the deal gets passed while still attempting to include the sick leave provisions

Nucleic Acids
Apr 10, 2007

Papercut posted:

To insure that at least the deal gets passed while still attempting to include the sick leave provisions

Bill splitting worked out incredibly well for BBB.

selec
Sep 6, 2003

Papercut posted:

To insure that at least the deal gets passed while still attempting to include the sick leave provisions

But if you wanted the sick leave protections why not play hardball and combine them and whip the hell out of your caucus? This just gives them an out.

I don’t think Pelosi wants those workers to have sick leave if it means that the railroads have to do fewer stock buybacks.

https://twitter.com/sensanders/status/1596226730942922754?s=46&t=c2LB8tjMXB8asIgIP29dFg

cat botherer
Jan 6, 2022

I am interested in most phases of data processing.

Nucleic Acids posted:

I cannot conceive of a single reason why these bills would be split other than to ram through the rail bosses’ deal and then kill the sick leave provision.

It's really been one of their favorite ways to kill things that they don't want to pass but told voters they want to pass. I don't know what these craven morons endgame is. Everyone loses here in the long run, including railroad execs. There's just no excuse for this terrible Dem leadership. There's not even the excuse of a midterm coming up. Instead, they are set on crushing the workers and setting things up for even worse problems in 2024. Do they think these workers will just be happy and shut up?

Papercut posted:

To insure that at least the deal gets passed while still attempting to include the sick leave provisions
No. This is called "giving up your leverage." The Dems were using exactly this line in BBB.

Adbot
ADBOT LOVES YOU

Bel Shazar
Sep 14, 2012

cat botherer posted:

It's really been one of their favorite ways to kill things that they don't want to pass but told voters they want to pass. I don't know what these craven morons endgame is. Everyone loses here in the long run, including railroad execs. There's just no excuse for this terrible Dem leadership. There's not even the excuse of a midterm coming up. Instead, they are set on crushing the workers and setting things up for even worse problems in 2024. Do they think these workers will just be happy and shut up?

No. This is called "giving up your leverage." The Dems were using exactly this line in BBB.

Seems to me it's 'ensuring you get the deal you want at the expense of the one you are less willing to fight for'

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • Post
  • Reply