politics
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
view the rest of the comments
Didn't he severely fuck the train workers unions a few months ago, or did I get that wrong?
The Biden Administration continued working on getting them their paid sick days.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/01/railroad-workers-union-win-sick-leave
It's wild to me that Biden broke the strike then got them the tiniest fucking concession afterwards and people think that's an argument that he somehow was on the side of the union the whole time. Getting 4 sick days a year is absolutely nothing compared to the whole list of grievances and it's embarrassing that people bring this up in response to him breaking the strike.
Huh. It's really weird to read stuff like this. Just reminds me how lucky I am to not be in the US... with my legally mandated 10 days a year and all...
If he was a Republican he would have them all fired and nationally ban unions. So, there’s that.
The sick leave is what lead directly to the strike vote, all the union sources from the time are clear on that. What else did you think they were planning to strike over?
If you listened to what the organizers were saying leading up to the potential strike, the sick days were used to sell the strike to the public since it was just the easiest to understand and most cartoonishly ghoulish points. The terrible Implementation of "precision scheduled railroading" and the reduction in staffing, ridiculous on call times, and weird attendance point systems that it brought was the actual impetus for the strike.
Any sources from that time?
I can't find the actual interview I'm remembering but the episode of "Work Stoppage" about PSR and the strike is good. Labornotes also had a bunch of good articles explaining the situation at the time:
https://labornotes.org/2022/02/rail-negotiations-are-about-good-job-made-miserable
https://www.labornotes.org/2022/09/rail-workers-reject-contract-recommendations-say-theyre-ready-strike
Precision Scheduled Railroading, a system that made them do safety checks much much faster, requiring less workers check more cars (among other things). Overwork and declining safety, potentially a factor in recent derailment number increases such as East Palestine.
Also he only got them a small fraction of the sick days they were asking for.
Where's Lemmy gold when you need it?
Donating a couple bucks to a strike fund in my honor is better than Reddit gold could ever be
Link me to one and I'll throw in a few bucks.
But anyway I never bought it, I only used the free coins they gave out.
A fraction of the paid sick days they were asking for, while also not meeting their other major demands at all. Ending Precision Scheduled Railroading was a big one. Still going on.
They stopped them from striking and potentially making greater gains, then tossed them some crumbs.
They should have stayed the hell out of it or used the government's power to stop the rail companies not the strikers.
Well Congress did vote on a bill to give rail workers 7 days of sick leave at the same time as the vote preventing the strike. One bill got enough Republican support to pass, the other didn't. If there were more Democrats in Congress, the outcome would have been more favorable to the unions, hands down
the cool thing about strikes is congress doesn't have to vote for a company to give in to the demands of the workers. As a matter of fact congress has fuck all to do with it
Congress has the authority to require a company to give in to the demands of the workers, just not enough people in it who are willing to vote to do it
If they'd not intervened AT ALL they could've gotten even more by striking.
Or even better just make a reasonable amount of sick days federal law for all, and also put better safety legislation for trains.
Ok, and at real risk to many thousands of other people's jobs when the rail system ground to a halt. When nurses go on strike, it's expected more expensive travel nurses are going to step in to do patient care, because otherwise innocent people will be harmed. UAW goes on strike, no one steps in to take over because all that happens is corporate revenue starts to suffer, car prices may go up, repair parts may become harder to find or more expensive.
If rail workers go on strike, the entire United States manufacturing sector grinds to a halt, plus serious impact on imports/exports, military readiness, and even food availability. Inflation would almost immediately have become much worse. Right wing and corporate media would have been running rampant with anti-union stories because public sentiment would have quickly shifted against the strike once the implications became clear. All this is ok though, because after devastating the US economy, the rail workers walk away with a slightly better contract than this one?
If the entire US economy necessitates oppressing rail workers, then yes, rail workers striking is a good thing. It sounds like they are extremely important, according to you, and should be listened to.
Then get the asshole executives to compromise instead? Why is the blame here being put on the workers being exploited?
Sorry, gotta pull and old Reddit classic here:
This
How does that not sound like a complete violation of the constitution. "We voted to give you 7 days to not work somtimes and in exchange took your right to not work"
As a side note. It is so fucked up limited paid sick days are a thing