341
Joe Biden Is About to Go Where No President Has Gone Before
(www.motherjones.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 24 Sep 2023
341 points (100.0% liked)
politics
19096 readers
2882 users here now
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
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
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
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?
If i keep slaves, and those slaves feed my children. If they escape my children will starve, the whole negborhood will! Therefore it is immoral to let the slaves become free persons, EVER. /s
The trolly problem clasically has no good answer, however the above statement has held down thousands of slaves in all but name. You are saying perpetuating slavery indefinitly causes less suffering than an unknown amount of starvation.
Sounds like the railroads are mismanaged to the point where the entire industry is so brittle that one strike of any duration at all would be a catastrophe.
Sounds like a job for antitrust or nationalization. Of course, if we can't muster the political will to impose terms on rail bosses, we're sure as hell not gonna break them up or nationalize them.
They're the ones that made the call to split the bill saying it was guaranteed to pass which made no sense
We need to stop saying "if there were more democrats" and start saying "if there were more socialists"
Yeah, it boggles my mind that the bills were split. The only reason I can think of to explain that is that they simply knew what was going to happen and any other explanation is just gaslighting us into thinking that they were doing something.
hey me, angey and ill informed child, shut your face
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"Sorry, gotta pull and old Reddit classic here:
This
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.
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.
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.
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.
I just spent a week in the hospital. Used up all my sick time. Went back to work, still sick. How am I gonna pay the hospital bill otherwise?
And ignored the union's other demands.
On one side I have seen where he’s continued negotiations with them to help them resolve issues without a strike which is pretty beneficial.
On the other hand, if that’s not as good as it looks, then this could show that he realized he fucked up not letting the rail workers strike. If he’s going this hard on other strikes and supporting unions it may be to garner support for re-election. Even if it’s only for his own gain, being heavily pro union is a win for the people.
Even if he's doing it for the appearance, it's good that union support is popular enough that politicians want to seem pro-union.
I mean, that's basically the union working as intended. Together, we have the power to put fear in the powerful. Bosses or Biden, makes little difference.
Yes, but then he got them the sick days anyhow after the fact.
I’m concerned that the second deal isn’t part of the contract, but, yeah. He fucked them in the name of national security; then walked back and got them the ask.
He got them a small number of the sick days they were demanding, and didn't address any of their other concerns whatsoever such as ending Precision Scheduled Railroading.
He didn't get all the days they asked for but that was part of the negotiation.
Considering that he didn't shut down the American economy while at the brink of a recession and still negotiated the terms that both sides agreed on is a win for me.
"After taking away their ability to use their leverage and power, they agreed to the pittance they were offered. The overworked wage workers and the billionaire led rail conglomerates AGREED!"
🤡
Reading neoliberal apologia is vomit inducing
These strikes don’t live in a vacuum. Inflation was much higher then, and supply chain transport constraints were a driving factor for it.
That was arguably some “Stop the Green Goblin or Save Gwen Stacy” shit.
It's almost like we shouldn't have the green goblin running all our trains
Not really?
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
Fuck IBEW
How come?
Do you know what it stands for? Its some electrical workers, they always had the sick leave. They were on the railroad companies side from the beginning, agreeing to the shitty deal with zero sick days for rail workers, that the actual rail workers were going to strike against.
But democrats hoist them up to the podium as speaking for rail unions. It is always IBEW linked.
Pretending being thrown scraps after having their most powerful tool taking away from them is a win is a pretty good reason.
"Pro union only if I like the union, otherwise fuck them"
Collective bargaining of organized labor isn't going to always pick the universally best option for everyone. Police unions should have made that glaringly obvious. If an electrical workers union agrees to a deal that benefits them but not others, it's an incredibly shitty thing to do, but it's still collective bargaining in action.
No, how collective bargaining works is if they dont get a deal that benefits enough people, they collectively strike. That was banned, collective bargaining was banned, and then after the fact these assholes are praising the move.
You did get it wrong. It prevented a strike, but still got the workers what they wanted a few months later and without wrecking the economy.