829
submitted 1 year ago by L4s@lemmy.world to c/politics@lemmy.world

Democratic Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez has endorsed President Joe Biden’s reelection campaign, a sign of the president’s strength in uniting his party to have the backing of one of its most liberal members

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] TheBucklessProphet@lemmy.world 8 points 1 year ago

For anyone who wasn’t previously convinced that AOC was a simple Dem operative rather than the socialist she was masquerading as, here you go. No serious socialist would back the reelection of an old white dinosaur who broke the rail strike’s back the way Biden did. The fact that DSA didn’t revoke her membership after that is a black mark on them as an organization.

[-] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago

That point about the rail workers isn't accurate

After months of negotiations, the IBEW’s Railroad members at four of the largest U.S. freight carriers finally have what they’ve long sought but that many working people take for granted: paid sick days.

This is a big deal, said Railroad Department Director Al Russo, because the paid-sick-days issue, which nearly caused a nationwide shutdown of freight rail just before Christmas, had consistently been rejected by the carriers. It was not part of last December’s congressionally implemented update of the national collective bargaining agreement between the freight lines and the IBEW and 11 other railroad-related unions.

“We’re thankful that the Biden administration played the long game on sick days and stuck with us for months after Congress imposed our updated national agreement,” Russo said. “Without making a big show of it, Joe Biden and members of his administration in the Transportation and Labor departments have been working continuously to get guaranteed paid sick days for all railroad workers.

“We know that many of our members weren’t happy with our original agreement,” Russo said, “but through it all, we had faith that our friends in the White House and Congress would keep up the pressure on our railroad employers to get us the sick day benefits we deserve. Until we negotiated these new individual agreements with these carriers, an IBEW member who called out sick was not compensated.”

From https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2023/6/23/2177130/-Big-win-for-Rail-Workers-under-the-Biden-Administration-info-on-the-climate-answer-America-needs

[-] blazera@kbin.social 8 points 1 year ago

IBEW stands for international brotherhood of electrical workers. They have a division of electricians that work on railroads. I dont know why this guy keeps getting quoted as some head of railroad workers. Thats also one of the unions that voted in favor of the contract with no sick days, it was actual rail worker unions opposing it that were planning on striking before Biden decided workers dont get to strike.

[-] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I'm aware of who they are, that article just had the easiest quote to pull showing that the admin kept working at it quietly behind the scenes. A better, yet more convoluted article would have been the one I'm linking below that shows the wins so far, the work that still needs to be done, more sources speaking on how their individual unions are doing, and a larger conglomerate of players still helping (the Biden admin is still a player)

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/01/railroad-workers-union-win-sick-leave

[-] blazera@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

oh good, a minority of rail workers got the right to be sick after Biden outlawed their right to collective bargain

[-] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

Majority*, more or less the only ones still bargaining are the operators, and I don't understand your cynicism as the work is still being done. It's obvious from the results so far that it's succeeding, just slowly and out of the spotlight.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 7 points 1 year ago

"granted paid sick days to almost half their workforce." is PR speak for minority.

My cynicism stems from the fact that collective bargaining was outlawed. Telling unions they're not allowed to go on strike. That's real, the president forbade a union to do what unions do, that's now a precedent we can just call upon whenever workers rights might inconvenience rich people, shit's not okay. Kind of hard to negotiate when your one point of leverage you have on the rich is not allowed. Any of this 'work still needing done' would have been done a whole lot sooner and better if not for Biden.

[-] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Older article

WASHINGTON, June 5 (Reuters) - More than 60% of U.S. unionized railroad workers at major railroads are now are covered by new sick leave agreements, a trade group said Monday.

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/most-unionized-us-rail-workers-now-have-new-sick-leave-2023-06-05/#:~:text=Under%20the%20agreement%20effective%20Aug,use%20as%20paid%20sick%20time.

I also disagree with the "better" part and the precedent you think that vote sets, for a few complicated reasons. First, "better" would have included hurting 100% of Americans with even more increased prices than were already being suffered from inflation numbers on the back end of the COVID economy. The administration had to choose between helping the union workers and helping all Americans. In the end, they chose both, just not immediately as illustrated above. As far as the precedent goes, rail unions are in a very unique position as Congress has a permanent seat at the bargaining table, this is not something other unions face. While we're on precedents, they had already agreed on a contract months before and still moved to strike, that's also a dangerous precedent. The whole thing was a shit show top to bottom. All things considered, I think the Biden admin is handling it the best that any ever could have.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 5 points 1 year ago

Yeah, you think the labor strikes to get us the 8 hour work day and overtime laws didnt raise prices? This logic you're using can dismiss any labor movement, because the employers are holding prices hostage. Same logic used against minimum wage, against child labor laws. I cant afford shit and Im willing to afford even less shit temporarily for another industry to get better workers rights. Anything to hurt scumbag employers not even allowing workers to get sick.

And no, they didnt agree on a contract months before. Some union leaders agreed to it, others rejected it, no one ratified it, before congress and Biden enforced the agreement by legislation. Why the hell would they strike against a contract they agreed with?

[-] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Man you are debating in serious bad faith of you're going to posit me as anti union.

You're right, all unions had not agreed in the contracts months before, several agreed, but after brushing up, 3 of the 12 unions objected and it only takes 1 to spike the negotiations, that's my error. I was mistaken in believing that when they sent the negotiated contracts to Congress in September that they had reached agreement, but moved to strike after negotiations feel apart in the cooling phase.

As far as everything else goes, yes, the point of strikes is to cause discomfort as a way of balancing power between labor and capital, however that doesn't change the government's obligation when it's of such large consequence. They had exactly one lever and were forced to pull it, some more gleefully than others. At the end of the day, the Biden administration didn't let the conversation stop there, and that is what sets the administration apart for the alternative.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

however that doesn’t change the government’s obligation when it’s of such large consequence.

again, this applies to every major labor movement in history, I would definitely call this anti-union if you're saying governments should prevent their one point of leverage over employers. You know what happens without the government intervening? The employers cave, and that's what prevents the strikes that would hurt everyone else. But why would they have in this scenario?

[-] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Alright, I'll bite. Name me any other labor movement where a single union's negotiations have the power to evaporate up to 4% of the nation's GDP in its first month?

I ask you that to illustrate that the rail situation was absolutely dire with a projection on 90+billion in losses for the country each day after the first day and a projection of 700,000 lost jobs after the first month. It's the only reason the government even has a seat at that bargaining table and it's a damn good one. I wouldn't dare give that power carte blanche, but I'm not faulting the government for taking the steps it took in that situation. Instead, I'll choose to reward the further efforts to get the unions what they deserve even after being forced to play their hand.

The progressive move forward would be to dissolve and nationalize the rails after that shit show, but that's a completely different conversation. We don't have a system built on progressive values, we have one that's been shattered and glued together several times and these are the late stage knells that we can expect at this point. But the path to actually building those progressive systems isn't to throw away progress due to imperfection. The Biden admin getting those wins is progress worth preserving and building upon is my point.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Yeah, they're a very important workforce, that was rapidly dwindling over time, over shit like not being allowed to be sick. How much does that hurt the GDP? The railroad companies made the situation dire themselves by teetering the economy on fewer and fewer, harder and harder worked workers. How about this, to save the economy, Biden forces the employers to agree to what the union workers settle on.

[-] BrandoGil@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

I don't disagree with that being a better solution, but it wasn't an option. Unironically, this was the train car moral dilemma. I think you're undermining your own argument, though. That while rapidly declining workforce due to the sick day issue and the issues that arise from that may very well be a reason the Biden admin is trying to right that wrong. I still argue that instead of changing who the government forces to agree, the rail system should be nationalized. We've seen that the companies in charge of them clearly can't manage them not just for their playing chicken with the economy forcing the government to bail them out of that disaster, but also the several toxic derailments since.

[-] TheBucklessProphet@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Listen, I'm thrilled that the workers got their sick days and credit where credit's due to anyone in the admin who helped secure that, but that doesn't make my point inaccurate. The Biden administration helped deny railroad workers their right to strike. That counts as breaking the back of the strike, even if after breaking their back they turned around and gave them (at least part) of what they were asking for. Breaking strikes via a literal act of Congress is a deeply upsetting, dangerous, and anti-worker move. Full stop.

In contrast to the IBEW statements you've quoted up above, look at the contrasting tone from the RWU in a recent Jacobin article:

RWU made crystal clear by our words and actions throughout contract negotiations that, while we were of course in full support of seven days of paid sick leave for railworkers, RWU would never be in favor of any legislation denying railroad workers our human right to withhold our labor when all else fails in our struggle for safe working conditions and dignity, regardless of whatever concessions may be dangled.

RWU was and is in favor of any legislation that would grant any relief to the barbaric working conditions we contend with — but we would never concede our right to strike. We thank Ocasio-Cortez and other members of the House of Representatives and the Senate for their votes in support of sick leave. But we are not happy at all with her or others in both chambers who voted to deny railroad workers the right to strike.

(Emphasis added by me)

[-] frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 8 points 1 year ago

What do you want her to do, split the vote? I agree Biden sucks, but shit, he's at least better than any GOP alternative. The real solution is for the DNC to stop pushing crusty old white fucks.

[-] pirategoddess@kbin.social 6 points 1 year ago

This. We can worry about progressive politics in 2028, but right now we have to focus on defeating fascism, and Biden is currently the best candidate for that.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 3 points 1 year ago

The real solution is for the DNC to stop pushing crusty old white fucks.

the hell do you call this then?

[-] frozen@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 2 points 1 year ago

The DNC already pushed for this crusty old white fuck.

[-] blazera@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

yeah? and you're saying we should stop?

[-] TheBucklessProphet@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

What I want to see is for her and anyone else calling themselves a socialist to work to be a socialist power outside of the Democratic Party. The DNC is rotted to the core by the money and influence of the capitalist class in a way that, if not irreversible, is hopeless in the short to medium term. Just look at all of the explicitly capitalist Democratic leaders, including younger ones like Buttigieg.

If you want to pursue socialism, the DNC is the wrong place to do it. Hell, looking at history I think putting eggs in the electoralism bucket is fundamentally flawed. Look at the failed German revolution that helped make room for the ascension of the Nazis thanks to “socialists” making extreme compromises and undercutting socialist revolutionaries to instead work within bourgeois political parties.

[-] Entropywins@kbin.social 4 points 1 year ago

Double check what happened after the breaking of the railstrike... check with the union they have info on their website

[-] TheBucklessProphet@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago

I thought I replied to this message, but it doesn't appear to have posted.

I'm thrilled that the worker's got sick time and credit where it's due to anyone in the admin who helped make that happen. It doesn't change the fact that the admin, with the help of AOC and others in Congress broke a strike. That's a terrible, dangerous, anti-worker precedent to set, and shame on anyone who voted for it and Biden for signing it.

If I ask someone for $20 bucks for lunch and they kick me in the shin before giving me the money, am I supposed to be thankful and forget the fact that they just kicked me in the shin? Congress kicked workers in the proverbial, collective shin by blocking them from their right to strike.

Here's a decent article from Jacobin written by an RWU representative making exactly that point: https://jacobin.com/2023/04/railroad-workers-united-aoc-strike-vote-rank-and-file

And here's a decent rundown of the situation from a decent socialist source (even if it is Trot): https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2023/04/19/jaco-a19.html

[-] TheOminousBulge@kbin.social 1 points 1 year ago

Are you really this myopic or are you just some fascist sockpuppet?

this post was submitted on 07 Jul 2023
829 points (100.0% liked)

politics

19072 readers
3233 users here now

Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!

Rules:

  1. 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:

  1. 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.
  2. 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.
  3. 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.
  4. 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.
  5. 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

Register To Vote

Citizenship Resource Center

Congressional Awards Program

Federal Government Agencies

Library of Congress Legislative Resources

The White House

U.S. House of Representatives

U.S. Senate

Partnered Communities:

News

World News

Business News

Political Discussion

Ask Politics

Military News

Global Politics

Moderate Politics

Progressive Politics

UK Politics

Canadian Politics

Australian Politics

New Zealand Politics

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS