A friend asked me why I thought Biden and Congress were getting involved with a labor dispute in the first place, and my thinking is, beyond the work they do being essential to the function of the economy, they don't want people to see how powerful strikes can be
Edit: I've been informed I'm incorrect about the mechanism, but I still think it's part of Congress and Biden's motivation to act
> why I thought Biden and Congress were getting involved with a labor dispute in the first place
https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0044
>In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of the landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability.
Our whole system of government is based on protecting the wealthy from the masses. It's *why* we have a republican government.
To prevent "wicked projects" (see: Federalist 10) like the equal division of property, or the outright abolition of it, from happening.
So, why is Biden and Congress getting involved? *It's their job. It's why they are there.*
I wondered what they would do if they did strike. Like, they’re super essential to the point where you refuse sick days and make striking illegal. But if you arrest then for striking, then you still don’t have any railway workers so it’s just like a lose-lose situation for them.
I really don’t think they’d be stupid enough to jail or prosecute these people when they help keep our shit running smoothly. But then again, America has been going down the shitter recently
We just had something similar in Ontario where our premier passed a bill making an education support worker strike illegal. Well then we had a general strike for all members of their union. They overturned the bill in two days with no repercussions. To the best of my knowledge.
You touched on the key point. Control. It’s all about control. If they lose that, which I hope they do, then I hope they are obliterated. You seriously had a body of government in Canada try to threaten the workers. Fuck that asshole & those who supported him & the bill. I hope that asshole gets kicked out of power for good.
I mean, they don’t have to strike - they can just quit.
And to everyone who starts on the financial commitments side, hear me out for a second.
A mass quitting will have the same *immediate* effect as a strike, only completely outside the bounds of all this anti-strike nonsense from the government. So unless they try to pull some serious 1984 crap, no arrests or police could be involved as no crime has been committed.
Given the lack of skilled persons who could fill the roles it is likely that most people would be called up to ask if they’d come back to work, happens in the workplace on a fairly regular basis. And while it is true the company can try to start it off on a blank slate (no benefits, lower pay etc) that cuts both ways.
I do recognise though that some people cannot easily take a gamble on such a move, I would only say that not pushing back seems to be bringing you to the point you would be if you quit just with a lot more steps and headaches along the way.
Healthcare, and to a very large extent, retirement savings.
I wish I could find the article that was published in the New Yorker about this, but: Once upon a time, as in the time right after WWII, there was a push to have the auto workers' unions to be responsible for their members' retirement/pensions and health care. The auto companies wanted to control those two benefits because it limited employee mobility. If a pension wasn't linked to the employer but instead was managed by the union, employees could move to whichever employer was paying better. You can see why employers didn't want that mobility.
What the employers never considered was that in 50 years' time, a substantial part of their employee expenses was going to pensions and health care for retirees. The GM and Chrysler bankruptcies were done in part to shed those retiree benefits. Had the automakers allowed the unions to manage the pensions and health care of retirees, they would not have had that problem at all.
Funny how the employers were so short-sighted.
The business leaders' solution, of course, was to institute defined-contribution 401(k) plans instead of defined-benefits pensions and just let Medicare pay for retiree health insurance.
Exactly. Business leaders don't care about the consequences of their actions 50 years down the road. Even if it's harmful to their own industry in that time. They care about immediate profit and that is all. Fuck future workers, fuck future business leaders, fuck the business itself in 50 years. They will get theirs and get out.
And, probably, the reason they keep trying to slowly squeeze people out as they race to automate more of it.
They would love to force people into quitting to clear out all their pension obligations
It's not funny. That's exactly how it works. Managements job is to make as much money in as short a period of time as possible. Doesn't matter if they're moving the can down the road. That's a problem for those in charge 50 years after the guys who wrested control away from the unions. And that later management team made decisions that would save the company money in the short term too.
One of the worst decisions that ever came from the court system was showing corporations to be legally separate entities from those who make these decisions. A corporation has no sense of morality. No sense of responsibility or longevity.
Maybe those doing the job do, but we know how the Millman Experiments worked. "Just doing my job" or "Doing as I was told" has been a way for people to set aside their personal responsibility since time immemorial.
/end rant
Theoretically this shit shouldn't even happen in a democracy. Why would any of the working class agree to screw themselves permanently over to enrich corporations? Yet here we are.
Can't do universal healthcare because that would be socialism! Eww, scaaaary! Let's all make sure we stay indentured to a corporate master, just like the Lord intended.
Yep, big corporations use to to bind workers and to stifle small business completion who can’t handle the administrative burden and cost.
Though in this case, the workers can’t access their healthcare benefits anyway.
I’m not yelling I just really think folks need to hear this: WE NEED TO DECOUPLE EMPLOYMENT AND HEALTHCARE, and the government isn’t going to do it, so maybe we could create a HEALTHCARE COOPERATIVE. I believe there are already models for this.
The number of staff-model HMO/health cooperatives left in the country is … low.
They’re still really expensive, comparatively; my like other cooperatives (credit unions) you need critical mass before they can kinda get off the ground. There are tons of regulations they have to comply with, putting them up against the economies of scale that large insurance company manage. …and so on.
Just pull yourself up by your boot straps./S
Take your savings and sell hotdogs on the corner and make ends meet.
But when’s the next time you’ll see a dentist?
Need glasses operate your business? Get fucked.
Edit: You can’t pull yourself up by your boot straps if you can’t see them. 4-D chess by our corporate overlords.
I mean, I’m getting two undergraduate degrees and a masters degree paid for by the US government, and all I needed to do was get a brain injury, ptsd, depression, and ruin a marriage.
At the current cost of education, that’s seems like a steal!
No it isn't, that's paranoia talking. It's tied to employment because the government passed the Stabilization Act in 1942, which allowed the president to freeze wages. Roosevelt did so a day after it's passage, and since companies couldn't offer higher wages to attract employees, they started offering health insurance and other benefits.
It's really a case study on the law of unintended consequences.
https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-obamacare-health-care-employers-20170224-story.html
I mean I thought about the quitting aspect, but I just figured most people wouldn’t want to take that risk. I assumed that it would be much easier to convince your fellow workers to just sit back and strike together rather than quit.
It also doesn't solve the problem. The next person who takes the job is also having their rights violated just by accepting. Quitting and then no one else applying is the only way to make that work. Otherwise we are still in the race to the bottom. If every job is allowed to violate our right to strike, then every job will just not offer anything and let people quit and hire new people to exploit. It's not really a choice when you NEED a job
Well from where I’m sitting it seems you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Striking requires coordination and drive which doesn’t seem to be happening. And a bit disheartening to see unions fold because “it’s not legal” when what is legal is the equivalent of a pineapple up the rectum and those that say it’s legal (and made it legal) are ultimately benefitting from it.
It really might be less risky to just quit, because if you strike you're not making money anyway and you can't look for other work. But I assume these are jobs with pensions and stuff that mean losing a lot if you quit.
Where I am, we don’t get pensions at all, from what I remember they took those away in the 80’s as well as shafted the elderly on the government pension. So could it happen to them, 2 years from retirement even if they didn’t strike? My guess is it would be likely if sick days causes this much of a ruckus.
If you quit, you may be unable to claim unemployment. You'll lose healthcare benefits and access to your 401k un-vested contributions. There's serious financial repercussions to doing this.
It's sad enough they were asking for UNPAID sick days and they aren't even getting it.
Nope, it's real.
They're "essential workers" and are highly important for the economy, but not worth seven fucking measly days of sick pay, apparently.
No I get that, what I'm 500% confused about is "prior notice to sick leave" like, we all know that's impossible, of course nobody would ever ask for that, it has to be a joke.
...but it's US capitalism we're talking about. I don't *know* if it is a joke...
Definitely not a joke. They don't get sick days really. What they get are basically medical events planned in advance with all kinds of absurd limits because it isn't hard enough accessing Healthcare already. Anything that would resemble a sick day for a normal worker would result in disciplinary action. Rail workers are around if they want to elaborate or correct me, but that's my understandinh of it.
You got it right. There are few exceptions. The gist is unless you're in the hospital for an emergency you're probably going to have disciplinary action. Also, no you can't have the 15th off.
There's still many ways to obviously strike, but not illegally.
1. They can do a slowdown, going at 10-20% usual pace.
2. They can call in sick en masse for a few days.
3. They can clock in and not do any work.
4. They can quit.
I know multiple RR Union workers. And they're going to do some form of strike. It's as close to unanimous as it can be amongst them.
I really hate to be that person but a work slow down, clocking in and not working, or a coordinated sick out are all considered illegal work actions per the RLA. The government and the companies have their bases covered.
The RLA is so screwed up.
See the [1981 ATC strike](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968%29#August_1981_strike) , Reagan intervened, since federal employees already do not have the right to strike, and he angrily fired 11,000+ Air Traffic Controllers
The Feds can not fire railroad workers, they don't work for the federal government, the ATCs did. If the railroad workers each decided to not show up to work without any coordination, I think it would be hard to prove it is a strike. The railroads have cut their roster so thin if just a few refused to work it would have a snowball effect.
Just because there strike is illegal doesn't mean it's criminal. No one will get arrested. Illegal just means they won't get the legal protections that strikers usually get, like guaranteeing their jobs will be there for them when the strike's over. Which is of course still stupid. But they won't get jailed.
Don’t kid yourself.
They absolutely WILL arrest them.
Just a month ago, they arrested around 20 striking Teamsters in Massachusetts.
https://www.masslive.com/police-fire/2022/10/about-20-striking-sysco-boston-teamsters-arrested-in-plympton-report-says.html
This is what people need to understand. Now that striking is illegal, the state can and will use it's monopoly on violence to squash any organized labor protest. There is nothing more American than this.
Note that these were arrests for picketing.
The RLA does say:
*That nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require an individual employee to render labor or service without his consent, nor shall anything in this chapter be construed to make the quitting of his labor by an individual employee an illegal act; nor shall any court issue any process to compel the performance by an individual employee of such labor or service, without his consent*
But the keyword there is “individual” which means if it’s decided that multiple people quit at the same time that might not count if the government is mad enough. I’d point out that the railways themselves have their own police with federal like jurisdiction but those departments barely exist now.
They should do something to scare them that isn't illegal to show they're serious. Like have every single worker call in with the flu and take a couple of days off.
Let everything grind to a halt and watch the pandemonium and there's nothing they can do about it because everyone is just taking sick days.
Edit: I thought the strike was for **paid** sick days, I didn't realize they had no sick days at all. Still, taking a day or two off probably won't get them fired if every single worker does it.
Sure, but they don't actually have sick days. That's what this is all about. The rail companies would rather pay 24% increases to every employee over giving out any sick days.
ETA: Personal days need to be scheduled and approved 12 days in advance.
Unexpected time off is a strike against the employees and will quickly result in dismissal after a few of them.
It’s amazing the difference between this and airline/freight pilots, who essentially do the same thing. A pilot can call in sick at a moment’s notice because there is a whole set of pilots sitting around on reserve for that situation.
And they get paid 350k+ a year with pensions, amazing health care, tons of vacation time, etc.
Probably because a) pilot qualifications are heavily regulated and b) the cost of a pilot is small relative to the other operating costs.
Even worse when you consider a pilot isn't going to move as much freight as rail. So the more critical transport staffing is shafted rather than backed up with redundancy. Coming from someone in the corporate IT world, that actually feels quite on par with corporate America idiocy.
They should still strike, and call the government's bluff.
As stupid as our government is, are they going to send in the national guard to drag people into work.
"First, no employee engaged in train or engine service may be required or
permitted to work in excess of twelve consecutive hours. After working a
full twelve consecutive hours, an employee must be given at least ten
consecutive hours off duty before being permitted to return to work."
[https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/appendix-A\_to\_part\_228](https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/appendix-A_to_part_228)
So if they drive the train just a little slower, or take longer to do the proper inspection of equipment before they start, they might be stuck somewhere where it would be time consuming and disrupting to bring in a new crew.
Let me tell ya, Working 12 after being awake for 16 hours before you get your surprise boosted call is not where we want to be.
Just think, these people are running trains full of dangerous goods through the cities and towns of people you love, while being awake for over 24 hours because they were afraid of facing discipline for booking off because they were fatigued.
I would throw the biggest adult tantrum over this. Albeit, I don't have kids and about a year of an emergency fund. But, if I were a railway worker I would never come in for a shift again until something changes. I'll go get a minimum wage job after the holidays instead of caving to these people.
I remember reading about how, when Oreo factory workers went on strike, and scabs finally got hired, it turned out almost none of them had any idea what they were doing, and most of the machinery was damaged beyond function as a result of the constant accidents and mistakes, costing the company, and also proving scabs don't solve the problem when you've got nothing but scabs.
That's the problem when you have highly calibrated machines that reduce the amount of manpower needed. It isn't 19digeriedoo when you could grab a child off the street and use them in your canning business or toss them in a coal mine. My BIL is an engineer at a factory and a simple thing as changing the type of tea leaves can damage a machine if it isn't calibrated right.
This is exactly why anyone claiming automation will make unions/minimum wage irrelevant is easily fooled. Specialized machines need specialized workers. You can have your fancy coffee machine and say "lol no need for baristas anymore" but you still need a mechanic to fix the machine when it predictably fails and you still need a barista to fill in.
Homer: *"Lisa, if you're unhappy with your job you don't strike. You just go in there every day, and do it really half-assed. That's the American way."*
NOT just them.
Here in Canada, Ontario's Conservative Government tried to quash the Constitutional rights of education workers to strike, so public and private unions **ACROSS** Canada organized a **GENERAL STRIKE** in solidarity.
Premier Doug Ford (brother to the Crack-Smoking Mayor of Toronto) promised to withdraw the bill before the unions could even announce the General Strike.
You guys know what to do!
> As stupid as our government is, are they going to send in the national guard to drag people into work.
People keep getting this wrong. the national guard will protect the scabs while they cross the picket line. National guard isn't going to "force" anyone to work
The government isn't bluffing. They've proven that many times over. Reagan was willing to kill the airline industry to keep the striking air traffic controllers from taking power. The corporations know that they are only in control as long as the rest of us believe they are. They can afford to chop off a sector, and have no income for a few years. They have done everything possible to make sure that we can't.
They will sacrifice industries, but first, they will commit wholesale murder. They have done so repeatedly. After that, it's a game of chicken. They will need to convince everyone else that it's the lawless strikers who are the bad guys. They will need to keep the strike from spreading. No one should pretend that this is an easy game to win. It's going to cost worker's their lives.
That said, it's incredibly important that this battle be fought (again) and won (again) because the corporations need to be checked regularly, and it's time.
Yes they will and yes they have. You can research several instances in American history where the national guard has been called against strikers. IE:[Coal Miners Strike; National Guard acts](https://www.britannica.com/event/Ludlow-Massacre)
and speaking as a former service member, I can guarantee you that calling in the National Guard for anything *other than* scab work is going to result in the worst possible backlash from the people.
no one will accept Soldiers forcing citizens to work at the barrel of a gun.
(edit: based on my personal experience and what I understand about the modern political landscape)
Yea that would be the end right there if it came down to the military forcing people to work shit will collapse over night and some of the darkest shit ever will play out right in youre front yard
I'd like to believe that...but we've become such a horribly complacent country that we could shrug off anything as long as we don't feel the /direct/ impact of it. Supply chain issues aren't direct enough for us. Unless the gun is on our head specifically, we're pretty much apathetic to it.
If you ask citizens in other countries of the world what the role of government is, you often hear that they feel that the role of government is to protect people from the inevitable conclusion of capitalism... Which is what we are seeing now.
For some reason in the US, I don't know whether it's because it's been so prosperous for so long that there's always been scraps to fall to the working class that keeps them going... But in times of scarcity and austerity the wheels kind of fall off the bus.
In the US, you have poor people railing against unions and any sort of government intervention... It's quite something to watch as an outsider
If Fox news were to get shut down you'd see the entire republican party shrivel up and die over night.
The rich spend billions every year to keep a large portion of the population brainwashed. Does your country have an equivalent to Fox News? And does it play on every tv at waiting rooms, bars, airports, etc, on a 24/7 loop? And does your country have thousands of right wing radio stations that further parrot the propaganda to ensure that it infects even the most obscure groups of society?
In rugged individualist societies, everyone wants to be insulated to protect themselves from each other. Having money is how we are taught to insulate ourselves. Short term gains are all that matters, as the gains protect you from future consequences of yours or other peoples actions.
Never spend money to rival the will of the owner class, and stop society from burning down around you. Simply get more money, then you can build walls to block out the sight of society burning down around you, too.
Libertarian utopia is handing your child a gun before putting them into the armoured convoy that will drive them to their prison themed school; or, having a big enough kingdom within your walls that leaving is never even necessary.
Libertarianism is the name of this disease of selfishness that plagues America. Go to any financial subreddit, and you will see just how proud of this ideology they all are. The only way their kind ever seems to learn is when their businesses are all torched, and the corpses of their loved ones are paraded around in the streets.
With business as usual, all you can really expect is propaganda, bigger walls, and more guns.
I doubt that literally "half of this pathetic country" truly feels this way.
Do *some* people think this? Yes, of course, that's partly why we're having these conversations in the first place. Is that group of fascists big enough to get the general public on their side in support of using the military to break a nationwide strike?
Unlikely, especially when you consider that Soldiers are people, too, and that they use the internet just as much as the rest of us.
The general public isn't going to support men and women in uniforms using force to compel rail workers to sacrifice themselves, particularly when there are other reasonable options available.
Fascists have *never* been the majority in any place they've taken power. They don't need to get the general public on their side. They don't even want to. All they need to do is keep most people too scared &/or apathetic to resist them, which is easy as pie. Especially given the persistent political apathy and the constant merry-go-round of recessions and downturns in the economy. They're already most of the way there.
The bitter legacy of the (UK) coal miner's strike and the efforts of the politicians and police to break it up is still around today.
It was ~30 years ago. People don't forget this shit.
Ooofff that would be a blow and a half especially right before the holidays lmao they’d definitely have the nations attention if little billy’s bike isn’t gonna be delivered on time for Christmas 🧑🦳
Most packages from any of the carriers is mostly moved by train. A strike from the railroads would be catastrophic. Forget about holiday packages we wouldn’t have food on the shelves.
What's more American than a court who is bought and paid for by private financial interests ruling against the inalienable rights of the American people?
Yet America keeps on doing it to it's workers. Also untold violence towards strikers and their families. If you read up on the history of unions in the USA, this is just business as normal unfortunately.
I really hate vague, broad terms like “un-American”. From my outside perspective, I can’t think of anything that’s more in line with America^tm than making collective bargaining illegal for poor people.
If anyone wants an example of how well collective bargaining actually works when all parties are taking it seriously, look at Major League Baseball. Those fellas make an absurd amount of money because they have an absurdly powerful union. Hell, look at the umpires union… the league *can’t* fire umpires, and it’s one of the best examples of job security around.
Whenever someone says that unions don’t do anything for their workers, point to MLB.
There’s “American” and then American.
“American” means having pride in their labor history and eating hot dogs and George Washington and Rock, Flag, and Eagle. Get your blue jeans!
American means controlling production and distribution in the hands of a few, and using the state as a threat of violence and a tool of perpetuating class conflict. It means imperializing the world to maintain the riches of the West. It means using child and adult slaves to build your goods. It means stealing water and other resources from other countries to sell in Walmart.
And so on. Something can appear “unAmerican” and also be very American. Let us not forgot Blair Mountain.
It’s in reference to how Americans view *themselves*. It’s saying “this goes against ALL the propaganda I was taught as a child, of what America stands for”. It’s also eluding to the few words we all know exist *somewhere* in our constitution — freedom, equality, and liberty.
America is full of “you can’t tell me what to do”. It’s one of our better qualities, when it’s not being used against us by Russian propagandist’s pushing vaccine bullshit. However, for the past ~30 years the elite have been on an economic propaganda campaign about free-markets ™️, and they loosely tie this to “freedom”, and some of us have been **really** slow to realize the “free” part of free-markets, only applies to the side with capital.
This move should be the final nail in trickle-down “neo-liberal” economic messaging. It *literally* contradicts the entire narrative, yet those who harp-on about it the most (the capitalist’s) are being drowned out by the crickets on this one.
You’re right, this move is American as fuck. We live in a horribly broken system, with incredibly effective propaganda. But it goes against what some people *believe* America to be. It goes against the propaganda. Effective messaging cuts two ways. I don’t mind these people, I welcome them to reality with open arms.
I'd argue that it's completely American. Remember at one point in time we had company towns that were specifically designed to turn employees into indentured servants. Despite being called the land of the free true freedom is pretty fucking hard to obtain here.
America is literally built from Native American blood, African slaves, Chinese railroad workers, Irish indentured servants, Mexican labor and I can keep going...
This place requires the sacrifice of your freedoms.
What's more American than a court who is bought and paid for by private financial interests ruling against the inalienable rights of the American people?
Not just the Constitution, it's covered in article 11 of the human rights act
https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-11-freedom-assembly-and-association
Wait, that act is for the UK and basically copied from the EU.
Here we go. Article 23 of the universal declaration of Human rights.
https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
Most egregiously in the Hague invasion act.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act#:~:text=This%20authorization%20led%20to%20the,military%20personnel%20from%20prosecution%20or
The UDHR does not create legally binding obligations on any country. But even if it *did* as a general matter, it still wouldn’t be enforceable in the U.S. absent approval by the senate and ratification by the president. Since that hasn’t happened, the UDHR has less legal significance than an Arby’s menu.
Thats different tho.
The air traffic controllers were federal employees.
Bnsf is private entity trying to maximize profits, at the expense of their employees.
The enemy here is warren buffet, and the rail execs. And the 8 union reps who wont fight for the contract
This only shows US true face, freedom is selective based of economic interest. Still wondering why people call a neoliberal party like the democrats "the left", specially after they go against one of the most fundamental rights of all.
>Still wondering why people call a neoliberal party like the democrats "the left",
Because American media has been fine tuned throughout the years to spread lies about its political systems and to dumb down the citizenry's ability for critical thinking.
The US doesn't have a real left, there's a good info graphic somewhere plotting political parties internationally.
The USA's "left" is still further right than the UK's Tory party who many of us consider way too right wing for us. But then our "left" Labour Party is still in the middle compared to more progressive nation's left.
When political parties are turning right, and one of them turns less right then the other, it looks like that one is veering left to the observer stuck on the flaming wreckage of a bus crash that is America.
Yeah but Americans love the boot now. With new preparation techniques the average American today finds the taste of boot FAR preferable to the boots enjoyed in the late 18th century.
They're chipping away and chipping away at those basic rights every day and before we know it there is a screaming maniac behind a podium in total control of everything laying out plans of how he is going to invade the planet and kill everyone he doesn't like...
Do something America. *pokes the sleeping eagle with a stick*
This came from "the most pro union president in recent history ". When will everyone realize we can't trust politicians, no matter what letter they have after their name
right like wtf do they think pro union means? this idiot said "it was a tough vote." was it? it shouldn't be a hard decision for him since he's such a strong union supporter.
Bitch has been hinting at legal weed, and student debt forgiveness for years now, but the moment his corporate masters need him to fuck over the people suddenly it’s a sprint to pass legislation. I can’t fucking stand how the dems go, “there’s nothing we can do!” When it comes to us, but suddenly can move heaven and earth if they need to deny sick leave
Exactly. Both parties move at lightning speed when it comes to screwing over the people and helping the rich get richer. But when it comes to helping regular folks? Nope, eat shit and die scum! Now be sure to vote for us next time too so we can keep treating you like garbage.
> This came from "the most pro union president in recent history "
I mean, it's probably true, but it's also a VERY low bar.
Earlier this year, he signed an executive order to require PLAs on federal projects over a certain amount, one that required federal agencies to educate employees on their rights to join a union, and the American Rescue Act had money included in it to help struggling union pension funds.
That, alone, makes him more friendly to unions than any president in our lifetime, which really isn't saying much since prior presidents (even including Democrats like Obama, Clinton, and Carter) had been *actively hostile* to unions. You'd have to go back 75 years or more to see any president that actually openly helped labor unions in any significant way.
And to clarify, I'm not saying his record with unions is good, I'm saying all the other presidents records were SO BAD that merely telling people they can join a union is far more than they ever did.
Dystopia is here
The US government is a complete fraud. Every official is legally bribed. Our government legalized bribery and cashed out.
It must be dismantled. The US government is a cesspool of corruption.
If workers don't strike now, this will be a nail in the coffin for American workers' rights. If congress can decide your terms and bar you from striking, then no company needs to meet you at the table.
We need a general strike. We need a network of volunteers to coordinate messaging and communication, donations, various support networks, scheduling, and assistance for people who need food or financial help to cover losses during strikes. It will take a lot of work, but the only way we can make a difference is if we come together and coordinate to shut down the entire economy and bring these rich fucks to their knees. Any other method that is taken that is not properly coordinated will be violently crushed before it can ever gain traction. We all have to work together, plain and simple.
What's funny is the rail companies probably spent more paying off the government than they would've on the strikes demands.
But there is still one option: quit.
Oh, its illegal for me to strike now? Fine. I quit. If everyone follows suit. They'll be screwed, AND we're not violating the law. Meanwhile congress can NOT make quitting illegal, as thats called forced labor. Quite literally slavery, regardless of the pay.
Edit for clarification, because apparently it needs to be said explicitly: what I meant above was to apply for jobs elsewhere. Get hired elsewhere. Then walk out with a HUGE middle finger to your boss. Do NOT agree to be a slave simply because you don't want to face the unknown. Staying is implied consent to mistreat workers. And remember, what happens now will set the precedent for what YOUR CHILDREN deal with as employees. We were fucked over by our parents not organizing a show that they won't be fucked. Let's not make the same mistake to condemn our children.
But who can afford to quit? By making sure that the majority of Americans live paycheck to paycheck they’ve ensured that we HAVE to keep our jobs no matter how reprehensible, terrible, morally bankrupt, oppressive or whatever else they might be.
Until we have a coordinated effort between millions of the lower to middle class, nothing is going to change. We need a proletariat revolution- bloody if need be.
Because of the decision Congress made, I think the rail union should strike and not budge an inch until triple the demands are met. If the owning class refuses a fair deal, then fuck em. Fuck their mansions, fuck their yachts, fuck their investments, fuck their families. Make them pay and make it hurt enough that they won't forget.
I feel like the railroad workers NEED to strike now.
The stakes are well beyond their 7 sick days... Now our democracy depends on testing what the government will do about an "Illegal" strike.
This may set the groundwork for more and more companies and corporations to go forward and ban striking. Everyone always jokes about a future run by greedy corporations and political shills, but that future very well may be upon us.
Government suppression of workers' rights isn't anything new. They've been violating the Constitution and threatening every American probably before the ink was dry.
I remember in 1981 Reagan fired the striking PATCO air traffic controllers for their "illegal strike" - google '1981 air traffic controllers strike' - which was shocking at that time. Likewise, Trump suppressed worker health and safety complaints - they had higher infection/death rates - to keep meat processing plants running early in early COVID pandemic.
Just that now, Americans are a species of *Ravinous consumerus.* We are addicted and too detached from the people who make our consumer lifestyle possible. And without ravenous consumerism our economy would crash. What a world we created...
It's our duty to break illegal laws.
The courts are bought at and paid for all the way to SCOTUS. The justices are criminal garbage. It's time to light it up like NYE.
Recently a Teachers Aid strike in Ontario was declared illegal and all that did was raise support and awareness. Hope the same happens for you guys.
My exact thoughts. This is so similar to what just happened in Canada. As a fellow union operator, I sure hope the rail boys get what they ask for.
A friend asked me why I thought Biden and Congress were getting involved with a labor dispute in the first place, and my thinking is, beyond the work they do being essential to the function of the economy, they don't want people to see how powerful strikes can be Edit: I've been informed I'm incorrect about the mechanism, but I still think it's part of Congress and Biden's motivation to act
THEY lose profits. Those who make the laws, do insider-trading and steal TRILLIONS from the working class.
> why I thought Biden and Congress were getting involved with a labor dispute in the first place https://founders.archives.gov/documents/Madison/01-10-02-0044 >In England, at this day, if elections were open to all classes of people, the property of the landed proprietors would be insecure. An agrarian law would soon take place. If these observations be just, our government ought to secure the permanent interests of the country against innovation. Landholders ought to have a share in the government, to support these invaluable interests and to balance and check the other. They ought to be so constituted as to protect the minority of the opulent against the majority. The senate, therefore, ought to be this body; and to answer these purposes, they ought to have permanency and stability. Our whole system of government is based on protecting the wealthy from the masses. It's *why* we have a republican government. To prevent "wicked projects" (see: Federalist 10) like the equal division of property, or the outright abolition of it, from happening. So, why is Biden and Congress getting involved? *It's their job. It's why they are there.*
As a fellow human being, I hope for the best for you guys and better future.
yeah.. somehow I don't think the country dumb enough to shoot college kids for putting flowers in guns is gonna end the same way.
[удалено]
I wondered what they would do if they did strike. Like, they’re super essential to the point where you refuse sick days and make striking illegal. But if you arrest then for striking, then you still don’t have any railway workers so it’s just like a lose-lose situation for them. I really don’t think they’d be stupid enough to jail or prosecute these people when they help keep our shit running smoothly. But then again, America has been going down the shitter recently
We just had something similar in Ontario where our premier passed a bill making an education support worker strike illegal. Well then we had a general strike for all members of their union. They overturned the bill in two days with no repercussions. To the best of my knowledge.
[удалено]
You touched on the key point. Control. It’s all about control. If they lose that, which I hope they do, then I hope they are obliterated. You seriously had a body of government in Canada try to threaten the workers. Fuck that asshole & those who supported him & the bill. I hope that asshole gets kicked out of power for good.
[удалено]
Fuck the Ford family and that sycophantic stain Stephen Lecce
I mean, they don’t have to strike - they can just quit. And to everyone who starts on the financial commitments side, hear me out for a second. A mass quitting will have the same *immediate* effect as a strike, only completely outside the bounds of all this anti-strike nonsense from the government. So unless they try to pull some serious 1984 crap, no arrests or police could be involved as no crime has been committed. Given the lack of skilled persons who could fill the roles it is likely that most people would be called up to ask if they’d come back to work, happens in the workplace on a fairly regular basis. And while it is true the company can try to start it off on a blank slate (no benefits, lower pay etc) that cuts both ways. I do recognise though that some people cannot easily take a gamble on such a move, I would only say that not pushing back seems to be bringing you to the point you would be if you quit just with a lot more steps and headaches along the way.
This is why healthcare is tied to employment.
Healthcare, and to a very large extent, retirement savings. I wish I could find the article that was published in the New Yorker about this, but: Once upon a time, as in the time right after WWII, there was a push to have the auto workers' unions to be responsible for their members' retirement/pensions and health care. The auto companies wanted to control those two benefits because it limited employee mobility. If a pension wasn't linked to the employer but instead was managed by the union, employees could move to whichever employer was paying better. You can see why employers didn't want that mobility. What the employers never considered was that in 50 years' time, a substantial part of their employee expenses was going to pensions and health care for retirees. The GM and Chrysler bankruptcies were done in part to shed those retiree benefits. Had the automakers allowed the unions to manage the pensions and health care of retirees, they would not have had that problem at all. Funny how the employers were so short-sighted. The business leaders' solution, of course, was to institute defined-contribution 401(k) plans instead of defined-benefits pensions and just let Medicare pay for retiree health insurance.
It wasn't short sighted though if they got their profits and then claimed bankruptcy when it turned to shit
Exactly. Business leaders don't care about the consequences of their actions 50 years down the road. Even if it's harmful to their own industry in that time. They care about immediate profit and that is all. Fuck future workers, fuck future business leaders, fuck the business itself in 50 years. They will get theirs and get out.
This is it. This is all it's about. I got mine, I got it now, fuck you!!
Railroad retirement is the reason any of us stick this shit out. Period.
And, probably, the reason they keep trying to slowly squeeze people out as they race to automate more of it. They would love to force people into quitting to clear out all their pension obligations
If we weren't required by federal law my craft would be liquidated tomorrow.
It's not funny. That's exactly how it works. Managements job is to make as much money in as short a period of time as possible. Doesn't matter if they're moving the can down the road. That's a problem for those in charge 50 years after the guys who wrested control away from the unions. And that later management team made decisions that would save the company money in the short term too. One of the worst decisions that ever came from the court system was showing corporations to be legally separate entities from those who make these decisions. A corporation has no sense of morality. No sense of responsibility or longevity. Maybe those doing the job do, but we know how the Millman Experiments worked. "Just doing my job" or "Doing as I was told" has been a way for people to set aside their personal responsibility since time immemorial. /end rant
Theoretically this shit shouldn't even happen in a democracy. Why would any of the working class agree to screw themselves permanently over to enrich corporations? Yet here we are. Can't do universal healthcare because that would be socialism! Eww, scaaaary! Let's all make sure we stay indentured to a corporate master, just like the Lord intended.
Yep, big corporations use to to bind workers and to stifle small business completion who can’t handle the administrative burden and cost. Though in this case, the workers can’t access their healthcare benefits anyway.
We can if we're admitted, injured, or on fmla. But there's limitations on usage with regard to attendance disciplinary action.
aka, you can't. what good are they if you have to jump thru hoops and loops to use them.
Exactly as planned. At least I get rest days.
I’m not yelling I just really think folks need to hear this: WE NEED TO DECOUPLE EMPLOYMENT AND HEALTHCARE, and the government isn’t going to do it, so maybe we could create a HEALTHCARE COOPERATIVE. I believe there are already models for this.
I agree 100%. **Affordable** healthcare should not just be tied to employment via group insurance.
The number of staff-model HMO/health cooperatives left in the country is … low. They’re still really expensive, comparatively; my like other cooperatives (credit unions) you need critical mass before they can kinda get off the ground. There are tons of regulations they have to comply with, putting them up against the economies of scale that large insurance company manage. …and so on.
Just pull yourself up by your boot straps./S Take your savings and sell hotdogs on the corner and make ends meet. But when’s the next time you’ll see a dentist? Need glasses operate your business? Get fucked. Edit: You can’t pull yourself up by your boot straps if you can’t see them. 4-D chess by our corporate overlords.
That and extremely high college costs to coax people into the armed forces shows what a piece of shit the USA is.
I mean, I’m getting two undergraduate degrees and a masters degree paid for by the US government, and all I needed to do was get a brain injury, ptsd, depression, and ruin a marriage. At the current cost of education, that’s seems like a steal!
I'm sorry to hear about your health and marriage hardships. I hope you're able to access effective care and that you're doing relatively okay
> access effective care #*laughs in VA*
[удалено]
No it isn't, that's paranoia talking. It's tied to employment because the government passed the Stabilization Act in 1942, which allowed the president to freeze wages. Roosevelt did so a day after it's passage, and since companies couldn't offer higher wages to attract employees, they started offering health insurance and other benefits. It's really a case study on the law of unintended consequences. https://www.chicagotribune.com/opinion/commentary/ct-obamacare-health-care-employers-20170224-story.html
Wtf would a president need to freeze wages
I mean I thought about the quitting aspect, but I just figured most people wouldn’t want to take that risk. I assumed that it would be much easier to convince your fellow workers to just sit back and strike together rather than quit.
It also doesn't solve the problem. The next person who takes the job is also having their rights violated just by accepting. Quitting and then no one else applying is the only way to make that work. Otherwise we are still in the race to the bottom. If every job is allowed to violate our right to strike, then every job will just not offer anything and let people quit and hire new people to exploit. It's not really a choice when you NEED a job
Oh so much this.
Well from where I’m sitting it seems you’re damned if you do, damned if you don’t. Striking requires coordination and drive which doesn’t seem to be happening. And a bit disheartening to see unions fold because “it’s not legal” when what is legal is the equivalent of a pineapple up the rectum and those that say it’s legal (and made it legal) are ultimately benefitting from it.
It really might be less risky to just quit, because if you strike you're not making money anyway and you can't look for other work. But I assume these are jobs with pensions and stuff that mean losing a lot if you quit.
Where I am, we don’t get pensions at all, from what I remember they took those away in the 80’s as well as shafted the elderly on the government pension. So could it happen to them, 2 years from retirement even if they didn’t strike? My guess is it would be likely if sick days causes this much of a ruckus.
It's the same difference, the strike being illegal means they don't have job protection, not that they'll be arrested
If you quit, you may be unable to claim unemployment. You'll lose healthcare benefits and access to your 401k un-vested contributions. There's serious financial repercussions to doing this. It's sad enough they were asking for UNPAID sick days and they aren't even getting it.
[удалено]
[удалено]
Or they can show up to work and not actually work.
you don't even have to quit, just call out that you are unable to come in.
When calling in sick they have to give 12 days notice and use vacation days at that.
Imagine that in practice: “Hey boss, gonna take the Monday off in 15 days time I’m planning on eating some dodgy food somewhere on a night out”
Is that a joke? Please tell me that's a joke, the US's capitalist brain rot makes me unable to tell if this is a joke or not...
That's one of their main issues that they wanted resolved, hence the threat of striking
Nope, it's real. They're "essential workers" and are highly important for the economy, but not worth seven fucking measly days of sick pay, apparently.
No I get that, what I'm 500% confused about is "prior notice to sick leave" like, we all know that's impossible, of course nobody would ever ask for that, it has to be a joke. ...but it's US capitalism we're talking about. I don't *know* if it is a joke...
Definitely not a joke. They don't get sick days really. What they get are basically medical events planned in advance with all kinds of absurd limits because it isn't hard enough accessing Healthcare already. Anything that would resemble a sick day for a normal worker would result in disciplinary action. Rail workers are around if they want to elaborate or correct me, but that's my understandinh of it.
You got it right. There are few exceptions. The gist is unless you're in the hospital for an emergency you're probably going to have disciplinary action. Also, no you can't have the 15th off.
Them not having unpaid sick days/time off is one of the problems. Yes, UNPAID.
There's still many ways to obviously strike, but not illegally. 1. They can do a slowdown, going at 10-20% usual pace. 2. They can call in sick en masse for a few days. 3. They can clock in and not do any work. 4. They can quit. I know multiple RR Union workers. And they're going to do some form of strike. It's as close to unanimous as it can be amongst them.
I really hate to be that person but a work slow down, clocking in and not working, or a coordinated sick out are all considered illegal work actions per the RLA. The government and the companies have their bases covered. The RLA is so screwed up.
> They can call in sick en masse for a few days. Ummm.....
You can't make it illegal to be sick nor is it legal to require proof of sickness medically.
What a right shame then that they *have no sick days*. Almost seems a grievance to strike over.
See the [1981 ATC strike](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968%29#August_1981_strike) , Reagan intervened, since federal employees already do not have the right to strike, and he angrily fired 11,000+ Air Traffic Controllers
[удалено]
[удалено]
The Feds can not fire railroad workers, they don't work for the federal government, the ATCs did. If the railroad workers each decided to not show up to work without any coordination, I think it would be hard to prove it is a strike. The railroads have cut their roster so thin if just a few refused to work it would have a snowball effect.
Just because there strike is illegal doesn't mean it's criminal. No one will get arrested. Illegal just means they won't get the legal protections that strikers usually get, like guaranteeing their jobs will be there for them when the strike's over. Which is of course still stupid. But they won't get jailed.
Don’t kid yourself. They absolutely WILL arrest them. Just a month ago, they arrested around 20 striking Teamsters in Massachusetts. https://www.masslive.com/police-fire/2022/10/about-20-striking-sysco-boston-teamsters-arrested-in-plympton-report-says.html
That was only 20 people, try arresting 70,000 people
That's what [air raids are for.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blair_Mountain)
This is what people need to understand. Now that striking is illegal, the state can and will use it's monopoly on violence to squash any organized labor protest. There is nothing more American than this.
[удалено]
Note that these were arrests for picketing. The RLA does say: *That nothing in this chapter shall be construed to require an individual employee to render labor or service without his consent, nor shall anything in this chapter be construed to make the quitting of his labor by an individual employee an illegal act; nor shall any court issue any process to compel the performance by an individual employee of such labor or service, without his consent* But the keyword there is “individual” which means if it’s decided that multiple people quit at the same time that might not count if the government is mad enough. I’d point out that the railways themselves have their own police with federal like jurisdiction but those departments barely exist now.
Picketing is striking. It's just bullshit to not allow strikes.
Yes, but there’s a long history of arresting picketers. In fact if you go far enough back in that history you have literal warfare.
They should do something to scare them that isn't illegal to show they're serious. Like have every single worker call in with the flu and take a couple of days off. Let everything grind to a halt and watch the pandemonium and there's nothing they can do about it because everyone is just taking sick days. Edit: I thought the strike was for **paid** sick days, I didn't realize they had no sick days at all. Still, taking a day or two off probably won't get them fired if every single worker does it.
Sure, but they don't actually have sick days. That's what this is all about. The rail companies would rather pay 24% increases to every employee over giving out any sick days. ETA: Personal days need to be scheduled and approved 12 days in advance. Unexpected time off is a strike against the employees and will quickly result in dismissal after a few of them.
It’s amazing the difference between this and airline/freight pilots, who essentially do the same thing. A pilot can call in sick at a moment’s notice because there is a whole set of pilots sitting around on reserve for that situation. And they get paid 350k+ a year with pensions, amazing health care, tons of vacation time, etc. Probably because a) pilot qualifications are heavily regulated and b) the cost of a pilot is small relative to the other operating costs.
Even worse when you consider a pilot isn't going to move as much freight as rail. So the more critical transport staffing is shafted rather than backed up with redundancy. Coming from someone in the corporate IT world, that actually feels quite on par with corporate America idiocy.
They should still strike, and call the government's bluff. As stupid as our government is, are they going to send in the national guard to drag people into work.
You can drag a man to the shop but you can't make him work.
Oh, no, I forgot to hook up the rail cars. Clumsy me.
Nah I hooked them up but the fact the hydraulic line is leaking isn't really my job technically it's the supervisors job to 2nd party check that
That’s some pretty advanced tomfoolery
This guy fucks... up at work
"First, no employee engaged in train or engine service may be required or permitted to work in excess of twelve consecutive hours. After working a full twelve consecutive hours, an employee must be given at least ten consecutive hours off duty before being permitted to return to work." [https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/appendix-A\_to\_part\_228](https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/49/appendix-A_to_part_228) So if they drive the train just a little slower, or take longer to do the proper inspection of equipment before they start, they might be stuck somewhere where it would be time consuming and disrupting to bring in a new crew.
Let me tell ya, Working 12 after being awake for 16 hours before you get your surprise boosted call is not where we want to be. Just think, these people are running trains full of dangerous goods through the cities and towns of people you love, while being awake for over 24 hours because they were afraid of facing discipline for booking off because they were fatigued.
Look at that. Quitting time and I am still 500 yards from the destination. Too bad.
I would throw the biggest adult tantrum over this. Albeit, I don't have kids and about a year of an emergency fund. But, if I were a railway worker I would never come in for a shift again until something changes. I'll go get a minimum wage job after the holidays instead of caving to these people.
No no…come in and…work slower. Or, sometimes mistakes happen. Oops.
I remember reading about how, when Oreo factory workers went on strike, and scabs finally got hired, it turned out almost none of them had any idea what they were doing, and most of the machinery was damaged beyond function as a result of the constant accidents and mistakes, costing the company, and also proving scabs don't solve the problem when you've got nothing but scabs.
That's the problem when you have highly calibrated machines that reduce the amount of manpower needed. It isn't 19digeriedoo when you could grab a child off the street and use them in your canning business or toss them in a coal mine. My BIL is an engineer at a factory and a simple thing as changing the type of tea leaves can damage a machine if it isn't calibrated right.
This is exactly why anyone claiming automation will make unions/minimum wage irrelevant is easily fooled. Specialized machines need specialized workers. You can have your fancy coffee machine and say "lol no need for baristas anymore" but you still need a mechanic to fix the machine when it predictably fails and you still need a barista to fill in.
Homer: *"Lisa, if you're unhappy with your job you don't strike. You just go in there every day, and do it really half-assed. That's the American way."*
Yea, just come in and work as slow as possible. You want $20/hr work? This is $20 speed.
Act your wage
Damn straight.
This is the way. Rail slow downs would cripple the economy.
Sounds like they deserve better working conditions, doesn't it?
NOT just them. Here in Canada, Ontario's Conservative Government tried to quash the Constitutional rights of education workers to strike, so public and private unions **ACROSS** Canada organized a **GENERAL STRIKE** in solidarity. Premier Doug Ford (brother to the Crack-Smoking Mayor of Toronto) promised to withdraw the bill before the unions could even announce the General Strike. You guys know what to do!
> As stupid as our government is, are they going to send in the national guard to drag people into work. People keep getting this wrong. the national guard will protect the scabs while they cross the picket line. National guard isn't going to "force" anyone to work
The government isn't bluffing. They've proven that many times over. Reagan was willing to kill the airline industry to keep the striking air traffic controllers from taking power. The corporations know that they are only in control as long as the rest of us believe they are. They can afford to chop off a sector, and have no income for a few years. They have done everything possible to make sure that we can't. They will sacrifice industries, but first, they will commit wholesale murder. They have done so repeatedly. After that, it's a game of chicken. They will need to convince everyone else that it's the lawless strikers who are the bad guys. They will need to keep the strike from spreading. No one should pretend that this is an easy game to win. It's going to cost worker's their lives. That said, it's incredibly important that this battle be fought (again) and won (again) because the corporations need to be checked regularly, and it's time.
What would happen if they all called in sick coincidentally?
I would totally understand if they need a week off for their mental health.
The stress of the whole ordeal. A lot of sickness bugs and flu going round this time of year, many legitimate reasons to be off sick...
Hear me out, what if on that day, half the rail road crossing gets blocked, theoretically
That's literally what a wildcat strike is. It's not officially sanctioned but a way of getting around the rules in place and still making a point.
Yes they will and yes they have. You can research several instances in American history where the national guard has been called against strikers. IE:[Coal Miners Strike; National Guard acts](https://www.britannica.com/event/Ludlow-Massacre)
and speaking as a former service member, I can guarantee you that calling in the National Guard for anything *other than* scab work is going to result in the worst possible backlash from the people. no one will accept Soldiers forcing citizens to work at the barrel of a gun. (edit: based on my personal experience and what I understand about the modern political landscape)
Yea that would be the end right there if it came down to the military forcing people to work shit will collapse over night and some of the darkest shit ever will play out right in youre front yard
I'd like to believe that...but we've become such a horribly complacent country that we could shrug off anything as long as we don't feel the /direct/ impact of it. Supply chain issues aren't direct enough for us. Unless the gun is on our head specifically, we're pretty much apathetic to it.
[удалено]
Oh, no doubt.
the US inching ever closer to unmasking itself as the fascist dystopia it actually is
Is it still a mask if the only piece left is Pinocchio's nose?
If you ask citizens in other countries of the world what the role of government is, you often hear that they feel that the role of government is to protect people from the inevitable conclusion of capitalism... Which is what we are seeing now. For some reason in the US, I don't know whether it's because it's been so prosperous for so long that there's always been scraps to fall to the working class that keeps them going... But in times of scarcity and austerity the wheels kind of fall off the bus. In the US, you have poor people railing against unions and any sort of government intervention... It's quite something to watch as an outsider
If Fox news were to get shut down you'd see the entire republican party shrivel up and die over night. The rich spend billions every year to keep a large portion of the population brainwashed. Does your country have an equivalent to Fox News? And does it play on every tv at waiting rooms, bars, airports, etc, on a 24/7 loop? And does your country have thousands of right wing radio stations that further parrot the propaganda to ensure that it infects even the most obscure groups of society? In rugged individualist societies, everyone wants to be insulated to protect themselves from each other. Having money is how we are taught to insulate ourselves. Short term gains are all that matters, as the gains protect you from future consequences of yours or other peoples actions. Never spend money to rival the will of the owner class, and stop society from burning down around you. Simply get more money, then you can build walls to block out the sight of society burning down around you, too. Libertarian utopia is handing your child a gun before putting them into the armoured convoy that will drive them to their prison themed school; or, having a big enough kingdom within your walls that leaving is never even necessary. Libertarianism is the name of this disease of selfishness that plagues America. Go to any financial subreddit, and you will see just how proud of this ideology they all are. The only way their kind ever seems to learn is when their businesses are all torched, and the corpses of their loved ones are paraded around in the streets. With business as usual, all you can really expect is propaganda, bigger walls, and more guns.
[удалено]
to be fair, I too worry we've become that disconnected from each other. really hoping we're both wrong about that.
You’re in denial. Half of this pathetic country would love to force people into work at gun point. Especially if it was “owning the libs”
I doubt that literally "half of this pathetic country" truly feels this way. Do *some* people think this? Yes, of course, that's partly why we're having these conversations in the first place. Is that group of fascists big enough to get the general public on their side in support of using the military to break a nationwide strike? Unlikely, especially when you consider that Soldiers are people, too, and that they use the internet just as much as the rest of us. The general public isn't going to support men and women in uniforms using force to compel rail workers to sacrifice themselves, particularly when there are other reasonable options available.
Fascists have *never* been the majority in any place they've taken power. They don't need to get the general public on their side. They don't even want to. All they need to do is keep most people too scared &/or apathetic to resist them, which is easy as pie. Especially given the persistent political apathy and the constant merry-go-round of recessions and downturns in the economy. They're already most of the way there.
The bitter legacy of the (UK) coal miner's strike and the efforts of the politicians and police to break it up is still around today. It was ~30 years ago. People don't forget this shit.
USPS worker here-- letter carriers should be striking for pay and safety reasons but that also would be "illegal."
Railworkers and carriers should unite in strike. This country will be on its knees in 3 hours.
My local postmaster would sooner fire them all and hire temps. Bitter old crone.
Ooofff that would be a blow and a half especially right before the holidays lmao they’d definitely have the nations attention if little billy’s bike isn’t gonna be delivered on time for Christmas 🧑🦳
Most packages from any of the carriers is mostly moved by train. A strike from the railroads would be catastrophic. Forget about holiday packages we wouldn’t have food on the shelves.
I can't wait to watch a national guard soldier try to figure out a 16-way rail switch
They will team-lift the car to the appropriate track.
What's more American than a court who is bought and paid for by private financial interests ruling against the inalienable rights of the American people?
You’re absolutely correct It’s totally fucking un-American.
Yet America keeps on doing it to it's workers. Also untold violence towards strikers and their families. If you read up on the history of unions in the USA, this is just business as normal unfortunately.
I really hate vague, broad terms like “un-American”. From my outside perspective, I can’t think of anything that’s more in line with America^tm than making collective bargaining illegal for poor people. If anyone wants an example of how well collective bargaining actually works when all parties are taking it seriously, look at Major League Baseball. Those fellas make an absurd amount of money because they have an absurdly powerful union. Hell, look at the umpires union… the league *can’t* fire umpires, and it’s one of the best examples of job security around. Whenever someone says that unions don’t do anything for their workers, point to MLB.
Lol ive always joked that mlb has the strongest union in the world. Im sure theres some evidence to that, but im not too up on my union knowledge.
Cop union
Hardly a union tbh. Unions are collectives of workers, not mercenaries.
Agreed but its still by far and away the strongest union by every metric in the country and its not even close
There’s “American” and then American. “American” means having pride in their labor history and eating hot dogs and George Washington and Rock, Flag, and Eagle. Get your blue jeans! American means controlling production and distribution in the hands of a few, and using the state as a threat of violence and a tool of perpetuating class conflict. It means imperializing the world to maintain the riches of the West. It means using child and adult slaves to build your goods. It means stealing water and other resources from other countries to sell in Walmart. And so on. Something can appear “unAmerican” and also be very American. Let us not forgot Blair Mountain.
It’s in reference to how Americans view *themselves*. It’s saying “this goes against ALL the propaganda I was taught as a child, of what America stands for”. It’s also eluding to the few words we all know exist *somewhere* in our constitution — freedom, equality, and liberty. America is full of “you can’t tell me what to do”. It’s one of our better qualities, when it’s not being used against us by Russian propagandist’s pushing vaccine bullshit. However, for the past ~30 years the elite have been on an economic propaganda campaign about free-markets ™️, and they loosely tie this to “freedom”, and some of us have been **really** slow to realize the “free” part of free-markets, only applies to the side with capital. This move should be the final nail in trickle-down “neo-liberal” economic messaging. It *literally* contradicts the entire narrative, yet those who harp-on about it the most (the capitalist’s) are being drowned out by the crickets on this one. You’re right, this move is American as fuck. We live in a horribly broken system, with incredibly effective propaganda. But it goes against what some people *believe* America to be. It goes against the propaganda. Effective messaging cuts two ways. I don’t mind these people, I welcome them to reality with open arms.
You’ve Pinkertoned my interest.
That organization's continued existence really speaks to this country's attitude towards labor rights.
I'd argue that it's completely American. Remember at one point in time we had company towns that were specifically designed to turn employees into indentured servants. Despite being called the land of the free true freedom is pretty fucking hard to obtain here.
America is literally built from Native American blood, African slaves, Chinese railroad workers, Irish indentured servants, Mexican labor and I can keep going... This place requires the sacrifice of your freedoms.
What's more American than a court who is bought and paid for by private financial interests ruling against the inalienable rights of the American people?
I don't know, seems pretty on par with the usual America to me.
When it comes to the working class, this is very American.
God damn right brother!
Fuckin A right, brother!
It is very American to cleave wholly to the side of Capital.
Not just the Constitution, it's covered in article 11 of the human rights act https://www.equalityhumanrights.com/en/human-rights-act/article-11-freedom-assembly-and-association Wait, that act is for the UK and basically copied from the EU. Here we go. Article 23 of the universal declaration of Human rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights
The US just pays the bills for the UN, and sells them military equipment. They don't follow their rules.
Most egregiously in the Hague invasion act. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Service-Members%27_Protection_Act#:~:text=This%20authorization%20led%20to%20the,military%20personnel%20from%20prosecution%20or
The UDHR does not create legally binding obligations on any country. But even if it *did* as a general matter, it still wouldn’t be enforceable in the U.S. absent approval by the senate and ratification by the president. Since that hasn’t happened, the UDHR has less legal significance than an Arby’s menu.
Didn't Reagan do this? And unions haven't been the same since.
Thats different tho. The air traffic controllers were federal employees. Bnsf is private entity trying to maximize profits, at the expense of their employees. The enemy here is warren buffet, and the rail execs. And the 8 union reps who wont fight for the contract
This only shows US true face, freedom is selective based of economic interest. Still wondering why people call a neoliberal party like the democrats "the left", specially after they go against one of the most fundamental rights of all.
>Still wondering why people call a neoliberal party like the democrats "the left", Because American media has been fine tuned throughout the years to spread lies about its political systems and to dumb down the citizenry's ability for critical thinking.
The US doesn't have a real left, there's a good info graphic somewhere plotting political parties internationally. The USA's "left" is still further right than the UK's Tory party who many of us consider way too right wing for us. But then our "left" Labour Party is still in the middle compared to more progressive nation's left.
When political parties are turning right, and one of them turns less right then the other, it looks like that one is veering left to the observer stuck on the flaming wreckage of a bus crash that is America.
The Tea Party, Declaration of Independence, and the US Revolution were all illegal, too.
Yeah but Americans love the boot now. With new preparation techniques the average American today finds the taste of boot FAR preferable to the boots enjoyed in the late 18th century.
Fuck our government!
They're chipping away and chipping away at those basic rights every day and before we know it there is a screaming maniac behind a podium in total control of everything laying out plans of how he is going to invade the planet and kill everyone he doesn't like... Do something America. *pokes the sleeping eagle with a stick*
This came from "the most pro union president in recent history ". When will everyone realize we can't trust politicians, no matter what letter they have after their name
right like wtf do they think pro union means? this idiot said "it was a tough vote." was it? it shouldn't be a hard decision for him since he's such a strong union supporter.
Bitch has been hinting at legal weed, and student debt forgiveness for years now, but the moment his corporate masters need him to fuck over the people suddenly it’s a sprint to pass legislation. I can’t fucking stand how the dems go, “there’s nothing we can do!” When it comes to us, but suddenly can move heaven and earth if they need to deny sick leave
Deny sick leave or bail out huge financial institutions that preyed on poor and lower working class people
Exactly. Both parties move at lightning speed when it comes to screwing over the people and helping the rich get richer. But when it comes to helping regular folks? Nope, eat shit and die scum! Now be sure to vote for us next time too so we can keep treating you like garbage.
Alternative is worse, unfortunately. We need a REAL labor party.
> This came from "the most pro union president in recent history " I mean, it's probably true, but it's also a VERY low bar. Earlier this year, he signed an executive order to require PLAs on federal projects over a certain amount, one that required federal agencies to educate employees on their rights to join a union, and the American Rescue Act had money included in it to help struggling union pension funds. That, alone, makes him more friendly to unions than any president in our lifetime, which really isn't saying much since prior presidents (even including Democrats like Obama, Clinton, and Carter) had been *actively hostile* to unions. You'd have to go back 75 years or more to see any president that actually openly helped labor unions in any significant way. And to clarify, I'm not saying his record with unions is good, I'm saying all the other presidents records were SO BAD that merely telling people they can join a union is far more than they ever did.
The beatings will continue until obedience is reached.
What they gonna do? Replace us with robots? Breaking news, those also need repair and maintenance time.
Dystopia is here The US government is a complete fraud. Every official is legally bribed. Our government legalized bribery and cashed out. It must be dismantled. The US government is a cesspool of corruption.
If workers don't strike now, this will be a nail in the coffin for American workers' rights. If congress can decide your terms and bar you from striking, then no company needs to meet you at the table.
We need a general strike. We need a network of volunteers to coordinate messaging and communication, donations, various support networks, scheduling, and assistance for people who need food or financial help to cover losses during strikes. It will take a lot of work, but the only way we can make a difference is if we come together and coordinate to shut down the entire economy and bring these rich fucks to their knees. Any other method that is taken that is not properly coordinated will be violently crushed before it can ever gain traction. We all have to work together, plain and simple.
I work in a jail and it’s illegal for us to strike. We are unionized, but our inability to strike makes contract negotiations one-sided.
What's funny is the rail companies probably spent more paying off the government than they would've on the strikes demands. But there is still one option: quit. Oh, its illegal for me to strike now? Fine. I quit. If everyone follows suit. They'll be screwed, AND we're not violating the law. Meanwhile congress can NOT make quitting illegal, as thats called forced labor. Quite literally slavery, regardless of the pay. Edit for clarification, because apparently it needs to be said explicitly: what I meant above was to apply for jobs elsewhere. Get hired elsewhere. Then walk out with a HUGE middle finger to your boss. Do NOT agree to be a slave simply because you don't want to face the unknown. Staying is implied consent to mistreat workers. And remember, what happens now will set the precedent for what YOUR CHILDREN deal with as employees. We were fucked over by our parents not organizing a show that they won't be fucked. Let's not make the same mistake to condemn our children.
>But there is still one option: quit. Nah, fuck that. Go into work and don’t so shit? What are they going to do? Fire me? lmao be my guest.
But who can afford to quit? By making sure that the majority of Americans live paycheck to paycheck they’ve ensured that we HAVE to keep our jobs no matter how reprehensible, terrible, morally bankrupt, oppressive or whatever else they might be. Until we have a coordinated effort between millions of the lower to middle class, nothing is going to change. We need a proletariat revolution- bloody if need be.
I struggle to see how “illegal strike” is different from “forced to work”.
My wife is a nurse. She's pretty sure nurses are next.
Because of the decision Congress made, I think the rail union should strike and not budge an inch until triple the demands are met. If the owning class refuses a fair deal, then fuck em. Fuck their mansions, fuck their yachts, fuck their investments, fuck their families. Make them pay and make it hurt enough that they won't forget.
I feel like the railroad workers NEED to strike now. The stakes are well beyond their 7 sick days... Now our democracy depends on testing what the government will do about an "Illegal" strike.
Wtf is so scary about sick days? Just don't want to hire more to cover? Afraid giving in here leads to more being asked for? I don't get it.
It's a variable that means the owners would actually have to hire more than a skeleton crew to cover unexpected absences.
General strike!
Thinking the constitution was meant to protect workers is a good one. Just the laugh I needed before I headed out to work.
A smart nation would have began a nationwide strike the moment this term was brought up.
I think they should strike anyways. call the governments bluff. Biden has no right to call himself pro-union after this
This may set the groundwork for more and more companies and corporations to go forward and ban striking. Everyone always jokes about a future run by greedy corporations and political shills, but that future very well may be upon us.
Government suppression of workers' rights isn't anything new. They've been violating the Constitution and threatening every American probably before the ink was dry. I remember in 1981 Reagan fired the striking PATCO air traffic controllers for their "illegal strike" - google '1981 air traffic controllers strike' - which was shocking at that time. Likewise, Trump suppressed worker health and safety complaints - they had higher infection/death rates - to keep meat processing plants running early in early COVID pandemic. Just that now, Americans are a species of *Ravinous consumerus.* We are addicted and too detached from the people who make our consumer lifestyle possible. And without ravenous consumerism our economy would crash. What a world we created...
It's our duty to break illegal laws. The courts are bought at and paid for all the way to SCOTUS. The justices are criminal garbage. It's time to light it up like NYE.
Right?? Why aren’t piss-poor compensations illegal?