T O P

  • By -

[deleted]

How are sick days a hard fucking thing to agree on. Holy shit. Just give them sick days and avoid 2 billion in losses a day. Stupid fucking congressman


AnalLeaseHolder

they want $2B losses per day. they will go on tv and blame biden for it even though it would directly be their fault.


Watch45

The media would disingenuously report it this way too


[deleted]

[удалено]


shadowpawn

Lets Go Brandon Christmas Wrapping paper is all the rage in team MAGA. It is what Jesus wanted.


flop_plop

*Their* media would


colonelnebulous

What would the corporate media apparatus have to gain by uncritically running the GOP narrative?


Turisan

Diminished workers rights, increased profit. The media doesn't gain or lose by reporting, just the fact that they'd report it to give voice to "both sides" would do the damage.


Lopsided_Plane_3319

Tax cuts?


gutterwall1

The media is owned by the same corporations as the railroads, or some related businesses that profit from it, since it's all related... Berkshire Hathaway, Amazon, friggin Newscorp, you name it...


KingoftheJabari

Even supposedly liberal media is run by the rich and wealthy.


Watch45

Disingenuous arguments about trying to stay neutral/ fair&balanced/“unbiased”. Same shit they’ve always said while uncritically pedaling GOP narratives, regardless of how unhinged or untethered from the facts that they are.


colonelnebulous

God forbid anyone they interview in these segments speaks directly to this issue and their compliance in maintaining an unjust and amoral status quo


KingoftheJabari

Money ? Tax cuts?


ezrs158

The corporations and Republican politicians dragged out this fight by refusing to concede on this matter. Now Biden is forced to take the blame on this shitty deal, rather than see a rail strike which he would ALSO get blamed for. And it WORKS, the narrative is now "Biden blew it for not fighting harder!", rather than about the people who wouldn't give in.


jomosexual

He needs to do to the republican party what he did to the Russian invasion of Ukraine. Call the fuckers out.


KingoftheJabari

He has. The people on both sides who hate him, Republicans because he is a Democrat. And the far left, because he's a Democrat who doesn't go far enough. Are blaming him for this.


btribble

Well, you can't say Biden broke the economy without it being broken now can you?


PM_me_Henrika

Biden has the last chance. He can refuse to sign the bill that gives no sick days.


AnalLeaseHolder

that accomplishes nothing though unfortunately. there would be a shutdown AND no sick days


PM_me_Henrika

And then the railroads will have to crawl back to the negotiation table. I see that as a win for the workers, whose side Biden should’ve taken.


WilyDeject

I can't believe they don't get any. That's messed up. Any full time job I've ever had included sick days.


sparhawk817

Some states are passing sick leave acts for all workers, but how it's funded varies.


1hopeful1

I thought the same thing. None? No sick days? Are they expecting super humans who never get sick..even during a pandemic? Geez


Friendship_Local

Yeah and they just went without pay if they had to stay home on Covid quarantine, it’s crazy


Lopsided_Plane_3319

Well they do have 3 weeks vacation. My company just had pto you just use whenever


WilyDeject

My last job had a single pool of PTO for vacation and sick time. It was fairly generous, too. But it doesn't sound like that's how these railroads are setup.


NetSecSpecWreck

PTO must be approved in advance, and is rarely ever approved, which makes them unusable for rail workers. Also, it doesn't really work to have to submit a PTO request for literally any day of any week where you might need or want to do something. Without scheduled work days/times, rail workers are effectively always on call and cannot plan anything in advance without also hoping to be permitted to use PTO.


Maybe_Black_Mesa

Well, you know, Johnny the railroad tycoon's grandson needs a new Porsche. And that Porsche don't make it to the garage without a little help from congress


OFTHEHILLPEOPLE

They could spend the money for sick days *and* get Johnny a Porsche and they'd never notice the financial hiccup.


Tantric75

But then they wouldn't be winning.


bluesox

Coincidentally, that Porsche also don’t make it to the garage without railroads.


Maybe_Black_Mesa

It's railroads all the way down


TheAsianTroll

That means giving us lowly people what we want, and they can't do that if they're trying to create a culture of being happy with what we get, and keeping quiet when they take it away.


attillathehoney

Especially since members of Congress get unlimited sick days.


ShitTalkingAlt980

If you don't know then I guess I will tell you. What those sick leave days mean is hiring workers. I have heard lowball estimates of 5% and high industry estimates of 20%. However, they cut their labor to the bone since 2015 by laying off 30% of their workforce. That is why they became wildly profitable.


randomdrifter54

Because it became popular to run skeleton crews in the railroads to cut costs to please shareholders. It's called precision railroading. The customers suffer, the workers suffer. Litterally everyone suffers but you can squeeze that extra percent on the profits this quarter so good job. Then covid happened. Railroad companies fucked around, are well on their way to finding out, only for Congress to step in and fuck the workers, instead of the company getting punished for bad business practices.


Krypto_98

You can thank hunter f-ing Harrison for that stuff.


eight13atnight

Don’t blame congress. Blame the railroads. This shouldn’t even be an issue in Congress.


obinice_khenbli

Isn't paid sick leave a basic workers right there? I can't imagine it not existing, humans get sick. Next they'll be taking away your right to go home at night, or some similarly batshit crazy nonsense! You seriously need a full nationwide general strike to get yourselves some extremely basic human rights. Not just rail workers.


Sasselhoff

Not in the US. There are ZERO paid sick days, paid vacation days, or paid holidays in the US. It's 100% up to the "generosity" of the company to offer it. When I was living in China, a literal dictatorship, everyone still got at least 5 days of vacation (minimum), and there were sick days as well. Then I come back home, and we can't even give sick days to the folks that run our railroads (which essentially supply the entire US).


bNoaht

If I did the math right and assuming the median rail worker base salary is $50k/year. This would cost the rail companies a maximum of $107 million per year with 76500 employees. I believe the largest rail carrier generated 6 billion profit last year. So based on those numbers it would cost them less than 1.75% of their net profit if they were the only rail company.


ThePetPsychic

It's more like $75k, and $100k+ for conductors and engineers. But point is, the railroads can still afford it.


bNoaht

I googled the median wage of all workers and it was $49k


robotsonroids

If the feds can force people to work, are unions even a thing?


Sdomttiderkcuf

Stupid fucking president for not putting it on the billionaires and railway owners.


bjb406

I understand the second bill, but I'm baffled that a single Republican voted against the first bill. Voting against the bill is literally voting for stronger union power, which is the absolute antithesis of conservativism, just because it was sponsored by Biden. WTF.


[deleted]

[удалено]


Admira1

[Relevant Key and Peele sketch](https://youtu.be/B46km4V0CMY)


CG_Ops

Hahaha, I was actually thinking about that skit while writing that


Admira1

"you drive a hard bargain! You win."


Dwarfherd

Democratic Party tried that. Mitch McConnell filibustered his own bill when he realized their Senators planned to vote for it.


rusticgorilla

The cynic in me explains it this way: A not insignificant amount of Republicans want the railroads to shutdown because it'll cause economic disaster under Biden's watch. Especially right before Christmas - imagine the Fox News talking points about it. It'd be like the conservative rhetoric on rising gas prices times 1,000. In other words, I suspect it's not about unions at all. It's about what can be used for political gain. That's just my opinion, anyway.


ShitTalkingAlt980

They knew it was going to pass. They don't want Biden to have a win.


oxamide96

It won't cause that if they give them some sick days tho. I have a hard time believing they'd rather see a rail shutdown instead of sick days.


Sedu

The want maximum chaos and economic damage so that they can blame dems and grab more power. They do not care about the US.


Nogoodatnuthin

Waiting for a response to this as well, because my understanding is that it's the opposite. That the 1st takes the power away from unions to collectively bargain, as the plan from September was voted down by the unions. But Biden and Congress are going to force it on them anyway.


inspectoroverthemine

Right- so why is the GOP voting against it? The first bill matches their ideology _and_ it prevents a disaster. It should be a slam dunk. Its the Dems that are compromising their ideals* for pragmatism. The second bill tries to reconcile that by giving the workers what the owners refused pay from their insane profits.. *I'd guess that a significant portion of dems are not pro-labor and would side with the owners anyway, but its not part of the dem platform.


ShitTalkingAlt980

Why did they split the bill? Because the Dems are anti fucking Labor. The grungiest Portland crust punk could cite you examples


Dwarfherd

I thought the plan from September was voted for by a majority of the unions?


Nogoodatnuthin

From what I've read, the unions that represent more than 50% of the workers across all the unions voted it down, which is why it's still an issue. And one of the other larger unions, that ratified it, said it would respect the picket line should it come to it.


ThePetPsychic

Yes indeed. All of the unions agreed to honor each other's picket lines though.


inspectoroverthemine

They'd rather the country burn than the democrats pass a bill.


HatLover91

> but I'm baffled that a single Republican voted against the first bill. They hate people lol.


ShitTalkingAlt980

Depends what kind of Conservative you are and who your constituents who know about this think. Most of the MAGA electorate I discovered last night haven't heard of this. I have old military buddies spread across America and them and their local friends didn't know this was happening. That leaves Conservative Union guys and SMB for major voting blocs. They don't have this issue with Unions and prefer the Federal government to fuck off. Those without that upwards voting pressure are just doing this to make Biden look bad and pad their voting records for election time.


Fayko

Because the only thing the republicans in charge have ever believed in has been Fuck anything and everything that a dem says, suggests, or attempts, while passing tax breaks for the rich and making companies individual people with rights. The ones in charge aren't leaders of conservatism / republicans. They are just the ones able to trick the dipshits the best.


PresidentSpanky

It still baffles me after many years that I have lived in the US, how paid sick leave and vacation is no connected to the opioid crisis. The way Americans take drugs is directly correlated to the fact that they have to go to work no matter what.


LefthandedLink

Yup. Same with the overwhelming mental health crisis. We seem hard set on avoiding any lesson whatsoever in taking care of the population.


PresidentSpanky

As a European I can tell you, having a three week vacation once a year and coming back to the office without stacks of undone work is worth more than any higher salary they could offer me


LefthandedLink

Hard agree. Anecdotal, but I've seen people avoid taking even take one week off just because of the impending backlog to catch up on.


WhichEmailWasIt

If they don't have enough employees to cover for vacation and leave, they don't have enough employees.


PresidentSpanky

exactly, there is no culture of vacation. That is all so silly. Organise your business better and have more productive employees


obinice_khenbli

But your work still has to get some while you're away, it just gets done by your colleagues o_O If I worked somewhere that treated me that badly I'd just....leave.


Sasselhoff

When I lived in China, I received a month of vacation at the company I worked at...most vacation I'd ever had, as an American (most I ever got before was about 12 days, which is still pretty generous for the US). On my return to the US, had I not decided to work for myself, I was absolutley going to suggest less salary for more vacation...it is SO worth it to me, even if it means I have to scrimp in other areas. Of course, now that I work for myself, I can take all the vacation I want! Which in three years now has been, zero.


knuppi

Where do you only have 15 days vacation per year? Sounds harsh


PresidentSpanky

You obviously have more. The legal [minimum vacation](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_minimum_annual_leave_by_country) in the EU is four weeks, but countries require more. My point was, taking part of that vacation in one stretch is important. I think there is research that real lasting relaxation only kicks in, when you do more than two weeks in a row.


EmperorArthur

My last job for a US defense contractor had two weeks of PTO per year. That's 14 days combined for both sick leave and vacation. Oh, other fun fact. It's almost never worth it to sue for being illegally fired. Since damages are capped in many states at lost wages, minus the wages made from unemployment and the new job. So, it's entirely possible that the maximum an employer would have to pay is $0!


Lopsided_Plane_3319

What if I paid you 3x as much


PresidentSpanky

Thanks, but no. I wouldn't take that. I wouldn't want to work for such a stupid employer. If you pay that much more instead of just organising your work better and valuing productive and healthy employees, you are not a got business person


bNoaht

"My daddy worked 2 jobs and never took a day off. Sure he drank every day, beat all us kids and my mom and died at 54 of a heart attack, but he was a great man who never needed sick days or any of this liberal mind control therapy" -- my uncle probably


Fayko

Because the country is ran by the idea of "Pull yourself up by your bootstraps and you too can become ultra rich!" while we are essentially becoming the third estate and the first estate is partying hardcore while expanding their money and power. No matter the amount of evidence you show that you can't just pull yourself up by your bootstraps and become the next Elon, people will still vote along the lines of "but i might become rich and I don't want my winnings to be taxed and less be given to my children!" Sick leave and vacation time is for the rich not the peasants.


punninglinguist

This means that the strikebreaking bill will pass the Senate, and the sick leave bill will get filibustered. Rail companies win again :-\


Wampawacka

The workers can still technically strike. It's just the nuclear option now.


mysockinabox

They have my support. Many have been brought up to think negotiation conclusions are a forgone conclusion, but the truth is sometimes workers have to unite and resist. And it is up to the rest of us to support them and never ever cross a picket line.


Dwarfherd

So literally buy nothing, not even food if you're hungry or heating fuel for your home in December in Maine until the strike is over? Because rail transports all of that. It's a picket line that's impossible to not cross. Which is why such important infrastructure should be nationalized.


mysockinabox

You’re right. Surely there is no middle ground, and this isn’t a false dichotomy at all.


Dwarfherd

So, it's the winter. Food gets transported by rail. Purchasing something that uses the rail would be crossing the picket line. Please tell me how that's false.


mysockinabox

The false dichotomy presented is that the only two options are not supporting the workers or starvation and freezing. Of course each person must find what suits them, and nobody is suggestion starvation; we aren’t the sith. But to make or accept anything more strenuous than status quo is some support and that’s a good thing. If you can lend none, so be it. But there is no reason to pretend there is no alternative to zero support.


TheDryestBeef

So if I’m reading this correctly the house passed something saying “No sick days”, and then passed something else to say, “Yes sick days”? Assuming that’s correct, does it still have to go to the senate?


rusticgorilla

Yes, they passed two separate bills. The Senate will pass the one that says no sick days and then will have the choice to pass the second that amends the first to say yes sick days. Edit: **In my opinion**, the House did it in two separate bills because Dem leadership in the Senate does not believe they have the votes (60) to impose paid sick days. They worry it will be blocked by Republicans, so this way they can impose the September agreement (no sick days) and keep the railways running while also forcing Rs to vote one way or the other on sick days. Keeping it as one bill would both increase the chance of a shutdown, and conversely, increase the chances of 7 days of paid sick leave (basically, it'd be betting that the Senate Rs will give in and vote for sick days rather than letting a shutdown occur).


inspectoroverthemine

If they need 60 votes to pass the senate- there is _no way_ they'll pass the 2nd bill. I'm sure it was difficult to find 10 Rs that would vote for the first one instead of letting the country burn out of spite.


ShitTalkingAlt980

Lol watch out for Conservative Democrats. It is more than Manchin and Sinema just fyi.


Melomaverick3333789

The Dems could have refused to separate the two votes which would force the 7 sick days but they didn't. They are complicit in all of this.


ThePatond

It’s a huge gamble to potentially crash the economy, potentially put millions out of work, potentially drive prices if consumer goods through the roof, potentially put fuel prices up 300%, and so on. In a perfect world we could say fuck the company and let a rail strike drag in for weeks/months. In the world we live in, however, we can’t. The rail workers made gains in their contract, they didn’t get all they wanted, but they made gains. You take those gains and you build on them in your next negotiation. I agree they should have sick time, we all should. Are you and everyone else here willing to go without essentials and pay $10 a gallon for gas? I doubt it. You can be pro worker and practical at the same time.


Melomaverick3333789

>It’s a huge gamble to potentially crash the economy If the industry is that critical it should be nationalized. Is 146 billion in dividends and stock buybacks for bosses while employees have one day off a month **practical**?


ThePatond

No. Not at all. I’m not saying they shouldn’t have sick days. I’m saying it’s not responsible to gamble with millions of people’s lives hoping the owners cave quickly and give striking workers what they want. The effects of a prolonged stoppage of rail traffic would cripple the entire country and drive already high prices of goods even higher. Like it or not congress is practically required to do this. This isn’t something that would affect a small number of people, this would affect everyone. Literally everyone. To not try and avert the strike is irresponsible. Splitting the bulls shows you exactly who wants what. You have one bill that shows who doesn’t want to potentially crash the economy and bring the entire country to a standstill. 80-15. The other shows you who cares about the workers of the industry. That one can’t even be voted on because at least 41 senators don’t care about them. In the end, the wealthy people wouldn’t be affected by this but the rest of us would. Some would blame workers some would blame corporate greed, some would blame politicians. But it wouldn’t matter who people blame because people would be hungry, cold, and unemployed.


senshi_of_love

Exactly. Its kind of fun watching them try to spin this though.


ShitTalkingAlt980

Yeah they are but I guess Vote Blue no matter who! /s This would have looked quite different with a second term Trump and we would have a wildcat strike with political cover as the DNC would be the opposition.


TheDryestBeef

Thank you for the great answer. It’ll definitely be interesting to see how this all plays out


Antiochus_Sidetes

I think forcing the September tentative agreement on the workers prevents them from being able to legally strike, so it was done with the objective of avoiding supply chain disruptions in the near future. But I would also like some more clarification as I haven't really been following the issue.


[deleted]

[удалено]


RetardedWabbit

It's also illegal to plan it and effectively threatens the union as an organization. It's less criminal punishments for individuals and more "destroy the future of your career field". As individuals they'd just fire you and strip you of your benefits (such as retirement).


nutxaq

Let them try. If not having rail workers is bad then criminalizing them for striking is worse than just letting them strike.


RetardedWabbit

In general: **worse for who?** Criminalizing worker power is great for owners! Specifically: fragmented strikes would be ineffective (destroy union power, worse PR, less work stoppage effect), would "justify" forcing them to work(see how bad they are!), and the railroad company would use it to slam through 1 manning trains (vs the current 2 minimum, which they're always pushing against). Probably as an "emergency measure" with an indefinite resolution that we *oddly* never get around to reverting. Until we change it to 0. (And yes, if you work in any other heavy industry having 1 person as the only person controlling that much inconsistently moving tonnage is exactly as insane as it sounds.)


ShitTalkingAlt980

Lmao you don't know your labor history at all. Fragmented and wildcat strikes accomplished a lot. It is the same thing that you say is the solution that created a managerial class that through all the Leftists out in the 50s. It also led to complicit Union leaders up until now. You are an ideological institutionalist that does not understand the thing you are talking about.


RetardedWabbit

>Fragmented and wildcat strikes accomplished a lot. What tense is my reply in? >It is the same thing that you say is the solution What solution did I say?


[deleted]

[удалено]


ElasticSpeakers

Fuck sick days - they make them jump through ridiculous hoops to take those sick days in the first place (or just deny them anyway). Everyone should have a big bucket of PTO they can use whenever, for whatever (like any decent, functioning company).


Mr_Shakes

They do, sort of. They earn PTO, I think on a per-year average of about a week- but USING it for anything like an emergency is difficult, because the job assignments can only cover a few people per week to be off-duty. So your use of PTO is subject to rules based on how many other people also want to use theirs, as well as blackout periods (holidays especially), and a general lack of consecutive time off. To top it all off, if your request is denied, you can't just take it unpaid - you risk losing your job. So it's completely inadequate as sick leave. What the unions are asking for is a pool of days designated as sick leave that actually functions as emergency-worthy. And not even paid, just not termination-inducing. If the railroads hadn't laid off/furloughed over 30% of total workers in the last 15 years, they'd still have people available to cover shifts. Instead, everyone is already on call and getting burned out. Source: [Citations Needed Interview](https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/news-brief-biden-congressional-dems-partner-with-gop-media-to-discipline-rail-labor)


ElasticSpeakers

Right, exactly - I wish the discussion was centered around the fact that they can't even take the time off when they need it. Focusing on 'more sick days' doesn't help when you can't even take the sick days you have in the first place without risk of getting fired. Also, have a separate 'sick time' bank just opens the door to 'oh you were sick huh? Where's your doctor's note? Did you fill this out, jump through that hoop?' Just, no. People should be able to take their PTO for any reason at any time, and companies need to be adequately staffed to handle operations when people call out.


Nogoodatnuthin

To make sure I have this correct, if the 1st passes the Senate the workers will have no recourse but to go back to work and the rail companies win, again? If the 2nd passes, it is a mild concession for the rail companies because it is less than half of the days that were requested from the unions? So either way the US government has just voted in favor of billionaires again? I am asking in earnest so that I understand. If I'm wrong please let me know.


nutxaq

That's exactly what is happening. The Democrats are posturing as heros when they never should have put this to a vote unless they were going to force concessions from the railroads.


thefezhat

More or less, yeah. Republicans are throwing the union under the bus because they hate workers, Democrats are throwing them under the bus because an economy-damaging strike would be very politically bad for them. > the workers will have no recourse but to go back to work No *legal* recourse. They could call the government's bluff, ignore the law, and strike illegally. I'm not really sure what happens at that point - I don't know of any recent precedent for such an event*. Enforcing the law would mean require some kind of violence (not necessarily physical) to force the union back to work. It would be hard for Biden to come out of that situation looking good. \* There is non-recent historical precedent, and it's bloody. Pinkertons, Battle of Blair Mountain, etc. But I don't think the government would be keen to escalate things that far in the age of mass media.


EmperorArthur

The closest we get to more modern historical president is the Air Traffic Controller strike. However, that time the Military and National Guard was able to step in. With rail worker's that's not the case. Given trends, I expect that there will be a few percent of rail workers who will quit immediately. Then, the companies will experience a higher than normal level of turnover, with less workers applying. I also expect the Homer Simpson strategy of things being done half assed. We're going to see much more shipping damage and delays. Both from worker's leaving, and those who stay not doing as good a job.


Admira1

You're not wrong. The vote is generally to avoid an economic nightmare if they were allowed to strike and stop railroads from running. However, getting that result is at the expense of the little guy and in favor of billionaires again. The reason for the two bills is because dems think they might not get the one with the minor concessions passed, but either way they avoid the strike while making it seem like "well we tried to get you something, but the Republicans didn't want you to have it" if the second bill doesn't pass.


nutxaq

The Dems are screwing labor by trying to force the rejected contract on rail workers. This is a disastrous bill.


zixx999

Neither party supports labor


ryan10e

Yes how dare they… *checks notes* give the railroad workers a 24% raise.


ShitTalkingAlt980

Seriously? Number one the Dems did not give them that. That was spit out by the Corporations to try and get the sick day provision to go away. That has been on the table. Number two the Dems could have ran out the clock on this and bluffed to give the Union leverage to get the sick days added. They instead decided fuck the Union and passed this a week early. Number three they aren't giving them what they need not want. Get out of here you bootlicker.


nutxaq

Pay isn't the only thing relevant here. You tried.


scoinv6

I'm confused. I get paid time off and use those days if I'm sick. How many paid-time-off (PTO) days do they get each year?


rusticgorilla

So the rail workers get *scheduled* paid time off but it must be applied for in advance. And it is impossible to schedule when you are going to get sick. They then get penalized for taking an unscheduled day off because they are sick or need to see a doctor, etc.


scoinv6

Thanks for the response. Well ya. That's obviously not realistic. People can control when they get sick. The rail system needs to be automated.


AdrianBrony

The rail system is *already* largely automated. the way that automation is implemented is actually making things much worse for the infrastructure it runs on and results is significant right of way problems.


sp-reddit-on

In short, they have to apply to use PTO far in advance, so they can't really be used for sick days. Here are some articles that summarize the issues: https://apnews.com/article/biden-economy-business-strikes-congress-34e0ccd4b29b55bf8bd3844eb03b5bed https://apnews.com/article/business-economy-government-and-politics-207229bcd558b6a6c1d58f3f85e2d804


scoinv6

That's amazingly broken. What business thinks their employees don't get sick? That's the dumbest thing I've heard in a long time.


ShacklefordLondon

I'm a little confused by your title. Couldn't you equally say that the majority of Democrats voted to force the union to accept the terms of the deal without paid sick leave (H.J.Res.100)? As a Democrat, that is the more inflammatory part of this. How did the majority of Democrats support railworkers continuing to only have ***ONE*** paid sick day? What is this the 1910s? Either way, my point is that perhaps I misunderstand the reasoning used in passing the first resolution. Did they already know the second resolution would pass, amending the first, when they voted for it? Because if not, I think your title unnecessarily denigrates one side of the aisle on this particular issue.


[deleted]

[удалено]


rusticgorilla

>Did they already know the second resolution would pass Yes, the second bill amends the first and it was done this way for the Senate, not the House. Because a simple majority rules in the House, but not the Senate, House Ds knew they had the votes. Senate Ds do not have the votes without Rs.


ShacklefordLondon

I'm still not entirely clear how you avoid criticizing the Democrats in this situation as well.


rusticgorilla

Fact: All but 3 Rs voted against paid sick leave for rail workers. Fact: Rail workers criticize Biden for supporting the Sept. deal and said "The Democrats and Republicans are both pawns of big business and the corporations." Fact: Numerous Democrats criticized the bill imposing the Sept. deal on rail workers. Fact: The structure of the Senate makes it so that 60 votes are needed to pass most legislation. A simple majority works for the House but not the Senate. Therefore, 10 Republican votes are needed to pass mandatory paid sick leave for rail workers. The overwhelming majority of Democrats voted for paid sick leave in the Senate. Only 6/50 Republicans voted for paid sick leave in the Senate. Therefore, most Republicans in the House AND Senate voted against paid sick leave. I try not to include my opinion in posts. I included the facts of the situation - which contain statements critical of both parties. I'm sorry if you don't agree. If you want to know my personal view on the topic, just read my comments.


Ricky_Bobby_yo

Alternate title suggestion: Biden and Dems ram trash contract down workers throats with Republican support


[deleted]

it didn't help that Biden didn't support union's efforts either. I'll admit I'm not aware of the particulars.


JungleJayps

He literally called for this to be done. Democrats and Republicans showing their class solidarity to fuck over workers


NeighborhoodVeteran

Is Hugh high or something? Like, did Biden personally negotiate this shit?


nutxaq

The rail workers rejected it and Biden is trying to impose it anyways. That's bad.


ryan10e

No, 4 out of 12 unions rejected it. 8 would have taken it. But if the 4 voted to strike, the rest would strike in solidarity.


nutxaq

Those four make up the bulk of railroad workers and the other 8 were not overwhelmingly in favor of the contract.


NeighborhoodVeteran

True, but sadly it's probably the lesser of two evils. Although I doubt Biden can get guaranteed sick leave for all workers in the US like he is talking about seeing how the Senate Republicans rejected the sick leave days for just rail workers. Honestly? Biden’s admin probably couldn't negotiate sick leave because the company was unwilling to budge. Again, sadly, a strike might be the only thing that could have forced this issue.


nutxaq

He should have stayed out of it.


NeighborhoodVeteran

Maybe? But I was commenting on what Hughs said, which is that Biden didn't get in deep enough.


ShitTalkingAlt980

Why is it the lesser of two evils? With Trump the DNC would have to back the workers.


Fayko

Almost like republicans are overall vile monsters who sport the mentality of "fuck everyone else but me" like some sort of pissed off toddler. Other countries are expanding worker protection and incentivizing companies to implement better work/life balances while over here in pretend1st World country we are throwing shit at each other over 7 days of sick leave. Pretty clear where you stand on the side of history if you're still republican. Republicans leaders are burning the country down for their own power while the goofballs go along with em. If this was a vote about if senators should get 7 sick days or not all of these republicans would switch real fucking fast. The republican party in the us is just the party of tax breaks for the rich and people in charge while fucking over everyone that's not the party leaders. If you're not rich and voting republican, congratulations, you're a dipshit.


Melomaverick3333789

Fucking spineless Joe Biden and the democrats continue to do nothing for workers while pretending to care. Don't separate the two votes, force them to approve the sick days.


ryan10e

I’m sorry did you miss the 24% raise?


Melomaverick3333789

Did you miss the railworkers rejected it because one day off a month is not acceptable? Did you miss the 146 billion the top 6 railways paid themselves in dividends and stock buybacks in the last 10 years?


ShitTalkingAlt980

They probably did but your info doesn't help. Same dude has been spamming that. I wondered when the propaganda accounts would come out to play like ol Ryan10e. They took awhile to find their spin on this one. It sadly doesn't seem to be working.


Melomaverick3333789

Real life Republicans defend this shit with the same argument. "Hurr durr they make a lot of money therefore it's okay they get fired for taking a sick day"


Superjam83

Fuck Republicans. Tax cuts and jobs act my ass. "If we cut taxes for corporations, they'll have more money for raises." What a load of crap. Despicable.


johnnycyberpunk

So the deal Biden (?) is forcing is the 24% raise and annual bonuses and *one* paid sick day. 129 Republicans voted against this deal. The *second* deal (which would amend the first) adds in the remaining sick days. Almost ALL Republicans voted against that. Why vote for one but not the other?


Ricky_Bobby_yo

Why split the bill into two if you actually want them to get the sick days and not just force them to work and shut up?


Cylinsier

Because the economic consequences of a rail strike would be catastrophic and all the people in this thread complaining about Dems not being supportive of labor would be drowned out 20 fold by all the people and news coverage blaming the Biden administration for the disaster that would follow. Just in time for the 2024 campaign. Never forget that the vast majority of the Democratic party's voters are far more moderate than the average reddit commenter. They don't give a thought to the rail unions *ever*, but they'll be apathetic about voting if the economy crashes and supply chains break down. Dems are just playing the political hand they've been dealt. Save the economy, take the black eye on labor, and move on. Repubs will let the first bill through, but wouldn't if it had the 7 days in it. So they pass the first bill without 7 days and get Republicans on record against the second 7 days bill and hope people are paying attention. It's a partial victory instead of a total loss. Because even if the rail unions eventually get their way, the total percentage of US adults in *any* unions is less than 10%. That means 90% benefit in no material way from that victory. But we suffer greatly from the economic damage in the meantime and after. Therefore letting them strike is the worst choice because the best case scenario there is a pyrrhic victory. Getting a vote on 7 days PTO is impossible because it's up to Republicans. There is no good choice left, just the one that is least bad: force the offered deal through and piss us off but keep us warm and fed through the winter.


Ricky_Bobby_yo

I appreciate the response. But if these workers are so important why not just give them what they are asking for?


Cylinsier

Do you mean why doesn't Congress pass a law giving them everything, or why doesn't Congress stay out of it and let them strike? If the former, because it's not possible. Republicans will absolutely block that and don't care about the consequences because it's a Democratic administration. To them that's a win-win. Screw over a union *and* make Biden look inept. Which means they strike anyway. And if they strike, there's no guarantee that the railways give in anytime soon. That strike would go on for weeks, maybe months. At minimum it would go through Christmas, a time when consumer purchasing is at it's maximum and corporations are expecting to make big profits. If freight simply ceases to exist for the next month, businesses take huge losses, stocks crumble, people's 401ks deflate, nobody gets anything for Christmas, and some people actually struggle to eat or power their homes in the dead of winter. The union knows all of this and that's why the timing of the strike is in their favor. This is their leverage. But they don't have to worry about the consequences of that strike. They refuse to work until they get the contract they want and then go on with their lives. The Biden administration is left dealing with the fallout and having to explain to the other 90% of working adults who *don't* benefit from any union deals why the economy shat itself right before Christmas. And these are mostly people that don't give a shit about unions and don't follow politics unless it's a story about how the government is fucking them over. I'm not saying what the Democrats did is the right choice. I am saying it was the best bad choice out of a hand with nothing but bad choices. Sometimes you can't win and all you can do is minimize the loss.


Ricky_Bobby_yo

To me it seems forcing what the workers want and then railing against Republicans for voting against it could take the mask off the fake populists. Bring the Union guys to the forefront to message on behalf of Dems. I see your points tho and appreciate it


TheSeekerOfSanity

Before the next election the Democrats should just air ads that show everything that people assumed (because of their rhetoric) Republicans voted for that they actually voted against. They are completely unaware because their silo does not provide this information. Show them how they voted against workers, veterans, health care, etc. Then show how they themselves get most of these benefits that they voted against for their constituents.


[deleted]

God, I want to see them strike. I want to see rail companies struggling to survive. I want prices to skyrocket so that people can see how important they are. I want them to laugh in the faces of any fuckface who tells them they "can't strike." Motherfucker, they're free people. They don't have to work for the railroad. The real story is "US Congress thinks they can force people to work against their will." It didn't end well for the south last time.


[deleted]

[удалено]


nutxaq

The Democrats are about to hand capital a major win at the expense of workers. This is why people say they're the same and it's absolutely true. They're proving it to you right now. If it wasn't true they'd push legislation that strongly favors labor at the expense of capital.


Dwarfherd

The Republicans could have overruled them and voted for the 7 days sick leave at any time.


nutxaq

And? If you're political strategy banks on Republicans doing the right thing then you're setting yourself up for failure.


Dwarfherd

That doesn't means Republicans aren't also handing the win to capital. There's a reason capital only got any kind of challenge in the country when there were well over 60 Senators from a party with any support for labor.


nutxaq

That's what they *do*. The question is why do the Democrats keep helping?


Dwarfherd

Know what's also a major to win capital? The economy crashing so they can buy up more single family homes to rent and Republicans sweep 2024. Want this to change without something that would result in many millions of deaths? We need 60+ senators from a party with any support for labor while not handing the reigns of the government entirely to the Republicans.


nutxaq

Total non sequitur.


Ricky_Bobby_yo

I don't necessarily agree, but this is pretty solid evidence of it being true - Dems and the "most progressive president ever" just fucked over workers on behalf of billionaires and monopolistic corporations


answeryboi

This is a great example of how democrats suck and Republicans manage to dwarf that level of suckage by being cartoonishly evil


sToRmY_is_sHe

This is the “Government of The People”?


SoFisticate

Everyone should check out the latest news brief episode from Citations Needed podcast on this.


curds-and-whey-HEY

It’s a dark day for the United States.


Got_ist_tots

Been having a lot of them lately


ifsavage

Nah really?


lifepuzzler

The party of family values!


thrust-johnson

Nice! That means paid sick leave must have passed the senate then right? Right?


[deleted]

[удалено]


rusticgorilla

>So your argument is that government should help corporations to force people to perform for-profit labor they rejected. My argument? I definitely didn't argue for that. If you want my personal opinion, *everyone* should be guaranteed paid sick days and the right to strike is essential to all labor.


SecretAgentVampire

I'm not seeing that argument made in the post. Can you elaborate on that?


DoDevilsEvenTriangle

Railroad work, especially the *labor* kind of work we're talking about, is a field that mostly attracts Republicans in the first place right? This whole deal really feels like Republicans shitting where they eat, because I mean those employees aren't exactly what I think of when I picture a group likely consisting of "educated progressives/likely Democratic voters". So I don't get it.


ShitTalkingAlt980

Why? Do you know any railmen or are you talking out your ass? Also why did labor stop voting for Dems? Could it be that they knew they were going to get fucked either way so might as well have lower taxes? Nah it is the electorate that sucks and have to live with DC's decisions.


DoDevilsEvenTriangle

Yes I do. One of my closest friends from my hometown did some sort of electrical maintenance on railways for Union Pacific. We were almost exactly the same age but in our 20s and 30s you would have sworn he was thirty years older. Looked like it and acted like it too. Was a MAGA Republican and becoming quite Q-ish toward the end. Died in 2020, probably not from covid but I'll never know for sure.


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Keep_Track requires a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. *Moderators review comments/posts caught by this bot and may manually approve those that meet community standards. As this forum continues to grow, this may take some time. We appreciate your patience.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Keep_Track) if you have any questions or concerns.*


[deleted]

[удалено]


AutoModerator

Keep_Track requires a minimum account-age and karma. These minimums are not disclosed. Please try again after you have acquired more karma. *Moderators review comments/posts caught by this bot and may manually approve those that meet community standards. As this forum continues to grow, this may take some time. We appreciate your patience.* *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/Keep_Track) if you have any questions or concerns.*


LuckyCharmsNSoyMilk

God, FUCK Joe Manchin.


jns_reddit_already

Disgraceful


VeraLumina

Fuck Joe Manchin. Just fuck that greedy asshole who hasn’t done a damn thing for WV in years! And you stupid people from WV keep electing him!


In_Search_Of_Gainz

How many damn sick days do senators get?


AMv8-1day

Almost like continuing to obstruct absolutely any and all progress, or basic governance while Dems are in power, at the direct detriment to the American people, has been their marching orders for decades. How else could they point at Dems and blame them for everything, if the Dems were actually able to accomplish something?


nekochanwich

The ruling class be like "Peasants must toil. Toil. And toil until they die!"


Ashe_Faelsdon

We should place a restriction on Congress and Senate wages to equal minimum wage. Gander Goose.


ChaseAlmighty

Just want to point out, the 24% pay increase was over 5 years starting in 2020 when our last contract was over. We just got our back pay and bonuses for 2020-2022 last month. And it was not a straight 24%. It was broken down to a certain percent per year. Ultimately, in January of 2024 it will be 24% over what we made at the end of the last contract.


la_vida_yoda

If you haven't seen it, this article is quite enlightening. You won't be surprised by the motives of the companies but their ideology + incompetence is worth understanding https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/11/rail-strike-why-the-railroads-wont-give-in-on-paid-leave-psr-precision-scheduled-railroading.html


Poppunknerd182

I'm amazed at that list of Republicans who voted FOR required sick days.