Biden / Harris Focused Discussion

[Cthulhu 2020]

Because reality works in binaries and sometimes you don't have to make tough decisions you normally wouldn't make due to more important broader circumstances.

Like having corporate media across most of the spectrum that will side with rail companies and place all blame on unions for a strike, backed by Republican messaging that's in-tandem blaming union members exclusively, with significant actual risks to the broader economy in the immediate/shorter term plus the massive political risk of, "Democrats ruined Christmas" - as petty as that all fucking is, which I think we can agree - to set up some kind of actual "red wave" for 2024 if Republicans can stop fighting each other.

Can you imagine the outcome if they'd pushed this issue into a massive strike? Railroad companies would bring in ACTUAL scabs, pay them half the wage, and eventually turn them into the long term workers while the former workers are suddenly out of a really well paying job. It was pointed out earlier, but railroad employees are the second best paid blue collars in the USA. They make bank. And they can thank their largely in tact unions for that. A strike would have given the robber barons of the railroad industry enough excuse to bust the unions and add railroad employees to the list of slave wage workers.

It's so fucking weird that the farther left is going "Yeah sure, I blame Republicans for this stuff too, but let me write up ten sentences on how Democrats are really the bad guys!"

This same shit happened with the Bernie campaign in 2016. The right went from calling him a commie before the primaries to throwing out pretend sympathy all in a bid to spread propaganda against Hillary and how she "cheated" in the primaries with the ultimate goal of dissuading the farther left from voting for Hillary. The real villains of worker rights are manipulating the fanatics against those willing to make compromises. And what happens when you shove out those who are willing to make compromises? You don't get compromises. You just get fucked.

[Templar 331]

I asked this before and I'll ask it again, since NOBODY answered (and nobody will answer), what could Democrats possibly have done that wouldn't have resulted in a major catastrophe for the nation?

I'll wait.

Write an agreement that all the unions would vote yes to. But that would make the corporate donors sad.

[Muzjhath]

Can you imagine the outcome if they'd pushed this issue into a massive strike? Railroad companies would bring in ACTUAL scabs, pay them half the wage, and eventually turn them into the long term workers while the former workers are suddenly out of a really well paying job. It was pointed out earlier, but railroad employees are the second best paid blue collars in the USA. They make bank. And they can thank their largely in tact unions for that. A strike would have given the robber barons of the railroad industry enough excuse to bust the unions and add railroad employees to the list of slave wage workers.

I'll only respond to this.

The problem stems form this bit. If anyone tried to bust said unions? Everyone else should have fucking gone out to strike alongside them!
And then not care that it's technically illegal in the US. What is the authorities to do. Arrest and jail 1 or 2 million workers for striking?

[Elegiac]

The worst part that gets missed, is that if action that workers want to take to improve their working conditions can be strongarm prevented, their power is weakened, and then scab workers nullify almost the entirety of the rest of it. NHS workers in the UK took on action and then public money was hard funnelled to get in workers from agency to fill the gaps, costing shitloads more. Weakening the power of workers should never be an option; and that's what happened here: Striking can't be done because it'll disrupt too many supply chains and lead to deaths is a distraction: The longer this shit gets pushed down the road (not just for rail workers, but for all) it'll just BE worse when the dam breaks. Just because rail workers are better off doesn't mean shit: When any unionised worker can not take action, no worker can.

(also can we just look in shock at the concept that if you get sick you just lose money? Like, why is that even a thing you can defend ancillary? Fucking messed up situation for ANYONE to be in.)

It is not a distraction when the alternative is a rail strike being a springboard for getting a party into power that is manifestly more hostile to worker welfare than the Democrats.

Once again; y'all are missing the fact that the political calculus for taking hardline stances has not been sufficiently cultivated. Middle and working class Americans do not have class consciousness, and even in situations where there is a significant majority in favor for a change the electoral system is not equipped to translate that into reform on a one to one basis. Those are the things which need to be worked on, and they will lay the groundwork for more significant gains on the part of labor.

[Shadowferal]

this is an absolute right wing talking point lol you just keep saying 'oh i completely agree with you BUT here is all the reasons i dont agree with you' you can just take 10 seconds to ask the rail worker in this thread what he thinks and wants then support whatever that is. If you can get over yourself for 10 seconds.

Think about the rail worker if s/he did go on strike. The unions are between a rock and a hard place. But a strike would hit them as hard, (if not harder, for lack of pay), as everyone else. And the blame game would fall squarely on unions. Assuming union leaders are politically savvy, they expected Biden and congress' action. This will get punted to congress next year, and every goper crying about how the dems treat unions...

[Templar 331]

Think about the rail worker if s/he did go on strike. The unions are between a rock and a hard place. But a strike would hit them as hard, (if not harder, for lack of pay), as everyone else. And the blame game would fall squarely on unions. Assuming union leaders are politically savvy, they expected Biden and congress' action. This will get punted to congress next year, and every goper crying about how the dems treat unions...

As long as we show up to the picket line, we get paid by the union. They have money saved away for that.

[Rasulis]

The worst part that gets missed, is that if action that workers want to take to improve their working conditions can be strongarm prevented, their power is weakened, and then scab workers nullify almost the entirety of the rest of it. NHS workers in the UK took on action and then public money was hard funnelled to get in workers from agency to fill the gaps, costing shitloads more. Weakening the power of workers should never be an option; and that's what happened here: Striking can't be done because it'll disrupt too many supply chains and lead to deaths is a distraction: The longer this shit gets pushed down the road (not just for rail workers, but for all) it'll just BE worse when the dam breaks. Just because rail workers are better off doesn't mean shit: When any unionised worker can not take action, no worker can.

(also can we just look in shock at the concept that if you get sick you just lose money? Like, why is that even a thing you can defend ancillary? Fucking messed up situation for ANYONE to be in.)

Railroad companies are not going to bring scab locomotive conductors or engineers. There aren't that many people with the skill and know-how to run one-mile long trains with over 100 cargo cars. Not to mention the DOT/FRA mandatory drug testing requirements. One of my DOT hazmat transport refresher class was taught by a retired BNSF conductor. According to him, they would always have a long line of applicants whenever there was a job opening. As soon as they mentioned the drug testing requirements, half would leave.

[Shadowferal]

As long as we show up to the picket line, we get paid by the union. They have money saved away for that.

And of course there's the bad pr...that "callous disregard" for everyone else...the unions would give Reagan a good name. There's been massive pushback against unions since Reagan/Bush era that left unions without many seats at the table. The democrats are scrambling for unions to keep what influence they have...as I posted, union leaders should be smart enough about the politics. "Joe Union" might not see the politics but this is a fight they can't win...now.

[Muzjhath]

And of course there's the bad pr...that "callous disregard" for everyone else...the unions would give Reagan a good name. There's been massive pushback against unions since Reagan/Bush era that left unions without many seats at the table. The democrats are scrambling for unions to keep what influence they have...as I posted, union leaders should be smart enough about the politics. "Joe Union" might not see the politics but this is a fight they can't win...now.

The problem here stems from other people. And some laws in the US.
In a reasonable country the regular workers in the news just wouldn't air bad PR segments on the news or would make sure it was framed to put the bosses in the wrong.
The strike happened because of the fatcats.

[Cthulhu 2020]

Breaking: 3 power substations attacked with guns. Jan 6th perpetrators are posting suspicious messages, sounding like they're responsible, saying "this is God's judgment on the family friendly drag show" that was canceled, and acted ignorant.

https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1599253199126683650

Emily Rainey, a former Army officer who resigned after the Army launched an investigation into her participation in the Jan. 6th attack, posted this about the power outage.

In a follow-up post, Rainey tagged Sunrise Theater, where the drag show was being held, and wrote “God will not be mocked” above what appears to be a photo of the building tonight during the power outage.

This person posted a tweet appearing to endorse the firearms attack on the substations, then edited the tweet to remove an approving hashtag.

That's the danger with unflinching absolutists. They don't care who gets hurt as long as they deliver their message.

I’m worried for residents of Moore County who rely on life-sustaining medical equipment and just had the power go out. This attack has immediately put lives in danger, to say nothing of the campaign of terror being waged against LGBTQ people.

[Levelfive]

It is not a distraction when the alternative is a rail strike being a springboard for getting a party into power that is manifestly more hostile to worker welfare than the Democrats.

Once again; y'all are missing the fact that the political calculus for taking hardline stances has not been sufficiently cultivated. Middle and working class Americans do not have class consciousness, and even in situations where there is a significant majority in favor for a change the electoral system is not equipped to translate that into reform on a one to one basis. Those are the things which need to be worked on, and they will lay the groundwork for more significant gains on the part of labor.

I thought this was a good, level-headed analysis of the whole thing: https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1...190413831.html


Thread Reader

Magdi Jacobs Profile picture
Magdi Jacobs
Follow @Magi_jay
Twitter logo
Dec 2 • 17 tweets • 4 min read

I'm loathe to step into Railroad Debate, as I'm not an expert, but I wish people would acknowledge the following:

-This deal has been worked on for years
-8/12 of the unions voted for it. That doesn't mean the 4 that rejected it don't matter. But the 8 who ratified matter too

This has been a lengthy process. The contract was voted on by multiple unions; 8 ratified; 4 rejected. Those unions then entered into a "cooling off" period wherein union leaders began negotiating with *one another* about ratification. So there has been an inter-union debate. The deal that was reached between union leaders & the railroads did not include paid sick leave, which was the real sticking point.

Other benefits were gained: wage increases, healthcare, etc. That's not enough, imo. But it's not on *me* to tell the 8/12 unions "So now strike."

Now, I'm not even going to go into defending/criticizing Biden, here. But there's a lot of important information missing from this convo, for example: *do* the members of the 8/12 unions who ratified want to be compelled to strike? Or do they want to keep the deal they voted on?

There's a lot of complicated questions to resolve if one is taking a truly "pro-worker" position but, frankly, I don't see a lot of "complicated question asking." More flat-out misinformation, much of which includes no voices from the "workers" we're apparently fighting for

Turnout was also up for most unions during the latest round of voting. For example, only 28% of the Brotherhood of Railway Carmen voted in 2018; this surged to 58% in Sept, 2022. The union ratified. TCIU voting increased from 34% to 49%. Also ratified.

Now, am I saying this means you should feel one way or another about Biden, Congress, or the RLA? No, but the dynamics between the RELEVANT WORKERS are much more complicated than they are made out to be & the more you realize that, the more facile the online debate becomes

People say "The 4 that voted against represent more members than in the other 8." I understand why people find this a compelling point (I did), but the more I think about it, the less sense I can make of it. Are we going to hammer out the intricacies of union power on twitter?

The way the rail unions work now, if not all ratify the agreement, all must go on strike unless other steps are taken. I guess we could debate how this should all work, but, in reality, this process was decided on by unions, so I'm not gonna step in like "this % matters more"

These unions represent different* workers with different jobs. Different risk/strain/time away. I can hazard a real guess that many unions would actually NOT want us to push for "majority rules" in terms of members, as that could lessen power for smaller workforces in more danger

This whole situation raises a lot of really interesting questions about worker power, union power, the balance of fighting for rights thru strikes vs. protecting the public (including other workers!) from strike-induced harm, the threat of strike-induced harm being misused, etc

At the end of the day, tho, we can't begin to have any of those conversations with how much misinformation there is out there. Nor can we claim to stand up for workers when we're not even aware of the fact that these workers have been negotiating *amongst one another for years*

For my part, I'd start with asking, "Do any of these unions actually want to strike?" Did those who voted in favor of the contract want Congress to step in or not? And what distinguishes those unions who did not ratify--Boilermakers, Signalmen, etc--from those who did?

I've been trying to puzzle through the bigger Qs--shutting down the economy to secure sick leave (which I believe is a right) for some, whereas other workers w/in this same economy who also don't have sick leave will suffer. Is that "pro-worker?"

At the same time, economic suffering is the leverage of the strike. "Don't do this because it will cause harm" could be taken as an argument against any strike. These are, again, truly complicated, theoretical questions.

But I really just care about this right now, in terms of the current debate: people need to stop claiming they're standing up for "workers" when workers' are themselves in enough dispute about their best interests, here. We're not even talking about the same workforce here.

Here is what union leaders from the dissenting unions had to say about Congressional action last night. It amounts to: Democrats are sticking with us; Republicans aren't. Keep fighting for sick leave. (More in the link)

[Poopymonster]

Breaking: 3 power substations attacked with guns. Jan 6th perpetrators are posting suspicious messages, sounding like they're responsible, saying "this is God's judgment on the family friendly drag show" that was canceled, and acted ignorant.

https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1599253199126683650







That's the danger with unflinching absolutists. They don't care who gets hurt as long as they deliver their message.

So it looks like the most dangerous thing that can happen at a drag show is a Christian with a gun.
Sounds American enough all right.

[Dontrike]

Breaking: 3 power substations attacked with guns. Jan 6th perpetrators are posting suspicious messages, sounding like they're responsible, saying "this is God's judgment on the family friendly drag show" that was canceled, and acted ignorant.

https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1599253199126683650

That's the danger with unflinching absolutists. They don't care who gets hurt as long as they deliver their message.

Terrorism, simple as that. There was then looting at at least one gun store. So now there are guns in hands of people that shouldn't have them.

[Templar 331]

And of course there's the bad pr...that "callous disregard" for everyone else...the unions would give Reagan a good name. There's been massive pushback against unions since Reagan/Bush era that left unions without many seats at the table. The democrats are scrambling for unions to keep what influence they have...as I posted, union leaders should be smart enough about the politics. "Joe Union" might not see the politics but this is a fight they can't win...now.

The main reason for all of this is because, as we've seen in this instance, unions have been declawed. People have stopped believing in unions because they can't get much done. The big ones like the railroad and federal unions are pretty much at the mercy of Congress. And like we saw with Starbucks and Amazon it's hard to get a smaller one off the ground. If "Joe Union" had taken a step towards the unions instead of half-assed negotiated a middle of the road agreement people's faith in unions would have grown. But now he will feel the stigma of this failure and everyone will lose a little bit more faith in the power of unions to fight for the working class.

- - - Updated - - -

This has been a lengthy process. The contract was voted on by multiple unions; 8 ratified; 4 rejected. Those unions then entered into a "cooling off" period wherein union leaders began negotiating with *one another* about ratification. So there has been an inter-union debate. The deal that was reached between union leaders & the railroads did not include paid sick leave, which was the real sticking point.

If I'm remembering my union updates correctly, and this was a while back so I might not, the particulars about the contract proposals weren't released to the public or to us. They weren't going to be until the company agreed to them, which they didn't. We went through a "cooling off" period after the final rounds of negotiations and the same thing happened again with us not knowing the details of the proposals. It then went to the Presidential Committee (can't remember the exact name) where both parties put forward their terms. The Committee picked which points they felt were acceptable and gave the final product to the unions and corporations. It was then that we found out what was in the proposed contract. The Union came back and said they had been pushing for sick leave but the corporations absolutely would not have it. Whether this is true or not I can't say. But see the outcome of the Congressional vote I can believe it.

[Spectral]

The "no sick leave" thing is a pretty ridiculous talking point. Here are the actual time-off policies for rail workers. Lots of vacation, paid personal days (that can be used for short-run sick leave), and paid long-term sick leave. The only donut hole is if someone used all of their personal days and vacation days, but wasn't sick enough to be out for more than a week, in which case they'd need to take an unpaid leave day.

In my late 30s, I have never had that much access to paid leave, and I've worked in positions that most Americans would consider well-compensated and moderately prestigious.

Democrats and Biden did more than fine in coming to an entirely reasonable agreement and averting a disastrous strike. They were even smart enough to make a big fuss out of the sick leave thing, which they can now point the finger at the dastardly Republicans for. As is so common with these things, the Bernie-wing is going to go around being pissed off still, but the pragmatists did a good job.

[Endus]

The main reason for all of this is because, as we've seen in this instance, unions have been declawed. People have stopped believing in unions because they can't get much done. The big ones like the railroad and federal unions are pretty much at the mercy of Congress. And like we saw with Starbucks and Amazon it's hard to get a smaller one off the ground. If "Joe Union" had taken a step towards the unions instead of half-assed negotiated a middle of the road agreement people's faith in unions would have grown. But now he will feel the stigma of this failure and everyone will lose a little bit more faith in the power of unions to fight for the working class.

By comparison, the Canadian Union for Public Employees was gonna see all supplemental staff in schools (teaching assistants, librarians, custodians, etc) go on strike a few weeks back. This would have led to indefinite school closures across the entire province, since they can't operate without that staff. The teacher's union was talking about joining them in solidarity. It was so bad the Ontario Conservative government passed a bill that tried to give them the authority to deny them their right to strike. Their response? Fuck you, we're on strike. And then the government almost immediately knuckled under, repealing that same law they'd just passed to try and appease CUPE. If they hadn't, it likely would have spun off into striking transit workers, nurses, federal public workers, postal workers, etc, all covered under CUPE or by other unions coming out in solidarity (because the same bill could/would be used against them in the future).

Pretty much all the venom over the situation has been firmly directed at Doug Ford and his government, because they're the shitheads forcing the situation to this point.

That's the difference between a country that respects workers basic rights, and a country like the USA that largely does not give a single shit about them.

[Templar 331]

The "no sick leave" thing is a pretty ridiculous talking point. Here are the actual time-off policies for rail workers. Lots of vacation, paid personal days (that can be used for short-run sick leave), and paid long-term sick leave. The only donut hole is if someone used all of their personal days and vacation days, but wasn't sick enough to be out for more than a week, in which case they'd need to take an unpaid leave day.

HAHAHAHAHHAHA, no. Let me explain to you how it really works. (Since I work for a Class 1 railroad)

Yes you can "Mark off" sick. Do you know what happens? You get disciplinary points. You get extra points if you mark off Thur-Mon. Why? The weekend. You also lose your "guarantee." A guarantee is the minimum wage you would make in a week. If you are only called into work one day that week you would still be paid a decent amount. You can always make more each week but as long as you don't mark off you can't make anything less. By marking off that one day you lose any chance of making the minimum. I'm sure you're saying "if there's a chance that you won't be called in that week why mark off in the first place?" The answer, that's how this job is. You have absolutely no idea when you will be called. You live your life around the railroad. When they call, you answer. There is no "but I'm sick." You come in or face disciplinary action.

Can you use the vacation days in it's place? No. Your vacation days can be turned into individual days or an entire week block. You can only have X amount of individual days a year. The rest have to be used as a week. The amount depends on the number of years you've been there. How can you use your vacation? If you want to put in a weeks vacation it has to be put in the year before and submitted to your union rep before the end of October. Your individual days have to be requested at the beginning of the quarter. And if I remember right you can't request any day past the quarter. Do you know what happens at 12:01 A.M. on Jan1, Apr 1, July 1, Oct 1? Everything stops. And I mean everything so everyone in the entire company can race to their phone and dial up the automated system and put in their personal days off. They do this because it's first come first serve.

What about FMLA? Yes, we do get this. But you have to qualify for it. And yes, the ones that do qualify for it tend to abuse it. The reason why is because that's the only way they can get off on any day they need/want to be off. Because of all the convoluted steps you have to do just to get one day off it's easier to have a family member with a medical condition. Do you know how fucked up that is? That is why these sick days are so important.

[Endus]

The "no sick leave" thing is a pretty ridiculous talking point. Here are the actual time-off policies for rail workers. Lots of vacation, paid personal days (that can be used for short-run sick leave), and paid long-term sick leave. The only donut hole is if someone used all of their personal days and vacation days, but wasn't sick enough to be out for more than a week, in which case they'd need to take an unpaid leave day.

In my late 30s, I have never had that much access to paid leave, and I've worked in positions that most Americans would consider well-compensated and moderately prestigious.

Democrats and Biden did more than fine in coming to an entirely reasonable agreement and averting a disastrous strike. They were even smart enough to make a big fuss out of the sick leave thing, which they can now point the finger at the dastardly Republicans for. As is so common with these things, the Bernie-wing is going to go around being pissed off still, but the pragmatists did a good job.

The idea that personal/vacation days are a substitute for sick leave is ridiculous. And those figures in your link aren't nearly as generous as you think. Like, the minimum legal standard here in Ontario is two weeks of paid vacation, and that's only for staff with less than 5 years; it bumps to three after 5 years. While "vacation pay" is separated out from "vacation time", it's both more than the vacation time works out to, and you can choose to just be paid it on your regular pay checks rather than saving it up for actual vacation days.

Paid sick leave is set at a minimum of three days.

And those are the legal minimums; these aren't union-protected contractual arrangements, they're the minimum legal standards for most full-time employees in Ontario, and the exceptions are gonna be jobs with wildly non-standard hours or the like. If you're slapping fries into the bin at the shitty local non-franchise burger joint, you get these minimums, assuming you're full-time. It's not quite as much as railroad workers in the USA are getting, but it's not that far off, either. So it really questions how "generous" those figures actually are.

[Captain N]

Oh how I love when people cite that AAR reference for rail workers and their time off. As someone who does the job let's go through that thing part by part.

1. Vacation Days 15 - 25: Your seniority dictates when you can put in for your vacation. If you're a relatively new hire your entire vacation is going to be gone in January or February. Even if you do hold some seniority and can move your vacation to later in the year then break your vacation weeks down into single days -- CMS (Crew Management Services) have the ability to decline your single vacation days up to 24 hours before your day off and will do this frequently if there is a manpower issue.

2. 11 Paid Holidays: Rail workers do not get holidays off. We work through them. We're paid double time and a half if we work the holiday.

3. Mark Off/Sick Leave: If we take a day off (Called Laying off Sick) we're charged 8 attendance points every day we're sick. At 24 points we're considered to have an "attendance issue" and will be put on attendance probation. If we remain marked up and available to work we get back 2 points every month. So it literally takes us 4 months to get back the points we lost to take care of ourselves or a sick family member. FMLA the railroad will fight tooth and nail to deny to anyone. While there is no attendance policy issues right now with having it. They heavily monitor people's use of it and have a very strict policy on the number of days it can be used.

4.Railroad Unemployment Insurance: We call this "Can Insurance" and it comes out of our paycheck. It's basically our failsafe for being removed from service by an overly zealous manager who believes his rule book applies to real life applications.

A friendly reminder that the AAR is written by the corporate heads at the United State's Class 1 Railroads and does not take into account what happens to the actual workers in the field.

[Jastall]

HAHAHAHAHHAHA, no. Let me explain to you how it really works. (Since I work for a Class 1 railroad)

Yes you can "Mark off" sick. Do you know what happens? You get disciplinary points. You get extra points if you mark off Thur-Mon. Why? The weekend. You also lose your "guarantee." A guarantee is the minimum wage you would make in a week. If you are only called into work one day that week you would still be paid a decent amount. You can always make more each week but as long as you don't mark off you can't make anything less. By marking off that one day you lose any chance of making the minimum. I'm sure you're saying "if there's a chance that you won't be called in that week why mark off in the first place?" The answer, that's how this job is. You have absolutely no idea when you will be called. You live your life around the railroad. When they call, you answer. There is no "but I'm sick." You come in or face disciplinary action.

Can you use the vacation days in it's place? No. Your vacation days can be turned into individual days or an entire week block. You can only have X amount of individual days a year. The rest have to be used as a week. The amount depends on the number of years you've been there. How can you use your vacation? If you want to put in a weeks vacation it has to be put in the year before and submitted to your union rep before the end of October. Your individual days have to be requested at the beginning of the quarter. And if I remember right you can't request any day past the quarter. Do you know what happens at 12:01 A.M. on Jan1, Apr 1, July 1, Oct 1? Everything stops. And I mean everything so everyone in the entire company can race to their phone and dial up the automated system and put in their personal days off. They do this because it's first come first serve.

What about FMLA? Yes, we do get this. But you have to qualify for it. And yes, the ones that do qualify for it tend to abuse it. The reason why is because that's the only way they can get off on any day they need/want to be off. Because of all the convoluted steps you have to do just to get one day off it's easier to have a family member with a medical condition. Do you know how fucked up that is? That is why these sick days are so important.

Ooof. That's pretty restrictive and limiting from my perspective. I work at Costco Canada and we have 9 sick/personal leave day we can take for, practically, any reason just by calling before our shift begins, and a number of vacation weeks depending on seniority that in theory must be taken well in advance but in practice so long as you aren't late in asking for your week(s) during a busy season, such as in August, you usually can get what you want on fairly short notice, again modified by seniority. This includes part-time employees, even if with our workload "part-time" still means you do 35h/week on a slow week and overtime is quite common.

Now, different industries having different standards is normal. A rail network is an important infrastructure that needs people working on it to function of course. But it's hard for me to believe a well-managed company simply cannot afford sick leave.