Major railroad posts record earnings, spends more on share repurchases than on its employees
cnn.comSubmitted by esporx t3_10kfl58 in technology
Cynical_Cabinet t1_j5qk1cb wrote
There's your "Best Freight Railroad in the World". Can't give employees basic sick days, can't pay for maintenance, can't pay for any upgrades, can't ship anything on time, can't follow the law and yield to passenger trains. But hey, they are making record profits so that means everything is fine.
AnybodyMassive1610 t1_j5r3388 wrote
Didn’t the federal government remove their workers right to strike because “national security” or something - cause the companies couldn’t possibly afford to pay a living wage or vacation or sick days? Isn’t that something Joe “I’m all for the unions until I’m not” Biden did just a bit ago?!
Ogediah t1_j5rj1az wrote
They didn’t recently remove their right to strike. It’s baked into older legislation. Biden and congress did leverage that authority. And it was downright fucking ridiculous that Biden busted the strike by starting with: “as the most pro-union president ever”. Guess how his canned response letter also read when I contacted the White House?
Biden, that makes you a union buster you moron. You have to earn the title “most union president ever.” You don’t become it just because you said it.
Also, side note, but FDR was BY FAR the most pro-union president ever. Pro-working class period. His administration gave us OSHA, FLSA, the NLRA, Social Security…. the list goes on.
AnybodyMassive1610 t1_j5rngp8 wrote
I do realize that it isn't new per se. But, I went for something easy to define rather than that level of nuance.
However, you're absolutely right that they had the power to force an agreement and, as you've pointed out, it amounts to union busting.
The exercise of that older legislation, in effect, did remove their right to legally strike by allowing the government to force the union and railroad into an agreement.
It was the choice of this administration to favor the railroad companies that just posted record profits OVER that of the workers and their basic rights.
To be clear, Joe Biden, Chuck Schumer, and Nancy Pelosi --along with all of the current Democratic party leadership-- sided with the railroads & shareholders (like Warren Buffett) over that of the workers and their ability to negotiate collectively as a union.
It is deplorable to me that the party of FDR -- the party that has been supported by labor unions for decades -- whiffed so badly on what could've been a lesson in compassion, fairness, and support for critical workers having to suffer deplorable conditions. Instead it was a lesson in greed that further divides the ruling class from the working class - irrespective of party affiliation.
GroundbreakingWeb963 t1_j5sfy98 wrote
It's almost like the democrats are funded by the exact same people as Republicans and are only giving the illusion of a party that fights for the people. Weird.
stuntmanbob86 t1_j5x7suf wrote
Yeah, look into the companies that donate. You'll see that Berkshire Hathaway donates almost equally to dems and rep in congress. That's pretty telling...
Revolutionary_Lie539 t1_j5t3ekg wrote
Not weird. Normal.
Winchery t1_j5s1dv5 wrote
One thing though, the vast majority of railroad workers are EXTREMELY conservative, so they should be happy that carriers, aka the job creators, got their way. The free market is working for all the railroaders in this case.
I don't really get why they can support republican policies which are so anti union then be mad when the union has no power to protect them?
The democrats can't do anything in this case because if they allowed a strike then republicans would blame inflation and supply chain issues squarely on democrats.
In this case it makes sense to let the very right leaning railroaders sleep in the beds that they have made for themselves and dreamed about their entire life.
processedmeat t1_j5s44el wrote
These are some broad generalization you needed to justify bad behavior
beatyouwithahammer t1_j5tgduk wrote
They were not justifying bad behavior. You did not understand what was being said.
[deleted] t1_j5spi2r wrote
[removed]
Winchery t1_j5u5qlu wrote
Reread what I said. I didn't justify anything. I just laid out the facts.
Anyone that has ever worked in the cab of a locomotive or on the ground in a yard knows that the workforce is EXTREMELY conservative. Every single day at work you will have at least half of your day wasted hearing about how bad and evil democrats are and how bad unions suck while they vote for people that dismantle their unions.
They think companies should be able to do whatever they want with impunity except when it affects them. They honestly don't deserve any help in that industry.
processedmeat t1_j5u79j1 wrote
You
>Reread what I said. I didn't justify anything.
Also you
>Anyone that has ever worked in the cab of a locomotive or on the ground in a yard knows that the workforce is EXTREMELY conservative. They honestly don't deserve any help in that industry.
If someone is pro labor they should support labor no matter the political leanings of the majority of people in the field.
Winchery t1_j5u8847 wrote
That's just your opinion. I am pro labor, but if a sector is 95% hardcore conservative, I would like to see the unions fully abandon that sector and let the mighty hand of the free market dictate work rules and pay.
You have to look at the big picture. Railroads collectively spend more time, money and effort dismantling unions than any other industry out there. The mere fact that railroaders have a union when they hate them so much is doing a large amount of harm to unions in other sectors with memberships that aren't joining their employers in dismantling their own unions.
processedmeat t1_j5ua0cy wrote
Even if the railroad didn't have a union you should still support them in getting better working conditions.
Being conservative or liberal is irrelevant. Pro union or anti union is doesn't matter. Labor deserves better working conditions.
With Biden supporting the company over the workers he is supporting management over labor. It signals the next company that the government will have their back in the next dispute.
Winchery t1_j5uhbgg wrote
Biden and democrats have to play games since republicans have made government into gaming the idiot public.
We would be a lot worse off if you can convince even more voters that Biden directly made the cost of items go up even more had he allowed rails to strike.
This is checkers bud. Deep thinking not required. You can pretend like supporting all worker no matter what is going to help, but you fuck a lot more people if you end up having democrats lose all power in government. You are basically saying short-term support is fine even though it will allow the openly corrupt party to control everything.
Again, your idea only requires checkers level of strategy to see the results. In this case I am just glad that the workforce that needed to be sacrificed for the greater good supports the people that want to fuck them.
danielravennest t1_j5w1vq8 wrote
America has a center-right party and a far right party. We don't have any major left or liberal party.
AnybodyMassive1610 t1_j5w43zb wrote
yeah - I know, it is sad but true. What passes as "left / liberalism" here would me "moderate conservative" anywhere else
TailorHour710 t1_j5sp724 wrote
Forgive my ignorance, but I must ask this...what would've happened to the railroad workers if they did strike? How can anyone be forced to work against their will? I hope they plan on striking after hearing this news.
KyurMeTV t1_j5t68k8 wrote
Check out the FAA strike under Regan, they brought in military flight controllers to replace the strikers and the strikers lost their jobs en masse.
I can’t say it’ll be the same for the railroads but if they strike, they loose everything.
Prophet_Tehenhauin t1_j5t8i37 wrote
It wouldn’t be the same for railroads. The us military has people trained to be flight controllers already. They don’t really have a backlog of trained military train conductors or engineers
whapitah2021 t1_j5tayv5 wrote
Never heard of the Army Corps of Engineers? /s
localgravity t1_j5tdaf9 wrote
What would happen if the army corp also refused as a sign of solidarity? I know this would never happen, just curious to see your answer
whapitah2021 t1_j5tgtti wrote
Haven’t thought about that but….There’s no way this country could operate without railroads for an extended period of time. We could figure ways around it in the long run but machinery that move freight long distances are few and far between: over the road trucks wouldn’t be a solution, they’re already occupied. Pull retired engineers in for service to run the trains? Teach others to do the job? Who would train them? It would be a disaster I’d say. Part of that is our “last second supply chain” as you saw during lockdown and after….take 100K blue collar workers out of work and watch what happens, then do the same thing worldwide…..we’re still seeing the effects of that happening from people dying or quitting shitty jobs….microchips for example, China gets overwhelmed with Covid (and other reasons) and there’s a chip shortage in a few weeks….now Toyota is two years out from delivering your new XYZ model. But…..moving freight is a matter of national security and I would hope there’s a solution already in place if all the locomotive operators quit at once… We’re a resilient bunch of people, traditionally… I hope we still are. (Army Corp comment was a play on words, see wiki link below for their actual function if you don’t already know) Have fun, be safe!!!!
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Army_Corps_of_Engineers
Ogediah t1_j5u92c7 wrote
It’d be an illegal strike. If sanctioned by labor leaders they could end up in jail. There are also some protections for a legally recognized unions and they’d essentially loose all those protections. Including but not limited to the necessity for the rail company to bargain in good faith. Due to the national infrastructure concerns, the government would also likely step in and may even provide government employees to keep trains moving. For example, when Reagan fired the striking air traffic controllers, military personnel were brought in to fill the gaps of workers that wouldn’t cross the picket line. The workers that crossed the picket line were instrumental in making that possible. And something similar could happen to the rail workers.
Just incase you are wondering, the workers on strike (air traffic controllers) never got their jobs back.
Unfortunately this is the reality of organized labor nowadays. Laws which originally provided protections for collective bargaining have been gutted by things like Taft-Hartley, the railway labor act, executive privilege, etc. We’re at a point where most strike are illegal, “right to work” laws bleed out unions by forcing them to provide services without dues, companies see almost zero repercussions for breaking the law, etc. Its a real shame. The PRO Act would correct many of the issues. However, it’s had trouble making its way through the legislature.
MagikSkyDaddy t1_j5samrq wrote
Good for you, btw, for contacting the WH. I did too. It was unconscionable.
vintagebat t1_j5u3hru wrote
What's even more fucked up is that Biden busted the strike and still legitimately can claim to be the most pro-labor president since FDR. Every president in between has been that bad.
DerekTheSkiNerd t1_j5rrzq5 wrote
Some of the other unions in the group didn't want to strike and appealed to Biden.
Also the Democrats voted in favor of forcefully adding sick leave to the contract, republicans filibustered that measure.
Cytizens9320 t1_j5rxaiu wrote
>Also the Democrats voted in favor of forcefully adding sick leave to the contract, republicans filibustered that measure.
They deliberately separated the bill in order to absolve themselves and point to the republicans
indoninja t1_j5vpsln wrote
When every Democrat, except for Joe Manchin supports it, and every Republican is against it, seems pretty weird that you would blame Democrats.
Cytizens9320 t1_j5w2u2g wrote
Because they separated it when it should've been under one bill.
It all started because Biden sided with the railways corporations over Unions
indoninja t1_j5wcpg5 wrote
Do you think Republicans would have voted for it?
Cytizens9320 t1_j5whpq7 wrote
What does republicans have to do with it? Republicans didn't force Biden to forbid railway union from striking and making it illegal
indoninja t1_j5wi714 wrote
You understand that democrats voted for a bill to give the union sick days and Republicans blocked it.
I am asking you what do you think it would’ve happened if they tried to pass one pill with the sick days in it, do you think Republicans would have supported it?
stuntmanbob86 t1_j5x8a68 wrote
Yes, I am 100% certain it would have passed. The stakes were too high if there was a strike. Biden and his board had the chance to put sick days in the TA, they just settled on 1 personal day....
indoninja t1_j5y34uz wrote
You won’t think republicans would relish the chance to hurt the economy and blame Biden? Where have you Ben the last 15 years?
geekynerdynerd t1_j610tw5 wrote
Bruh I'd they'd voted no on forcing a deal to keep the economy functioning it would be the easiest political win ever for the Democrats, not the Republicans. The Democrats would've been able to point to how they all voted for it and the Republicans just wouldn't come to the table.
The only reason to separate them is because the Democrats actually didn't want it to pass. Moderate Democrats follow this playbook time and time again and people like you keep eating it up.
indoninja t1_j61rbv7 wrote
>The Democrats would've been able to point to how they all voted for it and the Republicans just wouldn't come to the table.
Pointing g to stuff does t matter when people are unep played and can’t put food on the table.
With almost two years until an election and Fox News blaming dems for no clean bill it would be a gain for republicans and still very little chance workers got what they wanted.
>Moderate Democrats follow this playbook time and time again and people like you keep eating it up.
The reality is the only way to force those seven days into a bill is with Republican cooperation, Democrats overwhelmingly voted for it, Republicans overwhelmingly voted against it, and somehow you still playing Democrats, but I’m the one eating a propaganda, OK
Cytizens9320 t1_j68b6gf wrote
This whole thing started because government got involved with a private dispute between Corporation and the employees.
indoninja t1_j68hlfv wrote
Private?
Not since railroad act of 1863.
The corporation has had huge givt benefits and its service is part of critical infrastructure. It os nonsense to think the givt should just shrug it’s shoulder and let a strike happen.
Seems weird to claim you are upset about lack of sick days but dont blame the people who voted against it.
DerekTheSkiNerd t1_j5s34dh wrote
I think it was actually for stupid boring procedural rules reasons they were separated, not the reason you posit. but i could be mistaken
Ogediah t1_j5ryz8u wrote
That’s not what happened or how it works.
DerekTheSkiNerd t1_j5s3923 wrote
That is exactly what happened, and that is how it works.
Corporations are generally shit, but unions aren't perfect little angels that are always right.
12 unions were subject to that contract, some of them didn't want to strike.
Ogediah t1_j5tgtnn wrote
That’s not what happened or how it works.
Source: I have a formal education in this area and lots of experience exercising it.
processedmeat t1_j5s478a wrote
Tell me again who signed the bill?
DerekTheSkiNerd t1_j5s4czl wrote
Tell me how you or I are in any position to determine which of the 12 unions was in the right and which were in the wrong. Some wanted to strike, some didn't.
The real world isn't black and white.
processedmeat t1_j5t4rx4 wrote
Let the unions that want to strike strike and the ones that don't dont
DerekTheSkiNerd t1_j5u6n5z wrote
Except that isn't how that contract worked. it was an all or nothing. the ones that didn't want to would have been forced to as well.
robinfresno t1_j5tqdbm wrote
There are only two choices. Record profits or bankruptcy. Nothing in between I guess.
Ill_Fail1452 t1_j5tqrcn wrote
It’s disgusting. There is only one FDR. As will ever be.
So many systems we can thank FDR and Hoover for.
YoureGrammarWronger t1_j5ttfos wrote
I don’t think the law is to yield to passenger traffic. I’m pretty sure it’s the other way.
eldomtom2 t1_j5txri3 wrote
The law gives Amtrak priority. What it does not do is provide effective means for enforcing it, or provide any sort of incentive for the freight railroads to provide enough capacity for both freight and passenger trains.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments