On September 15, the United Auto Workers began a targeted strike against Ford, GM, and Stellantis (the conglomerate that includes Chrysler) in an effort to secure higher wages, a four-day work week, and other protections in the union’s next contract. The strike is a huge development for American workers, but it’s also a big deal for President Joe Biden—these car companies are central to his green-infrastructure agenda. The union wants assurances that the industry’s historic, heavily subsidized transition toward electric vehicles will work for them, too.
Biden, whose National Labor Relations Board has been an ally of labor organizers in fights against companies such as Amazon and Starbucks, has called himself “the most pro-union president in American history.” He has expressed support for the UAW’s cause (workers “deserve their fair share of the benefits they helped create,” he said last week) and has sent aides to Michigan to assist in the negotiations.
Didn't he severely fuck the train workers unions a few months ago, or did I get that wrong?
The Biden Administration continued working on getting them their paid sick days.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/may/01/railroad-workers-union-win-sick-leave
A fraction of the paid sick days they were asking for, while also not meeting their other major demands at all. Ending Precision Scheduled Railroading was a big one. Still going on.
They stopped them from striking and potentially making greater gains, then tossed them some crumbs.
They should have stayed the hell out of it or used the government's power to stop the rail companies not the strikers.
Well Congress did vote on a bill to give rail workers 7 days of sick leave at the same time as the vote preventing the strike. One bill got enough Republican support to pass, the other didn't. If there were more Democrats in Congress, the outcome would have been more favorable to the unions, hands down
the cool thing about strikes is congress doesn't have to vote for a company to give in to the demands of the workers. As a matter of fact congress has fuck all to do with it
Congress has the authority to require a company to give in to the demands of the workers, just not enough people in it who are willing to vote to do it
deleted by creator
If they'd not intervened AT ALL they could've gotten even more by striking.
Or even better just make a reasonable amount of sick days federal law for all, and also put better safety legislation for trains.
Ok, and at real risk to many thousands of other people's jobs when the rail system ground to a halt. When nurses go on strike, it's expected more expensive travel nurses are going to step in to do patient care, because otherwise innocent people will be harmed. UAW goes on strike, no one steps in to take over because all that happens is corporate revenue starts to suffer, car prices may go up, repair parts may become harder to find or more expensive.
If rail workers go on strike, the entire United States manufacturing sector grinds to a halt, plus serious impact on imports/exports, military readiness, and even food availability. Inflation would almost immediately have become much worse. Right wing and corporate media would have been running rampant with anti-union stories because public sentiment would have quickly shifted against the strike once the implications became clear. All this is ok though, because after devastating the US economy, the rail workers walk away with a slightly better contract than this one?
If the entire US economy necessitates oppressing rail workers, then yes, rail workers striking is a good thing. It sounds like they are extremely important, according to you, and should be listened to.
Then get the asshole executives to compromise instead? Why is the blame here being put on the workers being exploited?
Oh duh! Why didn't they think of that!? Just compromise with the fucking scumbags, easy!
Maybe take a second pass at reading what I actually said, bud, unless you're calling the workers "fucking scumbags", and if that's the case, right back at ya!
If i keep slaves, and those slaves feed my children. If they escape my children will starve, the whole negborhood will! Therefore it is immoral to let the slaves become free persons, EVER. /s
The trolly problem clasically has no good answer, however the above statement has held down thousands of slaves in all but name. You are saying perpetuating slavery indefinitly causes less suffering than an unknown amount of starvation.
Sounds like the railroads are mismanaged to the point where the entire industry is so brittle that one strike of any duration at all would be a catastrophe.
Sounds like a job for antitrust or nationalization. Of course, if we can't muster the political will to impose terms on rail bosses, we're sure as hell not gonna break them up or nationalize them.
deleted by creator
hey me, angey and ill informed child, shut your face
How does that not sound like a complete violation of the constitution. "We voted to give you 7 days to not work somtimes and in exchange took your right to not work"
They're the ones that made the call to split the bill saying it was guaranteed to pass which made no sense
We need to stop saying "if there were more democrats" and start saying "if there were more socialists"
Yeah, it boggles my mind that the bills were split. The only reason I can think of to explain that is that they simply knew what was going to happen and any other explanation is just gaslighting us into thinking that they were doing something.
The only reason to split a bill is to pass the centrist/republican portion and let the progressive portion fail.
Sorry, gotta pull and old Reddit classic here:
This
It's wild to me that Biden broke the strike then got them the tiniest fucking concession afterwards and people think that's an argument that he somehow was on the side of the union the whole time. Getting 4 sick days a year is absolutely nothing compared to the whole list of grievances and it's embarrassing that people bring this up in response to him breaking the strike.
Huh. It's really weird to read stuff like this. Just reminds me how lucky I am to not be in the US… with my legally mandated 10 days a year and all…
In Canada I currently have 346 hours of fully paid sick time available with 12 hours used. If I take over 5 days in a row I need to provide a doctor's note. Taking a leave of absence for medical purposes is rarely questioned, same with going on disability. Outside of that I took 10 weeks of fully paid paternity leave, and we have a sabbatical program where you can take a reasonable pay cut for 3 years and take the 4th year off. Also have 4 weeks paid vacation and can take an additional 2 unpaid, with some other funny options available. Dental/medical appointments are a separate fully covered time code.
deleted by creator
People comment "don't let good be the enemy of perfect" about this, as if what they got even approaches good. You see how low the bar is at least.
If he was a Republican he would have them all fired and nationally ban unions. So, there’s that.
Again, how is that even constitutionally legal?
What specifically are you referring to, being non-constitutional action? And, where in the constitution do you feel forbids the action?
I think I was refering to the fact that i thoght you'd be forced to work, (if the soundbyte of what happened is even true) it's likely biden only banned protesting (witch is the real violation).
I failed to be reasonable because I didnt read the details of what he actually did
on a technical leveland posted while i was angry.Edit: wow, im not critical enough of my own ideas here, fixed that
And how did Biden ban protesting? I think maybe you should get your mind off of politics and out of whatever right wing qanon garbage you’re ingesting.
I posted while angry, misread the facts and failed to properly call myself a dumbass for spreading Qanon level comments. I failed to interrogate my own claims to see if they made any sense.
The sick leave is what lead directly to the strike vote, all the union sources from the time are clear on that. What else did you think they were planning to strike over?
If you listened to what the organizers were saying leading up to the potential strike, the sick days were used to sell the strike to the public since it was just the easiest to understand and most cartoonishly ghoulish points. The terrible Implementation of "precision scheduled railroading" and the reduction in staffing, ridiculous on call times, and weird attendance point systems that it brought was the actual impetus for the strike.
Any sources from that time?
I can't find the actual interview I'm remembering but the episode of "Work Stoppage" about PSR and the strike is good. Labornotes also had a bunch of good articles explaining the situation at the time:
https://labornotes.org/2022/02/rail-negotiations-are-about-good-job-made-miserable
https://www.labornotes.org/2022/09/rail-workers-reject-contract-recommendations-say-theyre-ready-strike
Precision Scheduled Railroading, a system that made them do safety checks much much faster, requiring less workers check more cars (among other things). Overwork and declining safety, potentially a factor in recent derailment number increases such as East Palestine.
Also he only got them a small fraction of the sick days they were asking for.
Where's Lemmy gold when you need it?
Donating a couple bucks to a strike fund in my honor is better than Reddit gold could ever be
Link me to one and I'll throw in a few bucks.
But anyway I never bought it, I only used the free coins they gave out.
That's a great idea. "Lemmy Gold" should be a link to some community support fund for a good cause like this.
As a side note. It is so fucked up limited paid sick days are a thing
I just spent a week in the hospital. Used up all my sick time. Went back to work, still sick. How am I gonna pay the hospital bill otherwise?
And ignored the union's other demands.
On one side I have seen where he’s continued negotiations with them to help them resolve issues without a strike which is pretty beneficial.
On the other hand, if that’s not as good as it looks, then this could show that he realized he fucked up not letting the rail workers strike. If he’s going this hard on other strikes and supporting unions it may be to garner support for re-election. Even if it’s only for his own gain, being heavily pro union is a win for the people.
Even if he's doing it for the appearance, it's good that union support is popular enough that politicians want to seem pro-union.
I mean, that's basically the union working as intended. Together, we have the power to put fear in the powerful. Bosses or Biden, makes little difference.
These strikes don’t live in a vacuum. Inflation was much higher then, and supply chain transport constraints were a driving factor for it.
That was arguably some “Stop the Green Goblin or Save Gwen Stacy” shit.
It's almost like we shouldn't have the green goblin running all our trains
Yes, but then he got them the sick days anyhow after the fact.
I’m concerned that the second deal isn’t part of the contract, but, yeah. He fucked them in the name of national security; then walked back and got them the ask.
He got them a small number of the sick days they were demanding, and didn't address any of their other concerns whatsoever such as ending Precision Scheduled Railroading.
He didn't get all the days they asked for but that was part of the negotiation.
Considering that he didn't shut down the American economy while at the brink of a recession and still negotiated the terms that both sides agreed on is a win for me.
"After taking away their ability to use their leverage and power, they agreed to the pittance they were offered. The overworked wage workers and the billionaire led rail conglomerates AGREED!"
🤡
Reading neoliberal apologia is vomit inducing
Not really?
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
Fuck IBEW
How come?
Do you know what it stands for? Its some electrical workers, they always had the sick leave. They were on the railroad companies side from the beginning, agreeing to the shitty deal with zero sick days for rail workers, that the actual rail workers were going to strike against.
But democrats hoist them up to the podium as speaking for rail unions. It is always IBEW linked.
Pretending being thrown scraps after having their most powerful tool taking away from them is a win is a pretty good reason.
"Pro union only if I like the union, otherwise fuck them"
Collective bargaining of organized labor isn't going to always pick the universally best option for everyone. Police unions should have made that glaringly obvious. If an electrical workers union agrees to a deal that benefits them but not others, it's an incredibly shitty thing to do, but it's still collective bargaining in action.
No, how collective bargaining works is if they dont get a deal that benefits enough people, they collectively strike. That was banned, collective bargaining was banned, and then after the fact these assholes are praising the move.
Average CLAC member
Classic T.H.U.N.K. quip from a C.L.A.N.G. member /s
You did get it wrong. It prevented a strike, but still got the workers what they wanted a few months later and without wrecking the economy.