Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The bill now goes to the senate including the resolution to add in 7 days of sick leave which was narrowly approved. Still 4 of the 12 unions are not onboard unless sick leave is part of the agreement.
the reason why republics would not support the small 7 day sick leave that the house democrats proposed, is that the republicans actually (this time) supported the unions, and NOT involving congress/POTUS is a private sector union issue..... why do the democrats feel its "the correct thing to do", and DICTATE what happens in the private sector...are the democrats NOW against unions.... certainly, seems that way
It was pretty clear the republicans in the senate would not impose the sick leave, they did not have the votes. Maybe you would rather have a strike go forward next week which would cost $2B a day driving up inflation. Those are the two choices, you either ask congress to get involved or let the strike take its course, which do you want.
Kind of cherry picking to say democrats are against unions, we all know which party has the long, long history of being anti-union.
Nice to see so many right-wing members on this forum now supporting unions.
If the railroad owners decide to afford sick leave, they'll simply increase their freight charges to offset the added costs, and the increase will wind up being paid by consumers...like you.
So, to everyone here, are you okay with paying higher prices for everything carried by rail that you buy, so these workers can have these 7 days?
Yes I do support it, it won't amount to much and besides with their recent profits I doubt they would need to raise prices. Heard the same argument regarding raising the minimum wage.
The main thing is, this is one those industries that, along with the airlines, health care, and a few others, could stall the US economy and hurt us in a very real way if a strike were to happen. Millions of goods would not be delivered, coal and oil would not appear to heat your houses this winter, thousands of people could not get to work, certain food goods would rot on the docks. Whatever had to happen to avert this was necessary.
the reason why republics would not support the small 7 day sick leave that the house democrats proposed, is that the republicans actually (this time) supported the unions, and NOT involving congress/POTUS is a private sector union issue..... why do the democrats feel its "the correct thing to do", and DICTATE what happens in the private sector...are the democrats NOW against unions.... certainly, seems that way
Like I indicated this was a very different strike at this time and place and would have really decimated the economy. Simplest thing to do would have been to have congress approve the sick leave but that wasn't happening in the senate.
Suddenly republicans are pro-union, the party that supports right-to-work states, celebrates management victories over unions, against wage increases, sick leave, family leave.
If the railroad owners decide to afford sick leave, they'll simply increase their freight charges to offset the added costs, and the increase will wind up being paid by consumers...like you.
So, to everyone here, are you okay with paying higher prices for everything carried by rail that you buy, so these workers can have these 7 days?
How much would that $27 billion in profits be hurt by giving them 7 lousy sick days? It's not like the railways are hurting. They are making record profits. But yeah, giving their workers the most bare bones, basic benefit of 7 sick days is just too much. But of course, the pain only goes one way:
Quote:
While conditions for workers have worsened, executives have reaped a jackpot: On average, the CEOs of five major rail companies were paid more than $16 million in 2021 alone.
Massive government overreach, and I doubt its legaly binding upon the Union and/or the railorad employes.
If I were th Union, I'd strike, & force the issue to the SCOTUS, who I believe would find the Feds intervention to be unconstutional.
If we were at war, maybe it would fly, but not otherwise. There is no national security threat...just a political threat because if theres a strike, it will feed inflation even more, and the 2024 elections are at stake.
It is really a mystery as to why some people can't(or perhaps won't) see the overreach.
Forget the fact if you think these workers "deserve" 7 days of sick time, or if the railroads can afford it. There are a lot of things companies could provide to workers that they could "afford", but don't. There are many businesses who may give an employee 1 or 2 sick days even though they could afford a week. If "sick time" is a deal-breaker for you, then find another company that has better sick time.
The issue here is does Congress have the Authority to force it upon the railroads to provide it.
Remember that there was a Tentative Agreement in place that did NOT include sick time. The House voted to force the unions to accept the tentative agreement, which based on the Railway act is probably legal to keep them from striking.
This debate is happening because the House decided to make a political statement. Where they added an amendment to force the Railroads to provide Sick Time. That is where the "overreach" is, and likely the part that will be struck down. Had they left the agreement be, it is likely that both the House and Senate would have already approved the agreement and this would be a non-issue.
Like I indicated this was a very different strike at this time and place and would have really decimated the economy. Simplest thing to do would have been to have congress approve the sick leave but that wasn't happening in the senate.
Suddenly republicans are pro-union, the party that supports right-to-work states, celebrates management victories over unions, against wage increases, sick leave, family leave.
How much would that $27 billion in profits be hurt by giving them 7 lousy sick days? It's not like the railways are hurting. They are making record profits. But yeah, giving their workers the most bare bones, basic benefit of 7 sick days is just too much. But of course, the pain only goes one way:
Yeah, yeah, I know, we can't make the poor, poor executive suite take a pay cut. $16 million is barely enough to survive on!
Nope, the only remedy to will be to pass it on to consumers.
And that's the problem.
No ONE is FORCED to work there.
If you don't like the BENEFIT package, LEAVE.
P.S. unions are the BIGGEST donors to dems running for office.
The person who visited the White House the most under obama was none other then the PRESIDENT of the AFL-CIO.
As usual, it is ALL about the MONEY!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
