NZA
LOL
what is "normal" and "not embarrassing" is determined more by the right wing than the left, therefore, it is actually a center-right country. the right has more leeway to say and do things that are "loony" without consequence.
How will Joe Biden GOVERN? General Biden Administration F**kery Thread
- Thread starter FAH1223
- Start date
really?EXCEPT there are loopholes in there that still allows states to do just that
I haven't followed this TBH. Details?
Armchair Militant
Stay woke
Armchair Militant
Stay woke
LOST IN THE SAUCE
The Sauce Apostle
Not unilaterally, no. There are a few different avenues for nationalization, none of which are likely to happen, but I was just using it as an example of how government pressure can obviously effect the negotiations in any direction.
The negotiations are at a stand still over sick days. Sick days. The request that threatens to harm the greater good is sick days. So is it the request that threatens to harm the greater good, or the denial of that request? You're completely ignoring the point I've been making since the initial post, the government could have intervened in a way that benefits labor. There is no reason Biden couldn't have asked congress to push through the agreement with the requested sick days. Doing so would still be intervening, and would still avoid the strike. Would the railway companies get everything they wanted? No, but that was never going to be the case. You're framing support against labor as the default, and there's no reason to do so. Also, we allow corporations to harm the greater good with no intervention as a standard in this country. It's been a long, long time since the government really stepped in to intervene on a large corporation harming the greater good.
Anyway, this conversation with you is getting nowhere, as usual. Have a great day, friend.
Gas companies wanted MAGA to take over again, and sabotaged Biden on every angle possible.
The railways were nationalized and the consolidation we see today is a result.
But congress was asked to take up sick days and the vote failed.
So I ask, what value is nationalization if the same congress who would be running the show if the railroads were nationalized are rejecting their demands?
Do you see this playing out any differently than the constant battle of the USPS?
All of this is to say, this could be avoided if there were federal mandates on sick leave. But people don’t care about that when they vote for boeberts and walkers
Last edited:
LOST IN THE SAUCE
The Sauce Apostle
You're too focused on nationalization. I understand it's a pipe dream, I was just using it as an example. Biden had many options for ways to intervene, and he just happened to choose the one that favors the the deal the unions did not agree with. But yes, the precedence from the WW1 just furthers my point, really. If I'm not mistaken they forced through union demands around that time as well.The railways were nationalized and the consolidation we see today is a result.
But congress was asked to take up sick days and the vote failed.
So I ask, what value is nationalization if the same congress who would be running the show if the railroads were nationalized are rejecting their demands?
Do you see this playing out any differently than the constant battle of the USPS?
All of this is to say, this could be avoided if there were federal mandates on sick leave. But people don’t care about that when they vote for boeberts and walkers
Congress decoupled sick days from the main bill. This is because the deal Biden suggested to push through was the one agreed upon by the railway companies without the sick days, and not the one the unions requested with the sick days. He could have pushed for the deal the unions were requesting, but he chose not to. That is the decision I've been criticizing. With all the leverage removed we all knew how the vote for sick days was going to turn out.
So you wanted congress, whose legally mandated purpose here is to avoid a strike to poison pill their own bill? We have to be realistic here with the greater good.
The bolded is absolutely incorrect. That period is arguably one of the worst periods.
The RLB instituted a 12 perfect reduction wages, workers could be required to work 16 of 24 hours, and terrible conditions led to the railway strike of 1922.
That strike was met with companies hiring strikebreakers, leading to violent clashes, kidnappings, murders, vandalism (domestic terror), that ultimately led to the government using law enforcement and the national guard to squash it.
At the end of the day the settlement offered to labor was little and what we have today was the ultimate result.
Railway Labor Act - Wikipedia
Historically, rail unions were taking Ls for over a decade following the end of the war. Just look at wwii decades later:
Wages and Working Conditions: The Railroad Strike of 1946 | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans
With the end of the wartime no-strike pledge, workers across America expressed their frustration with wages and working conditions through a series of strikes that involved over 5 million people from the end of 1945 and into 1946.
All this to say, being one of the most pro labor presidents with regard to rail workers doesn’t really account for much when the laws say the railways are essential and the workers are replaceable.
Last edited:
LOST IN THE SAUCE
The Sauce Apostle
I just don't agree that the sick days would be a poison pill, at all. I don't think the repubs were going to risk being seen as anti worker and responsible for the strike and economic shut down, especially over something as small as sick days. Each side was trying to leverage the same situation, yet you're still just framing things as if the default move is for the government to support industry over labor. The unions had the upper hand. They could strike if their demands weren't met, while the rail companies would need to replace the entire work force. The government is the one who tipped the scales in favor of the rail companies. You haven't really demonstrated why Biden needed to choose the rail companies over the unions.So you wanted congress, whose legally mandated purpose here is to avoid a strike to poison pill their own bill? We have to be realistic here with the greater good.
The bolded is absolutely incorrect. That period is arguably one of the worst periods.
The RLB instituted a 12 perfect reduction wages, workers could be required to work 16 of 24 hours, and terrible conditions led to the railway strike of 1922.
That strike was met with companies hiring strikebreakers, leading to violent clashes, kidnappings, murders, vandalism (domestic terror), that ultimately led to the government using law enforcement and the national guard to squash it.
At the end of the day the settlement offered to labor was little and what we have today was the ultimate result.
Railway Labor Act - Wikipedia
en.m.wikipedia.org
Historically, rail unions were taking Ls for over a decade following the end of the war. Just look at wwii decades later:
Wages and Working Conditions: The Railroad Strike of 1946 | The National WWII Museum | New Orleans
With the end of the wartime no-strike pledge, workers across America expressed their frustration with wages and working conditions through a series of strikes that involved over 5 million people from the end of 1945 and into 1946.www.nationalww2museum.org
All this to say, being one of the most pro labor presidents with regard to rail workers doesn’t really account for much when the laws say the railways are essential and the workers are replaceable.
My mistake on the Railway Labor Act. I knew that 8 hour work days were forced through at that time, which I guess was the Adamson Act - Wikipedia. On a quick skim, it seems like what they did force through was short lived and hard to enforce as it was right before nationalization. The whole situation sounds pretty interesting, so I should probably read up on it more.
We're still getting nowhere.
Based on what? It’s the end of congress. Elections are over. They have no insensitive to pretend to be anything other than they are.
Besides, they’d just vote against it and go into 2024 campaign mode about how the Biden administration ruined Christmas and don’t care about blue collar workers. You do live in this country right?
They didn’t though for a variety of reasons. One the rail companies had the same leverage as the workers. Whether it were a lockout or a strike congress was always going to force the issue and send them back to work, especially during the holidays.
The reason I am confident is based on 100 years of examples of rail strikes playing out exactly that way.
I think it’s a very interesting topic and I’ve been reading up on since September.
meh, rail workers got a significant pay raise and more time off and they’ve had the opportunity to shine a spotlight on their lack of sick days.
Activist should continue to move forward with applying pressure on conservatives to approve national sick day legislation.
Change doesn’t happen over night. It also doesn’t happen when you vote against your own interests.
black voters
Last edited:
