270
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023
270 points (95.9% liked)
politics
19087 readers
4355 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Sure man. I'm not a leftist and I'm a reliable (albeit meaningless) vote for Biden, but keep telling yourself that being strongly pro-labor means people are voting for Republicans. Pretending bad things are good doesn't actually work. Biden was bad in the rail strike and he's better now. Hopefully going forward his (and others') support for labor will be unwavering.
I hate how nuance goes out the window in these discussions sometimes. I'd rate Biden's actions on the rail strike as "lukewarm". Think about it from a moderate perspective. It makes sense to avoid a rail shutdown, because that would cause a lot of harm to a lot of people, working class and otherwise. Biden wants to make sure the economy keeps moving so people can keep making money. This is his best shot at "harm reduction", and he did more than was expected of him. That's the point. I can't imagine having to be in that position to try and make these decisions to make everyone happy. And, for what it's worth, 4-7 paid sick days (dependent on the employer) is pretty standard for most jobs in the US. I'd say that while this was pretty lukewarm, it's still overall a good thing and could lay the rails so to speak for future improvements as well.
Why? "You can't force people to work" isn't a position to compromise on. He didn't have to please everyone, he only had to stick up for the inherent rights of workers. I don't have any right to tell you to work, even if you not working would harm me. It's not a position you need to compromise with me on. It's entirely right and good for at least one party to unequivocally side with labor.
And if a strike is just unacceptable, force the labor-friendly contract and then nationalize the railroads. People act like it was the workers against the economy when the whole issue came about because a private for-profit entity wasn't willing to give them sick days. There were two parties that could have been made to sacrifice for the greater good, but for some reason people think the only option was screwing the workers.
"Well X job also gets 4" is irrelevant. Some jobs are less safety critical so an employee working sick won't endanger others and other jobs should be striking for more. It's to the workers themselves to decide what a reasonable contract is.
Except breaking a strike means the employers don't need to fear one as much in future negotiations. The likelihood of Congressional intervention was reportedly a factor in their willingness to take a demand of 15 days and counter with 1. Next time around they'll be even more confident that they don't need to listen to worker demands. Establishing a "too big to strike" norm means their unions are kind of just for show, because work stoppages are the primary tool unions have to negotiate.
I appreciate you taking so much time to reply and write out this well thought out response, but I’m not really even that far off from your views to begin with. I don’t know if this is a good use of your time.
I agree the railroads should be nationalized. I have no sympathy for the rich.