Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave • Hacker News Board

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#121

Post by staringback » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:51 PM UTC

lesuorac wrote: post #53

ThunderSizzle wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Society (and the authorities/governments) were completely inconsistent with it. I still see people who freak out over COVID but don't care about any other contagion. People still talk about COVID testing as if it is a "Are You Contagious?" testing. Even medical facilities keep pushing COVID testing even though it doesn't change the diagnosis, treatment, or outcome; even if you test negative for COVID, you could (1) s…

> Even medical facilities keep pushing COVID testing even though it doesn't change the diagnosis, treatment, or outcome (X) Doubt If you're not very sick then sure the treatment isn't going to change much (just fight it off with OTC drugs). But if you actually need any sort of intervention (rare) they'll give you different drugs than say an Ebola infection. > If your not sick (or sick but not contagious), then you do…

When I was in NYC a few weeks ago I noticed a plethora of "COVID testing" tents around Manhattan, never did I see anyone actually getting a test there. I can't help but think the employees sitting around and the operators of the testing huts are leeching off government funds in the name of "public health and safety"

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#122

Post by lotsofpulp » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:51 PM UTC

cool_dude85 wrote: post #54

danielvf wrote: post #35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

From stats I can look up, the average US railroad worker earns $130,000 year in total comp in 2021. Railroad retirement begins full strength at age 60, and looks to be $4,838/mo for an ex railroad employee and spouse. In contrast, Social Security on $130,000 earnings would be $1,919/mo if you retired at age 62. The railroads pay for the retirement expense via tax. So yes, by US labor standards, railroad employees are…

"Pensions are expensive" is a classic lie cooked up by finance (who want high fees in 401k individual accounts) and cheap companies who want to cut every benefit to the bone. I'll preface this by stating that I have not looked into the railroad pension, but instead I will draw a parallel to my own. I can get 80% of my top recent pay when I retire after 32 years, which is quite generous as pensions go. The long-term c…

Defined benefit (DB) pensions are excessively expensive due to the advent of low cost broad market index funds.

With a DB pension, you have to add agency risk to the equation. There is no need for that now when you can get a Vanguard/Fidelity/Schwab 401k and pay the same 0.03% expense ratio to get the same investment performance that a pension fund manager would. And you never have to worry about the pension fund manager stealing from it, or the politician directing investments to their nephew’s real estate company.

I would rather have whatever normal cost the employer is contributing for DB pension given directly to me so I can drop it in VOO and cut out all the middlemen and reduce agency risk.

> The long-term cost of this is around 16-18% of payroll - 8-9% from my employer, 8-9% from me.

Assuming you work for the government in the US, this is false. Government entities in the US are allowed to use whatever nonsense assumptions they want to value liabilities, and obviously they undervalue them now and lay the extra cost on future taxpayers. Hence the underfunded DB pension and retiree healthcare crisis plaguing many taxpayers.

Finally, DB pensions and deferred benefits in general make it hard to compare compensation offers from different employers, which is also bad for workers trying to negotiate the highest price. Very few people are equipped to be able to properly price the value of a DB pension from one entity to another.

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#123

Post by selimthegrim » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:51 PM UTC

thesuitonym wrote: post #61

FranchuFranchu wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Here in Argentina, the right to strike is granted by our constitution. A restraining order preventing unions from striking would be seen like a restraining order preventing voters from voting.

The right to strike is granted in the US as well, however laws mean nothing to the oligarchs.

Subject to the president in certain industries, as in this case

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#124

Post by standardUser » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:51 PM UTC

over_bridge wrote: post #3

It's hugely in the public interest to not have sick rail workers infecting their passengers

It's in absolutely everyone's interest to have ample and guaranteed paid sick leave... except for a minuscule and already-wealthy portion of the population who might stand to lose a smidgen of money over such policies. Because of that threat of becoming more wealthy at a slightly reduced pace, they will oppose federal action with everything they have. And they usually win.

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#125

Post by WalterBright » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:52 PM UTC

A business doesn't really care about an employee's takehome pay. It cares about the total cost of employing the person. That cost is the employee's salary plus benefits plus payroll taxes.

This means that if benefits are increased, one way or another, that comes out of the employee's paycheck.

Nothing comes for free. The so-called "employer's contribution" to Social Security is actually paid by the employee in the form of a reduced paycheck. The same for the "employer's paid sick leave benefit".

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#126

Post by zdragnar » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:52 PM UTC

skizm wrote: post #101

In the very unlikely event that the US (or any country in a similar situation) were to nationalize the railroads, what would happen to the labor unions and workers' ability to collectively bargain? If the railway were nationalized and the government said "PSR is here to stay, no sick days, it is illegal to strike" or something like that, would this be any different than exactly what is happening now? Personally, I th…

Federal government employees already form unions. If the government took ownership of the railroads, nothing would change in that regard.

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#127

Post by j1elo » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:52 PM UTC

mauvehaus wrote: post #19

Fuck the shareholders. Strike. Yes, I am absolutely willing to pay more in the short term for things so that people are treated with a little basic human decency. Moreover, I'm more than happy to pay a little more for things in the long term to ensure that there's enough slack in the system to absorb the shocks that periodically come around. We've just spent almost three years slowly killing everyone in healthcare be…

Why does it depend on each independent company, instead of just stating it by law? I mean, it seems that everybody across all industries should enjoy the same minimum sick days, not letting companies decide below that, because otherwise some (or most) will decide that number to be zero, as is the case.

Otherwise these people will strike to gain some decency in their labor conditions, but it will be "wasted" effort in the sense that other industries will still lag behind with similar problems. Wouldn't it be better to have a more general change that applies to everybody? Companies are greedy, they'll always try to get as much as possible from their workers, if law allows for it.

(note: not american. I'm just an observer from afar, in an european country where a lot of these worker rights are coded in the law; companies can offer perks above those rights, but never below)

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#128

Post by cool_dude85 » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:53 PM UTC

treis wrote: post #106

bestcoder69 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Agreed on the strike. Hearing they have 0 sick days (plus penalties for missing) was unbelievable to me. Strike and make it so the rail company shareholders have to live with completely fucking the US economy over their profit margins. And if they do, we all have a duty to point the finger at them.

This is just a political talking point supported by a friendly media. From the union's mouth: >Q: Why did the railroads reject proposals to add benefits on top of the framework recommended by the PEB? >A: The request for additional benefits made by the few unions that have not ratified tentative agreements is similar to a proposal which was carefully considered and rejected by President Biden’s Presidential Emergency…

>What's happened is that the unions negotiated higher pay for worse benefits. Now some of them are leaning on friendly politicians to get the benefits they traded away back without having to give up the higher pay.

They didn't negotiate anything with the current contract being imposed on them. The contracts have been voted down by membership, hence the union does not agree with the terms.

The group who has "leaned on friendly politicians" is in fact management, who got Biden and the spineless Dems to impose this not-agreed-to contract via legislation.

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#129

Post by actionfromafar » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:54 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #74

JohnFen wrote: post #70

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Wow. That's even worse.

As an employee and an employer, I like having only one type of paid leave. It should not matter to the employer why an employee is not working. If the issue is insufficient time off for illnesses, then the negotiation should be for more paid time off (PTO) in general. This eliminates all the resources wasted on catching fraudulent use of sick days.

Wouldn't that create an incentive to run your employees so hard they develop health issues? No skin off your back, just get a new employee when the first gets permanently broken. I'm cheeky, but I think that is one of the rationales for having sick leave at all.

Re: Why America’s Railroads Refuse to Give Their Workers Paid Leave

#130

Post by cool_dude85 » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 2:55 PM UTC

WalterBright wrote: post #125

A business doesn't really care about an employee's takehome pay. It cares about the total cost of employing the person. That cost is the employee's salary plus benefits plus payroll taxes. This means that if benefits are increased, one way or another, that comes out of the employee's paycheck. Nothing comes for free. The so-called "employer's contribution" to Social Security is actually paid by the employee in the fo…

>This means that if benefits are increased, one way or another, that comes out of the employee's paycheck.

Or maybe it comes out of stock buybacks.