Live data from Hacker News

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

nymag.com

11–20 of 388 posts

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

#11

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

Its not just about being sick. These guys can work in awful conditions doing a dangerous job and often can and do get hurt. "Sick" leave is not all about a virus .

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

#12
The "reason" is just to make more profits. All industries can adjust to paid leave, certainly railroads can make it too.

It is important to remember that the railroad industry was THE original big money monopoly that made its money exploiting workers. It's just continuing its tradition in the hands of Warren Buffet and similar owners.

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

#13
post #10

Companies want employees rather than contractors in the sense that they want to have a locked in wage rather than negotiate new contract rates for each contract, but companies want contractors rather than employees because employees get benefits in exchange for their relatively slower growing incomes. Here, we see the tug of war and companies trying to have it both ways.

Contractors can also be laid off without any fuss with things like the WARN act.

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

#14
Scheduling seems to be the most reasonable (non greed) defence. Surely now we have the tools to schedule and manage staffing in what is actually a quite complex set of constraints, with temporal and geographic inputs.

Can probably also optimise things such that shifts and/or journeys start and end closer to home for workers, less nights on road more overtime / less overtime when people want it etc.

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

#16
post #13
post #10

Companies want employees rather than contractors in the sense that they want to have a locked in wage rather than negotiate new contract rates for each contract, but companies want contractors rather than employees because employees get benefits in exchange for their relatively slower growing incomes. Here, we see the tug of war and companies trying to have it both ways.

Contractors can also be laid off without any fuss with things like the WARN act.

I think most companies know how to get around WARN act or WARN act-like state rules pretty easily now. It's toothless imo.

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

#17
> ”The answer, in short, is “P.S.R.” — or precision-scheduled railroading. P.S.R. is an operational strategy that aims to minimize the ratio between railroads’ operating costs and their revenues through various cost-cutting and (ostensibly) efficiency-increasing measures. The basic idea is to transport more freight using fewer workers and railcars.”

That’s a long-winded way of saying: ‘We’d rather make more money than care about the health of our employees.’

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

#18
This problem does not seem unique to railroads. Any business that depends on human labor to deliver a service would have this problem. Airlines, restaurants, theatre companies. The way to deal with this is to have excess labor available (slack in the system). Are railroad profit margins so small that paying for excess labor will bankrupt them? Maybe labor in the railroad industry is so highly regulated that labor flexibility very expensive to maintain. Railroad pensions are the only private pensions that I know of that are specifically called out in IRS tax forms. That has always seemed odd to me, and is probably some indication of how tightly regulated labor in the railroad business is.

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

#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 because every "inefficiency" in the system has been trimmed to the bone. We've been asking people to shoulder crushing loads to make up for the lack of what is normally excess capacity. We shouldn't need a reminder that all that inefficiency is what adds resilience to the system so soon.

Airlines claim to have learned this. They say they're reducing schedules to more realistically match their ability to absorb hiccups during the holiday travel season. Time will tell, but it seems nobody wants a repeat of last year. If you make flying awful enough, evidently people will find ways to not do it.

Maybe part of the solution is to treat other industries like the banking and finance industries. Banks get periodic stress tests; perhaps it's time to do the same for all of the other systems that we rely on holding together but don't have to think about until they're falling apart under load.

Post reply on HN