161–170 of 388 posts
Rail companies are getting the blame here, but the real problem is that paid leave isn't a statutory employment right protected by law. Here in the UK full time employees are entitled to 28 day paid annual leave, although I have work for companies which offer more, while pay is seperate.
As I understand, the problem here is that any railroad that behaves reasonably here, will be punished by the markets, and the management that made the decision will likely be replaced. The solution, as others have pointed out, is that this should be a regulatory requirement rather than negotiated business-by-business. There are not really any "losers" in such a fix: The workers get a more appealing and reasonable ben…
"The businesses keep making large profits, perhaps a tiny sliver less." Absolutely unacceptable (to them). They will fight tooth and nail to prevent any federal action that could harm their bottom line. It's one of the most predictable plays in American politics.
But if they all operated at slightly less margin, this dynamic would not occur; and the vast bulk of investors are not going to flee from an otherwise stable and long-term profitable asset class because it becomes a tiny (perhaps not even noticed) increment less lucrative. The vast bulk of investors are not going to march with (financial) pitchforks to Washington about this.
Think of the alternative: that no stockholder in any business would ever tolerate companies offering reasonable sick day policies. That is obviously not true; in most industries, at most companies, there is some kind of sick policy. So we should look at what is unique about this industry for the cause.
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…
This approach is taken with regulated utilities and telcos as well--natural gas utilities design their systems with enough capacity to serve all firm customers on the expected coldest day of the year (called a "design day") and circuit switched telephone networks were designed to handle the traffic expected on Mother's Day.
In my experience calling, text messaging, and WhatsApp has basically always had capacity issues on New Year's Eve, as literally everyone is trying to contact their family members the moment the clock hits twelve. Failed connections/messages are basically expected, and many people even intentionally call earlier or later to avoid this.
Hey, something maybe for one here I can shed some light on, for those who want a little more than the article gives. ;) I am a supervisor on a commuter rail, and in this respect they operate in a similar fashion. Like any other business, profits are key. Someone figures out staffing. Pretty much cut and dry. For a line from terminal A to B, there is one train per hour in each direction, 48 trains in a day. We need fo…
Yeah, no wonder workers are striking. This is absolutely insane and at some point one has to wonder if creating a good working environment and healthy, happy employees would do the profit line even better than this fascist structure.
I would be willing to place a wager it's similar at freight, on the subject of time off: no guaranteed holidays. My commuter rail runs 24-7, the only way an employee gets the holiday off is if it falls on their regular day off.
At my railroad a lot of the workers did not have the resources to go to college or get a job with better conditions. So, while morale is low, some take the view "it could be worse." I'm sure you get a lot of that there, too.
Rail companies are getting the blame here, but the real problem is that paid leave isn't a statutory employment right protected by law. Here in the UK full time employees are entitled to 28 day paid annual leave, although I have work for companies which offer more, while pay is seperate.
The rail workers have 4? 5? weeks of paid leave already. The issue at hand is "sick days" i.e. days off on short or no notice.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wow. That's even worse.
I'm not even going to say which is worse, they both suck equally in my view. The problem with articles like this, as they (purposefully, perhaps) make no mention of such employer tactics. So, I guarantee most readers are saying or thinking "greedy union workers."
It seems strange to me that thousands of tons of goods and materials can be held up by flu season.
In lieu of more reliable methods of managing freight trains, it sounds like railroads put the full-court press on their employees.
Is there a justification for the railroads' practices? Do rail workers frequently call in sick for BS reasons?
edit: also, thanks for weighing in with your viewpoint. from the outside it's kind of hard to understand the emotions and practices that are driving this story.
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.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's fine, in Italy you get a visit from the "Medico Fiscale". It's confrontational for sure, so you just go to your GP, get a certificate with the prescribed days of rest and attach that to your sick leave notification. Easy
Next door in Austria I've seen employment contracts (from local Mittlestand family owned companies in the automotive sector) where it was specified that "in case of sick leave, the employee agrees to health checks by the company's own GP at the company's expense, even if you already have been written off sick by your own GP." I've never been more disgusted. Then again, I've also read in the news here of employers hir…
Hey, something maybe for one here I can shed some light on, for those who want a little more than the article gives. ;) I am a supervisor on a commuter rail, and in this respect they operate in a similar fashion. Like any other business, profits are key. Someone figures out staffing. Pretty much cut and dry. For a line from terminal A to B, there is one train per hour in each direction, 48 trains in a day. We need fo…
> If no crew is available at all, then the train doesn't run.
Cool, then treat them better before they all walk out.
Hey, something maybe for one here I can shed some light on, for those who want a little more than the article gives. ;) I am a supervisor on a commuter rail, and in this respect they operate in a similar fashion. Like any other business, profits are key. Someone figures out staffing. Pretty much cut and dry. For a line from terminal A to B, there is one train per hour in each direction, 48 trains in a day. We need fo…
This is how many (most) jobs work. There is a bank of "Paid Time Off" (PTO) which can be used flexibly for sickness or vacation. The term bank is used purposefully to describe it, since it can be paid out as pay at separation. Many employers also limit the total amount of PTO an employee can accumulate. This is done to control potential liabilities from the bank.
While I don't call for the elimination of sick/PTO/etc, I also recognize that they are essentially irrational, similar to employer sponsored health care as an artifact of tax privileged "fringe benefits" that come with working in a large org. Funds paid to a worker for not working come from funds withheld from the worker when working. Sick/PTO benefit just makes a complicated system on top of the work/pay transaction.