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

#311

Post by pseudo0 » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:09 PM UTC

zopa wrote: post #150

bestcoder69 wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another possible causal factor is just that labor is weak in the US, and thus is unable to win sick days from their employers AND is unable to convince congress to pass universal sick days either. If that’s the case (I’m biased to say yes) these rail workers really need to strike. Voting for blues obviously isn’t cutting it.

The proposal to add seven sick days passed the House and got a majority in the Senate, mostly (though not quite exclusively) ‘blues’. It’s not who unions are voting for that’s the problem, it’s the filibuster.

If the Democrats had wanted the paid sick days to pass, they would have bundled it with the bill forcing the railway workers to accept the contract, making it all or nothing. Splitting it off was just a way of killing it without taking responsibility.

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

#312

Post by maverwa » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:13 PM UTC

ALittleLight wrote: post #265

stephen_g wrote: post #153

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, coming from a country with strong labour laws, it's mind boggling that this is legal in the US. I think the realist view has to be that the market ain't ever going to fix it, companies are always going to try to get away with as much as they can, and the people have to force the Government to bring in minimum standards.

The market is perfectly capable of fixing the problem. The employees should quit, strike, or slowdown work until their employers give them what they want.

> The employees should quit, strike, or slowdown work

That assumes a situation where workers are able to do these things. Sure, in theory everyone could quit, but then they would need another way to earn money.

If employers know that their employees cannot afford to quit or risk losing their job, the whole "the market will fix it" theory falls flat, since there is no market.

Not sure how if this is the case for railroad workers.

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

#313

Post by chiefalchemist » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:15 PM UTC

staringback wrote: post #121

lesuorac wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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"

It's all for show. Uncle Sam committed monies to the states and the states to the local municipalities. No politician wants to say "We don't need this" and then have people laid off. No politician wants to say "Give us that money back."

This isn't unique to Covid and Covid testing. It's simply much easier to see.

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

#314

Post by isbjorn16 » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:16 PM UTC

adolph wrote: post #190

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…

> Fuck the shareholders. Strike. It might not remain legal to strike (for this set of workers on this occasion). On several occasions, Congress has intervened to delay or prohibit strikes. For example, in 1994, Congress passed P.L. 103-380, which extended the final cooling-off period by four months to allow the United Transportation Union and the Soo Line Railroad to continue negotiations. In 1970, P.L. 91-226 impose…

Oh, no, I guess they'll just have to do everything as slowly and by the book as possible. Darn.

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

#315

Post by Throwawayaerlei » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:16 PM UTC

ddingus wrote: post #307

HDThoreaun wrote: post #284

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The bill that would give the workers 7 sick days only got 52 votes in the senate. Needs 60 to overcome the filibuster

Team Blue had the complete authority to render the filibuster moot. We the people granted them more than enough power to do what we want done. Fact is they hid behind the parliamentarian, insisted on bipartisan legislation as a priority and then proceeded to cede the power granted to make that excuse a reality today. Personally, I reject it all and know damn well this could all play out differently and it doesn't bec…

Team Blue could in theory end the filibuster today if they dragged in the five MIA Senate Democrats who have not been voting on these measures and got Harris to break the tie.

As you say, they have their reasons for keeping it.

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

#316

Post by chiefalchemist » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:19 PM UTC

cool_dude85 wrote: post #24

chiefalchemist wrote: post #2

Given what we we've went though with Covid (i.e., "if you're the least bit sick, stay home...") this makes zero sense. Such double standards don't do well to mend confidence. That said, I won't be surprised if there are sick outs in the coming weeks. This negotiation might be over for now, but it's not over for good.

Can't do a sick out if you don't have sick leave. I'm holding out hope for a wildcat strike the way this went down. Remember, union negotiators sent this sellout contract for a membership vote, and now it's being imposed by the party that at least pays lip service to labor. People are going to be pissed. Teachers won some solid victories over the past few years doing wildcat strikes against top brass' wishes, and the…

Can't? Nah. It might be a high bar, but it's not impossible to jump over it. I suspect there's enough disgust that one or three days here or there would be worth it to enough of those union members. Also, don't discount other unions - that were able to negotiate sick pay - joining forces. They'll recognize this is not a precedent that favors them and won't wait to push back (if they're wise).

It's also going to be interesting how this plays out during the next election cycle.

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

#317

Post by ThunderSizzle » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:24 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…

> If you're not very sick then sure the treatment isn't going to change much. But if you actually need any sort of intervention (rare) they'll give you different drugs than say an Ebola infection.

That's literally what I just said - medical facilities keep pushing COVID testing even though in 99% of cases, it's not going to be used to modify the diagnosis or treatment. As you said, the other ~1% or less of cases that might make a assist or alter a decision based on information provided by the test is rare, and nor did I say that in that scenario that it shouldn't be done.

> Unclear how you know if you're not contagious if you don't actually know what you're sick with.

There's more than just COVID testing, and some tests can reveal an infection that isn't contagious. For example, many bacterial infections are no longer considered contagious after ~24 hours of antibiotic use [1]. A positive on a bacterial infection can give enough confidence on the risk of being contagious.

However, with a negative COVID test, you could (1) still have COVID, or (2) have another infection that is contagious. Doctors can't assume you have strep throat or a sinus infection from a negative COVID test, but doctors can make a diagnosis based on a positive strep test that you don't have something else based on your symptoms.

[1] https://www.nhs.uk/common-health-questions/infections/how-lo...

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

#318

Post by lazide » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:26 PM UTC

cnelsenmilt wrote: post #286

lazide wrote: post #282

Earlier quoted context omitted.

One thing I learned a long time ago in ops is that if it doesn’t break (because someone sacrifices they’re well-being), then it won’t get fixed. The managers and leaders keep pushing things because they can .

Absolutely. And union negotiations, and then a strike, are some ways that the workers can make it break.

Except when, as in this case, they are forbidden from striking by law.

Which is a legislative form of ‘keep working your field peasant, or else.’

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

#319

Post by forgetfreeman » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:36 PM UTC

willyt wrote: post #209

forgetfreeman wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet you'd have a really tough time finding a white collar gig where paid leave wasn't a bog-standard part of the package. So nah, rail companies are getting caught out because they are absolutely fucking around with this.

Yes but now they can't change because the first one to do this becomes uncompetitive, the only way to introduce this in a fair way that otherwise maintains market competition is to introduce a rule that applies to all the companies in the market that says you must offer paid sick leave. Edit: A more extreme example; there is a rule that says airlines mustn't make pilots work more than a certain number of hours withou…

Do they become uncompetitive or do they suddenly attract all the top talent in their industry because of their new compensation offerings?

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

#320

Post by forgetfreeman » Fri, Dec 02, 2022, 6:37 PM UTC

smileysteve wrote: post #105

forgetfreeman wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

And yet you'd have a really tough time finding a white collar gig where paid leave wasn't a bog-standard part of the package. So nah, rail companies are getting caught out because they are absolutely fucking around with this.

Glares in "startup" "untracked pto" where it's white collar and paid leave isn't guaranteed but for the power of the worker.

laughs in SV dweebs chasing IPO payouts are a rounding error compared to the rest of the white collar environment Anyone silly enough to sign up for that treadmill is welcome to whatever comes their way, good or bad.