Post by chances on Nov 29, 2022 0:13:11 GMT
A few snippets from a longer NYT article
www.nytimes.com/2022/11/28/us/politics/biden-rail-strike-congress.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
- [ ] WASHINGTON — President Biden called on Congress on Monday to intervene in the deepening labor dispute between rail companies and their unionized workers, warning that a strike that shuts down freight trains just days before Christmas would be devastating for the nation’s economy.
- [ ] In a statement, Mr. Biden urged Congress to pass legislation to impose an agreement that his administration helped broker but that has failed to win the support of all the rail labor unions.
- [ ] He called on Congress to “to pass legislation immediately to adopt” the agreement.
- [ ] The president is a staunch union backer who has previously argued against congressional intervention in railway labor disputes, arguing that doing so unfairly interferes with the union bargaining efforts. In 1992, he was one of only six senators to vote against legislation that ended another bitter strike by rail workers.
- [ ] But Mr. Biden’s call for Congress to act underscores the president’s recognition of the effect that a rail strike could have on the fragile economic recovery after the Covid-19 pandemic.
- [ ] “Let me be clear: A rail shutdown would devastate our economy,” the president said. “Without freight rail, many U.S. industries would shut down. My economic advisers report that as many as 765,000 Americans — many union workers themselves — could be put out of work in the first two weeks alone. Communities could lose access to chemicals necessary to ensure clean drinking water. Farms and ranches across the country could be unable to feed their livestock.”
- [ ] Congress could intervene in a variety of ways. It could push back a strike deadline and extend the negotiating period, or require the two sides to involve an arbitrator. It could also enact a deal directly through legislation — whether it was the agreement that some unions already have voted down, or a less generous proposal that a presidential board issued over the summer.
- [ ] A coalition of business groups on Monday sent a letter to Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress urging them to intervene.
- [ ] The American Trucking Associations, an industry group, recently estimated that relying on trucks to work around a rail stoppage would require more than 450,000 additional vehicles — a practical impossibility given the shortage of equipment and drivers.
- [ ] The agreement voted down by the four rail unions would raise wages by nearly 25 percent between 2020, when the last contract expired, and 2024. But it has proved contentious among rail workers who argue that it does not go far enough to resolve what they say are punishing schedules that upend their personal lives and their health.
- [ ] While the agreement would let employees miss work up to three times each year to attend to routine medical appointments, many argue that it does not address the unpredictable shifts that arise from chronic understaffing.
- [ ] The Surface Transportation Board, which regulates freight rail, recently estimated that large freight rail operators have reduced their work force by nearly 30 percent over the past six years.
- [ ] Certain provisions of the agreement could even lead to more erratic scheduling by allowing rail carriers to do away with substitute workers who step in when others call in sick.
- [ ] But for the president, the decision to publicly embrace congressional action as a solution to the labor dispute is a high-stakes gamble that threatens to anger some of his biggest supporters in the labor community.
- [ ] … some union leaders may quietly prefer that intervention to come in December rather than January, when the House comes under Republican control and may be more likely to back the skimpier deal.
- [ ] “I am reluctant to override the ratification procedures and the views of those who voted against the agreement,” he said. “But in this case — where the economic impact of a shutdown would hurt millions of other working people and families — I believe Congress must use its powers to adopt this deal.”
www.nytimes.com/2022/11/28/us/politics/biden-rail-strike-congress.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare
- [ ] WASHINGTON — President Biden called on Congress on Monday to intervene in the deepening labor dispute between rail companies and their unionized workers, warning that a strike that shuts down freight trains just days before Christmas would be devastating for the nation’s economy.
- [ ] In a statement, Mr. Biden urged Congress to pass legislation to impose an agreement that his administration helped broker but that has failed to win the support of all the rail labor unions.
- [ ] He called on Congress to “to pass legislation immediately to adopt” the agreement.
- [ ] The president is a staunch union backer who has previously argued against congressional intervention in railway labor disputes, arguing that doing so unfairly interferes with the union bargaining efforts. In 1992, he was one of only six senators to vote against legislation that ended another bitter strike by rail workers.
- [ ] But Mr. Biden’s call for Congress to act underscores the president’s recognition of the effect that a rail strike could have on the fragile economic recovery after the Covid-19 pandemic.
- [ ] “Let me be clear: A rail shutdown would devastate our economy,” the president said. “Without freight rail, many U.S. industries would shut down. My economic advisers report that as many as 765,000 Americans — many union workers themselves — could be put out of work in the first two weeks alone. Communities could lose access to chemicals necessary to ensure clean drinking water. Farms and ranches across the country could be unable to feed their livestock.”
- [ ] Congress could intervene in a variety of ways. It could push back a strike deadline and extend the negotiating period, or require the two sides to involve an arbitrator. It could also enact a deal directly through legislation — whether it was the agreement that some unions already have voted down, or a less generous proposal that a presidential board issued over the summer.
- [ ] A coalition of business groups on Monday sent a letter to Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress urging them to intervene.
- [ ] The American Trucking Associations, an industry group, recently estimated that relying on trucks to work around a rail stoppage would require more than 450,000 additional vehicles — a practical impossibility given the shortage of equipment and drivers.
- [ ] The agreement voted down by the four rail unions would raise wages by nearly 25 percent between 2020, when the last contract expired, and 2024. But it has proved contentious among rail workers who argue that it does not go far enough to resolve what they say are punishing schedules that upend their personal lives and their health.
- [ ] While the agreement would let employees miss work up to three times each year to attend to routine medical appointments, many argue that it does not address the unpredictable shifts that arise from chronic understaffing.
- [ ] The Surface Transportation Board, which regulates freight rail, recently estimated that large freight rail operators have reduced their work force by nearly 30 percent over the past six years.
- [ ] Certain provisions of the agreement could even lead to more erratic scheduling by allowing rail carriers to do away with substitute workers who step in when others call in sick.
- [ ] But for the president, the decision to publicly embrace congressional action as a solution to the labor dispute is a high-stakes gamble that threatens to anger some of his biggest supporters in the labor community.
- [ ] … some union leaders may quietly prefer that intervention to come in December rather than January, when the House comes under Republican control and may be more likely to back the skimpier deal.
- [ ] “I am reluctant to override the ratification procedures and the views of those who voted against the agreement,” he said. “But in this case — where the economic impact of a shutdown would hurt millions of other working people and families — I believe Congress must use its powers to adopt this deal.”
