undefined | Better HN

0 pointszopa3y ago0 comments

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.

0 comments

dbpatterson3y ago

The "blues" created the legislation & forced the workers to accept a shitty contract with no sick days. They could easily have refused to vote for it and let the strike happen w/o real sick days.

HDThoreaun3y ago

> They could easily have refused to vote for it and let the strike happen w/o real sick days.

No they could not. That would lead to economic catastrophe worse than march/april 2020. Dems would get swept next election and the workers wouldn't even win because dems would be forced to pass this exact law within a week of the strike starting. The government can't let 100,000 unrelated people lose their jobs, and they really can't let grocery stores run out of stuff or coal plants run out of coal causing blackouts.

Throwawayaerlei3y ago

Do they not have the option of forcing the railroads to give in on the sick leave issue? Did not "Team Blue" as in the Biden administration arrange this set of trade offs in the first place in the agreement which some of the most affected (screwed) workers are rejecting?

1 more reply

mjhay3y ago

That would require courage and long-term thinking. As of now, this problem has just been punted, while the industry continues to hemorrhage workers

pseudo03y ago

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.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse