# US railroad labor issues and possible rail strike (2022)



## Barb Stout

I hear that one of the main things the conductors and engineers are striking over is having to be available to work most or all of the time; being "on call" forever, I guess. I assume it's because the freight rail lines don't have enough workforce redundancy which I have heard has been a long-time problem. I imagine that now it might be difficult to rectify even if the railroad companies wanted to due to the shortage of workers "everywhere". If they did try to rectify it, would that cause problems to Amtrak; would perhaps conductors and engineers be poached from Amtrak? And currently, who gets paid more overall, freight rail-lines conductors/engineers or Amtrak's?


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Barb Stout said:


> I hear that one of the main things the conductors and engineers are striking over is having to be available to work most or all of the time; being "on call" forever, I guess. I assume it's because the freight rail lines don't have enough workforce redundancy which I have heard has been a long-time problem. I imagine that now it might be difficult to rectify even if the railroad companies wanted to due to the shortage of workers "everywhere". If they did try to rectify it, would that cause problems to Amtrak; would perhaps conductors and engineers be poached from Amtrak? And currently, who gets paid more overall, freight rail-lines conductors/engineers or Amtrak's?


They are on call 24/7/365. They get penalized if they don't show up when called, even if they're on approved time off (vacation, doctor's appts, etc). They're probably short-staffed because of their poor work life policies. Engineers and conductors have been leaving the freights to work for Amtrak.


----------



## Barb Stout

AmtrakBlue said:


> They are on call 24/7/365. They get penalized if they don't show up when called, even if they're on approved time off (vacation, doctor's appts, etc). They're probably short-staffed because of their poor work life policies. Engineers and conductors have been leaving the freights to work for Amtrak.


Wow, that's terrible! So why didn't the PEBS (or whatever it is) document deal with that?


----------



## MARC Rider

Here's a discussion on labor issues, including, but not limited to the possible impending strike on the Class Is.

I'll start it out by suggesting that our current woes seem to generate from an attitude among managers that they need to get as rid of as many "redundant" workers as possible (except maybe in the executive suites.) I don't know what they're teaching in the business schools, but it seems obvious that the top management needs to have more experience in the actual operations of the enterprise rather than treating it as some sort of abstract finance exercise.


----------



## enviro5609

Barb Stout said:


> Wow, that's terrible! So why didn't the PEBS (or whatever it is) document deal with that?


Because things have gotten so bad there isn't a good solution at this point that doesn't involve serious economic implications. It is a "beatings will continue until morale improves" situation. Things are so bad there aren't enough employees, so things get worse, so there are less employees, etc. The attendance policies are an attempt to maintain current service levels with an insufficient workforce (thereby maintaining or even increasing next quarter's profits). It might make more strategic sense to take the short term pain now to invest in a better workforce going forward, but that's not the choice shareholders want. In fact, corporate leadership has doubled down. The Class Is are already pushing to reduce train crews to 1 person, as the next step to do more with less. That will only make working conditions less safe and further hurt retention. 

The problem is, this negative cycle has gone so far that there's no easy way back. If the PEB mandated more sensible leave policies now, the Class I's would have to cut service, and this would not only affect their profits but heavily exacerbate the supply chain and inflation issues in the short term. That will happen one way or the other with current staffing trends, but there just isn't the political will there to force a course correction until its a crisis. A service collapse at the Class I's may be inevitable, but no one wants to be the one who is seen to have caused it. In the absence of leadership and tough choices, things may have to get worse before they get better. 

There is a lot to unpack there in terms of what is wrong with corporate culture and our system of governance. But I'll let it speak for itself.


----------



## Trogdor

While not strictly railroad-related, your comments about business schools and getting rid of workers reminds me of this piece I read on line a couple of months ago about Jack Welch, a long-celebrated (amongst investors) CEO that ultimately ruined GE: Did Jack Welch break capitalism?


----------



## TrackWalker

Canoe Racing

A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (General Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.

On the big day, the Japanese team won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusionwas the Japanese team had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing.

So American management hired a consulting firm and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion. They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing. To prevent another loss to the Japanese, the American's rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the "Rowing Quality First Program," with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower.

There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses. The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.


----------



## PRR 60

The membership of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers has rejected the proposed contract. The IAM was one of ten unions that had reached a tentative settlement. So, there are now three unions without an agreement.

Although nine unions have reached tentative agreements, the three without agreements represent over 70,000 rail workers. The nine with agreements represent about 44,000 workers. Big hill to climb in the next 34 hours (after three years to work things out).


----------



## Qapla

Back when they were making the first "foot" ruler, one group wanted to make it 13" and the other group wanted to make it 11". When the discussion was over, we ended up with the 12" ruler being a foot - it was said that, for the first time ever, each side was actually willing to give an inch and a workable solution was achieved.


----------



## John819

PRR 60 said:


> The membership of the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers has rejected the proposed contract. The IAM was one of ten unions that had reached a tentative settlement. So, there are now three unions without an agreement.
> 
> Although nine unions have reached tentative agreements, the three without agreements represent over 70,000 rail workers. The nine with agreements represent about 44,000 workers. Big hill to climb in the next 34 hours (after three years to work things out).


If any one union goes out, the rest will honor the picket line. So management needs to get 100% or Congress needs to enact some legislation to defer the strike.

If either of these occurs by the deadline, look out for porcine objects aviating over the ice cap covering Hades.


----------



## chubbycat

1 rail union rejects deal, 2 accept ahead of strike deadline









1 rail union rejects deal, 2 accept ahead of strike deadline


Members of one union have rejected a tentative deal with the largest U.S. freight railroads, while two ratified agreements and three other unions remained at the bargaining table just days ahead of a national strike deadline.




www.click2houston.com


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> The underlying issues of been on call forever will not be a easy fix. The freight crew are limited on a monthly number of hours it seem. To get it to a guarantee day off each week going to be a heavy lift. The freight railroads are make huge amounts of money right now, so they can give out hiring bonus, but they culture of “do what we say” need to change.
> 
> Work schedule that would work.
> 10 days on, 4 days off.
> 5 days on, 2 days off.
> 1 month on, 1 month off.
> 6 month on, 6 months off.
> 
> These are common shifts available in other transportation business.


Repost from the Amtrak thread.

This is fixable, but I don’t think the railroad will do it. Maybe the four modes of transportation (Air, Sea, Roads, and Railroad) Need the federal government to dictate there hours of service and even things out, a bit.

On duty and off duty times are variable depending on the mode of transportation. Seem a Human needs a different rest cycle after a day of work. It is not depend on the human need, but the job they hold.


----------



## Michigan Mom

This staffing model has been in place for a while, for transportation companies, and it's a wonder it's lasted as long as it has. Then again greed will always strangle the goose that laid the golden egg in the end.


----------



## John819

The on-call rule has been in the union contracts for years, and it apparently was not a problem. What changed was that the railroads adopted PSR and cut staffing to the bone, so that train crews now operate to the maximum hours of service allowed with no scheduled time off. They may get 10 hours of rest time, but at irregular intervals and with the possibility of doing another 12 hour shift on two hours notice immediately thereafter.


----------



## west point

enviro5609 said:


> Because things have gotten so bad there isn't a good solution at this point that doesn't involve serious economic implications.
> 
> The problem is, this negative cycle has gone so far that there's no easy way back. If the PEB mandated more sensible leave policies now, the Class I's would have to cut service, and this would not only affect their profits but heavily exacerbate the supply chain and inflation issues in the short term.



Glad to see someone recognizes this pending problem. This is the Hobson's choice that has this poster worrried. How many persons will defy any congressional action?. Will that cause many trains not to operate? Will class 1s try to demand 1 person crews immediately and can that be the RR's ultimate goal?


----------



## MARC Rider

Looks like there's a proposed settlement that gives the workers at least some more flexibility in the times off.

Maybe now is the time to start talking about nationalizing the rail infrastructure, or at least having an independent entity controlling dispatching, the length of trains, etc. Perhaps even a law mandating 2-person crews, etc. Even if the proposals don't succeed, the mere fact that there's public discourse about it might cause management to hold back their worst ideas about how to screw over the workers and provide lousy service in the name of short term profits that can be skimmed off by the top managers and financial speculators.

In the broader sphere of business management in general, we probably need reforms that require business enterprises to exist primarily for the purpose of providing the product that they're selling, with making money as a necessary, but secondary objective. It would probably also be a good thing to have some sort of limits on personal wealth. Not sure what the reforms would be, but achieving those objective would make the world a lot better place.


----------



## jis

Why is the dictum that "a two person crew is better" not open to analysis to the extent that it is considered to be appropriate to mandate it under all circumstances? Inquiring minds want to know. What safety is going to improve on the NEC in the presence of ACSES and all that by placing a second crew member in the cab? If two is better is three even better?


----------



## Michigan Mom

MARC Rider said:


> Looks like there's a proposed settlement that gives the workers at least some more flexibility in the times off.
> 
> Maybe now is the time to start talking about nationalizing the rail infrastructure, or at least having an independent entity controlling dispatching, the length of trains, etc. Perhaps even a law mandating 2-person crews, etc. Even if the proposals don't succeed, the mere fact that there's public discourse about it might cause management to hold back their worst ideas about how to screw over the workers and provide lousy service in the name of short term profits that can be skimmed off by the top managers and financial speculators.
> 
> In the broader sphere of business management in general, we probably need reforms that require business enterprises to exist primarily for the purpose of providing the product that they're selling, with making money as a necessary, but secondary objective. It would probably also be a good thing to have some sort of limits on personal wealth. Not sure what the reforms would be, but achieving those objective would make the world a lot better place.


I've been reading about safety concerns I didn't know existed, apart from the scheduling policies - length of freights being among them. And the host of potential safety concerns that go along with it.
Nationalizing the railroads is a great discussion to have!


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Nationalizing railroads would require emminent domain, which would require Government to pay fair market value for each railroad , there is no way we can afford that. and in addition to fully maintain such a massive system, think of the cost.


----------



## jis

Dutchrailnut said:


> Nationalizing railroads would require emminent domain, which would require Government to pay fair market value for each railroad , there is no way we can afford that. and in addition to fully maintain such a massive system, think of the cost.


IMHO ... Nationalizing is just a random pipe dream that people throw out from time to time. It won't happen anytime soon unless the US property ownership laws undergo a sea change. It will taken the railroads a long time to screw up to the extent that anyone that is serious will think about doing it seriously. The last time it was done was in the middle of a war using war powers and with the understanding that it was a temporary measure.


----------



## Rover

> What resulted from the back and forth was a tentative agreement that will go to union members for a vote after a post-ratification cooling off period of several weeks.
> 
> Railroad workers will now be able to take unpaid days off for doctor’s appointments without being penalized under railroad attendance rules. Previously, workers would lose points under the attendance systems that the BNSF and Union Pacific railways had adopted, and they could be disciplined if they lost all their points.
> 
> The unions that represent the conductors and engineers who drive the trains had pressed hard for changes in the attendance rules, and they said this deal sets a precedent that they will be able to negotiate over those kinds of rules in the future. But workers will still have to vote whether those changes are enough to approve the deal.











Tentative labor deal averts threat of nationwide rail strike


WASHINGTON (AP) — Rail companies and their workers reached a tentative agreement Thursday to avert a nationwide strike that could have shut down the nation's freight trains and devastated the economy less than two months before the midterm elections.




apnews.com


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Michigan Mom said:


> Nationalizing the railroads is a great discussion to have!





Dutchrailnut said:


> Nationalizing railroads would require [eminent] domain, which would require Government to pay fair market value for each railroad , there is no way we can afford that. and in addition to fully maintain such a massive system, think of the cost.


I do not disagree that nationalization has little chance of happening so long as vast monetary contributions are considered protected speech, but I am surprised that nationalization is never mentioned even in the form of leverage to make other demands seem more reasonable by comparison.



jis said:


> IMHO ... Nationalizing is just a random pipe dream that people throw out from time to time. It won;t happen anytime soon,. It will taken the railroads a long time to screw up to the extent that anyone that is serious will think about doing it seriously. The last time it was done was in the middle of a war.


Railroad screw-ups will not risk nationalization unless the Overton window moves in that direction, and the only way to do that is to start discussing it.


----------



## thully

Has anyone heard definitely how long the cooling-off period is if unions reject the deal? The news stories all mention a vague “several weeks”, but I’ve seen a few people say it’s around the end of the month. That timetable could definitely cause issues for the forum Gathering…


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Tentative agreement is due the need of the members of the Union to Vote on the contract. So pretty sure it going to happen.


----------



## MARC Rider

jis said:


> Why is the dictum that "a two person crew is better" not open to analysis to the extent that it is considered to be appropriate to mandate it under all circumstances? Inquiring minds want to know. What safety is going to improve on the NEC in the presence of ACSES and all that by placing a second crew member in the cab? If two is better is three even better?


A NEC train is not the same as a 2-mile long freight train. And I seem to recall that the single-man crew may have contributing factor to the Lac Megantic disaster in Canada.









Lac-Mégantic rail disaster - Wikipedia







en.wikipedia.org







> In May 2010, former MMA engineer Jarod Briggs of Millinocket, Maine, explained to the Bangor Daily News that "so much could happen in a twelve-hour shift on one of these trains, such as a washed-out track, downed trees or mechanical failure. What if the engineer onboard were to encounter a medical problem? Who is going to know about it? If there is a fire engine or an ambulance needing to get by a train or a crossing when that happens, it could take hours." Briggs left MMA to work for another railway in 2007; while he described the lone crew member involved in the Lac-Mégantic derailment as "a very good engineer, one of the better on the property", he has long expressed safety concerns about MMA's overall train operations because "if you have two people watching you can catch a mistake. It was all about cutting, cutting, cutting."


----------



## dwebarts

TrackWalker said:


> Canoe Racing
> 
> A Japanese company (Toyota) and an American company (General Motors) decided to have a canoe race on the Missouri River. Both teams practiced long and hard to reach their peak performance before the race.
> 
> On the big day, the Japanese team won by a mile. The Americans, very discouraged and depressed, decided to investigate the reason for the crushing defeat. A management team made up of senior management was formed to investigate and recommend appropriate action. Their conclusionwas the Japanese team had 8 people rowing and 1 person steering, while the American team had 8 people steering and 1 person rowing.
> 
> So American management hired a consulting firm and paid them a large amount of money for a second opinion. They advised that too many people were steering the boat, while not enough people were rowing. To prevent another loss to the Japanese, the American's rowing team's management structure was totally reorganized to 4 steering supervisors, 3 area steering superintendents and 1 assistant superintendent steering manager. They also implemented a new performance system that would give the 1 person rowing the boat greater incentive to work harder. It was called the "Rowing Quality First Program," with meetings, dinners and free pens for the rower.
> 
> There was discussion of getting new paddles, canoes and other equipment, extra vacation days for practices and bonuses. The next year the Japanese won by two miles. Humiliated, the American management laid off the rower for poor performance, halted development of a new canoe, sold the paddles, and canceled all capital investments for new equipment. The money saved was distributed to the Senior Executives as bonuses and the next year's racing team was outsourced to India.


Truth.


----------



## jis

MARC Rider said:


> A NEC train is not the same as a 2-mile long freight train. And I seem to recall that the single-man crew may have contributing factor to the Lac Megantic disaster in Canada.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Lac-Mégantic rail disaster - Wikipedia
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> en.wikipedia.org


But that does not justify legislating two person crew for all. That justifies tasking the FRA to come up with appropriate regulations identifying situations where two person crew must be used.

I am generally leery of legislatures trying to do things that they have low understanding of, instead of yielding to professionals in the field.


----------



## Michigan Mom

I can understand being leery of legislators who may not fully appreciate some of the nuance, but I'm ten times more leery of owners who have cut staffing to increase profits. They are also not railroad professionals. At least the unions have relevant expertise. And the legislators have to at least pretend to care about constituents. They've got staff at their disposal who can provide research on short notice for any subject matter. Yeah it's a problem, there is tremendous, shall we say, variety among legislator competence. Still. The investors who view railroads as means for personal enrichment, and who can't stomach the thought of being less rich, are demonstrably perfectly willing to absorb the occasional accidents, injuries and deaths. As long as the profits are there, and they can take use profits to buy back stock, it will not interfere with their sleep one iota. It just won't.


----------



## joelkfla

NY Times article on railroad workers' frustration and the effects of PSR:

Workers Say Railroads’ Efficiency Push Became Too Much


----------



## zephyr17

I don't know if this is a acceptable comment for the mods, but I'll accept its deletion without complaint.

This was a huge showdown and for once it was management that blinked. Both sides were dug in on the attendance policy issue and the union got the core of what they were justifiably fighting for. Management had been equally adamant that they did not want the unions in their attendance policies, but were the ones to back off.

I find that a good sign for what appears to be the beginning of a renaissance for private sector organized labor, with other, smaller, victories such as organizing some Amazon warehouses and some Starbucks. I have never been a Union member and historically have been skeptical of them. But have come to the conclusion they have to regain their rightful place in the marketplace, after decades of diminishment, as a needed check on the excesses of management and "shareholder value".


----------



## railiner

Speaking of legislators…anyone recall when Indiana law required “full crews” on freight trains?
Engineer, Fireman, Head Brakeman on the locomotive; Conductor, Brakeman, and Flagman on the caboose…

Yes, a six man crew. That they are now wanting to run a train with only one person, is remarkable in that context...


----------



## Trogdor

jis said:


> Why is the dictum that "a two person crew is better" not open to analysis to the extent that it is considered to be appropriate to mandate it under all circumstances? Inquiring minds want to know. What safety is going to improve on the NEC in the presence of ACSES and all that by placing a second crew member in the cab? If two is better is three even better?



“Two-person crew” doesn’t necessarily mean both crew have to be in the cab. The NEC already has two-person crews (actually, all generally have three-person crews and some may even have four-person crews). Every train has an engineer and a conductor, and 1 or 2 ACs.


----------



## Barb Stout

One fine day, I found a cam of a freight train passing by that was going slow enough that one could count the cars. I counted somewhere between 900-1000 cars. If the length of a train car is 55.5 feet, as Ms. Google says some are (and also listed others at just shy of 68 feet), then that would end up being a 10-mile train. Who wants to be the only person on a 10-mile-long train? Who thinks that's an ok idea?


----------



## Rover

For context, for one that knows, what are the freight rail worker rules in other countries, like Germany and China, for example??


----------



## AmtrakBlue

Rover said:


> For context, for one that knows, what are the freight rail worker rules in other countries, like Germany and China, for example??


Why do you want to know? It’s irrelevant.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Rover said:


> For context, for one that knows, what are the freight rail worker rules in other countries, like Germany and China, for example??


Other countries have different labor rules but also haul more compact rolling stock made into smaller trains with shorter stopping distances. Trains in the US are some of the longest anywhere and must contend with commercial vehicle impacts. I have never seen US-spec tanker cars routinely traveling through major industrialized cities outside of North America. Canada would probably be the closest comparison but their safety culture is nothing to emulate.


----------



## Trollopian

Devil's Advocate said:


> Trains in the US are some of the longest anywhere and must contend with commercial vehicle impacts...



Commercial- _and passenger_-vehicle impacts. The length of U.S. trains is one reason that drivers at some scantily-protected crossings try to "beat the train," sometimes with catastrophic results. We have threads on those.


----------



## Eric S

AmtrakBlue said:


> Why do you want to know? It’s irrelevant.


Why is that irrelevant? There is plenty to learn from operating practices in other countries.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Trollopian said:


> Commercial- _and passenger_-vehicle impacts. The length of U.S. trains is one reason that drivers at some scantily-protected crossings try to "beat the train," sometimes with catastrophic results. We have threads on those.


Good point. Many passenger vehicles are a limited threat but North American sized pickups and SUV's are large and heavy enough to derail a train.


----------



## Rover

AmtrakBlue said:


> Why do you want to know? It’s irrelevant.



Why are you so cross??

Deal averts rail strike... for now


----------



## GDRRiley

jis said:


> But that does not justify legislating two person crew for all. That justifies tasking the FRA to come up with appropriate regulations identifying situations where two person crew must be used.
> 
> I am generally leery of legislatures trying to do things that they have low understanding of, instead of yielding to professionals in the field.


2 man crews should be the norm and the RR need to justify why this operation should be a 2 man crew.


Devil's Advocate said:


> Good point. Many passenger vehicles are a limited threat but North American sized pickups and SUV's are large and heavy enough to derail a train.


a pickup or SUV will not, even a limo or light truck will struggle to derail a loco however cab cars can struggle with large pickups.




Barb Stout said:


> One fine day, I found a cam of a freight train passing by that was going slow enough that one could count the cars. I counted somewhere between 900-1000 cars. If the length of a train car is 55.5 feet, as Ms. Google says some are (and also listed others at just shy of 68 feet), then that would end up being a 10-mile train. Who wants to be the only person on a 10-mile-long train? Who thinks that's an ok idea?


55ft is short for a car, most are 70-80ft now. That would be an insanely long train, longest ones I know of end up at around 15,000-18,000ft and have 2 sets of DPUs.


given how class 1 will operate I feel like a 4 days on 3 days off is what the unions should be pushing for. The other option is a rolling average like pilots where they can only fly a set number of hours in the last 28 days and on the job a set number. Again you'd need 2 counts, away from home and operating time. 528 hours every 28 days away from home and a maxmium of 240 hours operating. that would mean max 20 12 hour days and away from home 22. Plan it 6 weeks in advance


----------



## Rambling Robert

Sec/Labor Marty Walsh was mayor of Boston and we gave up a really good guy! It looks like from the above video President Biden appreciated Marty’s negotiation efforts. Hardworking, wonderful communicator, progressive and pursuing a positive outcome are some traits in his character.


----------



## Jack Davis

Barb Stout said:


> One fine day, I found a cam of a freight train passing by that was going slow enough that one could count the cars. I counted somewhere between 900-1000 cars. If the length of a train car is 55.5 feet, as Ms. Google says some are (and also listed others at just shy of 68 feet), then that would end up being a 10-mile train. Who wants to be the only person on a 10-mile-long train? Who thinks that's an ok idea?


I would think if that looooooooonnnnng train kept it's speed down (slow enough to count the cars) then it can STOP if necessary. BUT, where will it find a 'pull out siding' long enough to handle its length to allow another train to pass? In that case, NO. But, they're out there and 'somebody' says it's OK.


----------



## jis

Trogdor said:


> “Two-person crew” doesn’t necessarily mean both crew have to be in the cab. The NEC already has two-person crews (actually, all generally have three-person crews and some may even have four-person crews). Every train has an engineer and a conductor, and 1 or 2 ACs.


Indeed. I was thinking of the case where there has to be two engineers in the cab, and was merely stating that such thing should not be legislated. Using that approach in a bit of political victory it had at one time been strongly believed that there needs to be three man crew, and it took forever to finally get rid of the third redundant man.

An engineer and one or more conductor in today's technology environment seems quite reasonable in most cases. But as we know there is the endless discussions that are ongoing about OPTO in certain restricted environments. And in certain cases abroad, like the Dubai Metro, the only crew on the train is security personnel. The operation is entirely automatic. These sorts of advances should not be legislatively disabled for environments where they make sense.

Incidentally I learned that on Brightline unlike on Amtrak, there is clear separation between operating and OBS crew. The operating crew (Conductor and Engineer) generally sit in the cab. The OBS crew mans the train and provides on board service.


----------



## PVD

Rambling Robert said:


> Sec/Labor Marty Walsh was mayor of Boston and we gave up a really good guy! It looks like from the above video President Biden appreciated Marty’s negotiation efforts. Hardworking, wonderful communicator, progressive and pursuing a positive outcome are some traits in his character.


He was in NYC last 
Saturday for our LD Parade as Grand Marshal and seemed relaxed and confident when I spoke to him outside of the Cathedral before the Parade.


----------



## joelkfla

jis said:


> Incidentally I learned that on Brightline unlike on Amtrak, there is clear separation between operating and OBS crew. The operating crew (Conductor and Engineer) generally sit in the cab. The OBS crew mans the train and provides on board service.


Is there a Service Manager over the OBS, or is each car attendant their own boss?


----------



## jis

joelkfla said:


> Is there a Service Manager over the OBS, or is each car attendant their own boss?


There apparently is an overall service manager, sort of equivalent of a Purser on an airliner. Also it is not clear that there is a per car designated attendant. There is a set of attendants that serve the train according to some plan apparently.


----------



## railiner

jis said:


> Incidentally I learned that on Brightline unlike on Amtrak, there is clear separation between operating and OBS crew. The operating crew (Conductor and Engineer) generally sit in the cab. The OBS crew mans the train and provides on board service.


Isn’t that also the way VIA Rail works?


----------



## Bob Dylan

railiner said:


> Isn’t that also the way VIA Rail works?


Yep!


----------



## Palmland

Just-Thinking-51 said:


> Tentative agreement is due the need of the members of the Union to Vote on the contract. So pretty sure it going to happen.


According to Trains' Newswire this is timeline for the ratification of the new labor agreements. Target date is November 17, just in time for Thanksgiving.

*****
"On Sept. 22 the BLET began a 15-day question and answer period during which general chairmen will reply to the national president’s office with any questions or clarifications regarding the tentative agreement.

“Those questions will be consolidated into a single document, and the BLET’s National Wage Team, alongside SMART-TD, will return to the bargaining table with the Carriers to mutually agree upon the answers to those questions,” the BLET said.

Once the Q&A session is complete, ballots will be distributed on or around Oct. 14, with the BLET tentatively set to tally the votes on Nov. 17."


----------



## thully

The IAM union, who previously rejected a tentative agreement and whose cooling-off period was set to expire September 29th, has reached a new tentative agreement. As such, the new cooling off period lasts until December 9th while they vote, so there won‘t be a rail strike until at least then (assuming other unions have a similar time frame), even if the agreement is rejected.









Your Solidarity Pays Off With a New, Stronger Tentative Agreement - District-19 IAMAW


Dear IAM District 19 Members: Throughout this process of seeking a new contract, you have stood strong and demanded the fair treatment you deserve from the carriers. Your solidarity and strength have made national headlines and, most importantly, given your District 19 negotiating team the power...




districtlodge19.org





Some had worried that the IAM could strike on September 29th, though that seems to have been averted for now.


----------



## GDRRiley

From the link above:

*A Cap in Healthcare Costs*: A limit of monthly Health and Welfare Plan employee contributions of no more than $398.97 through 2025 until a new agreement is reached.
– *Single Room Occupancy*: For the first time, we will have codified language in our agreement that will require your employers to provide roadway mechanics with their own sleeping rooms while on travel. Previously, this could have been changed by the employers without further negotiation.
– *Travel Expenses and Per Diem*: The carriers have agreed to bargain with us within 60 days of ratification over travel expenses and per diem.
– *Overtime*: For the first time, we also got the carriers to agree to a joint study on overtime, forced overtime policies and overtime meal options.

We *also secured everything* from the first Tentative Agreement, including:
– A 24% compounded general wage increase
– A $5,000 service recognition bonus
– Full retroactive pay, within 60 days of contract ratification, amounting up to $11,950, based on average pay hours (overtime and straight time)
– An additional paid day off for all members including a paid day off for all newly hired employees hired before September 30 of each year
– Enhanced hearing benefits and added coverage for diagnosis and treatment of Autism Spectrum Disorder
– A “Me-Too” clause, ensuring IAM Rail Division members will receive the same additional value if another union reaches an agreement that improves the terms of this agreement.

Looks like a decent list of what they wanted but doesn't look like it fixed the time off component much


----------



## Rover

The threat of a freight railroad strike is back 

https://www.cnn.com/2022/10/10/business/railroad-union-vote-strike-threat/index.html

The two largest unions, the Sheet Metal, Air, Rail, Transportation union, which represents conductors, and the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, which represents engineers, have yet to vote. Online chatter among the conductors union and engineers union members signal they want a strike before even seeing the contract.

Even if the members of the two larger unions vote in favor of their deals, they would not report to work if the BMWE were to go on strike. And the fact that the BMWE voted down the contract is probably a sign that rank-and-file anger towards railroad management could lead to no votes at the two larger unions as well.


----------



## GDRRiley

I suspect we will see all 3 reject the deal and push for something better. 
they didn't fix the 24/7/365 on call


----------



## Bob Dylan

GDRRiley said:


> I suspect we will see all 3 reject the deal and push for something better.
> they didn't fix the 24/7/365 on call


I think most of us would side with the Union Members and Strike, the 24/7/365 On Call Policy is simply Undefensable!!


----------



## Rover

BNSF workers outraged, disappointed after judge grants temporary restraining order blocking strike

A federal judge sided with the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway saying that a strike of 17,000 union workers would "exacerbate our current supply chain crisis."


----------



## Rover

TYT: The Biden Admin has "kneecapped" the Union workers... Strike Leverage taken away


----------



## GDRRiley

Rover said:


> TYT: The Biden Admin has "kneecapped" the Union workers... Strike Leverage taken away



That is the most sensationalized headline ever

It was a comment that pushed for the railroads and Unions to come to agreement otherwise congress would be forced to act. 
Which is nothing new and what we expect because railroads shutting down will destroy this country in under a week.


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

I noticed a very long freight train on the CN tracks this morning - haven't seen one for a while, especially part way onto the St. Charles Air Line - looked like it was edging into the single track portion. I had to wonder if it was blocking Amtrak departures/arrivals on the CONO and Illini/Saluki.... 

(although looking at aerial shots it may have just been positioned to allow through traffic)


----------



## Rover

As holidays near, a nationwide rail strike is still on the table. Here's the latest


So far, three of 12 unions representing freight rail workers have rejected the contract deal brokered by the Biden administration in September. Those unions are holding out for paid sick leave.




www.npr.org


----------



## Metra Electric Rider

I'm loving the internet trolls elsewhere saying that the earlier agreements that averted a strike earlier were fake news... 

I hope this gets resolved, but we shall see.


----------



## jis

Apparently SMART-TD membership very recently rejected the deal while a little while back BLET had endorsed the deal.


----------



## joelkfla

This NY Times article includes some info on problems with the extra board, and possible Congressional actions:



https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/21/business/economy/freight-rail-union-contract.html?unlocked_article_code=MBBNJQVW6wU7RFmqlm0OBUtay8oSbeWaUIydw94rHwLPm1zQYCnNd1ija09s7MnQ3H1hCUAEQ8wKaQZPaYZje8gMYgJ14sdmVnfs1tqs1I0LEenBRVQ4_fzC3gClUows4MDFdf7JKwl4QhTpyF0yIQN7F4rYj_LKDqkyqKIWGq6CEnfsh-eb_pken12PNVMovCQA4QM30HtMSgvYzkaaI7cHc79NPyQOCVdoRXQPzyPpHgy1Xjl2npB5-DkOC0YktolvewtJphmVdD_9JxlG2dW2Vr7_E4rDrLwRHcR-bqm96tmRv28swS7fR9nYswqwB4jbzafAmvSpf0tH4uyEENapNE3Qi7EJBp23K8Ak&smid=share-url



Washington Post article includes this quote:

“As the President has said from the beginning, a shutdown is unacceptable because of the harm it would inflict on jobs, families, farms, businesses and communities across the country,” according to a White House official. “A majority of unions have voted to ratify the tentative agreement, and the best option is still for the parties to resolve this themselves.”​


https://wapo.st/3tMeZ4W


----------



## Rover

Biggest rail union rejects contract, raising possibility of nationwide strike during holidays


The SMART Transportation Division voted down a tentative contract.




abcnews.go.com





The nation's largest rail union on Monday voted down a tentative contract brokered by the White House, raising the possibility of a nationwide strike next month that could cripple the U.S. economy.

The SMART Transportation Division, or SMART-TD, which represents about 28,000 conductors, rejected the contract in a vote that garnered record turnout, the union said Monday. The contract was nixed by a slim margin, as just 50.8% of workers voted against it.


----------



## TrackWalker

Just received in email from BMWED....

"BMWED’s Status Quo Period Ends on December 9th Following SMART-TD and BLET Ratification Results 

Published: Nov 21 2022 8:12PM (EST)

BMWED’s Status Quo Period ends effective 0000:01 on December 9th following SMART-TD’s failed ratification while BLET Agreement ratifies. 

The BMWED congratulates BLET Members and Leadership for their successful ratification of their National Agreement as they bring this round of national negotiations to a close. 

Now SMART-TD’s and BMWED’s status quo period ends at 0000:01 on December 9th. The BRS’s status quo period is still scheduled to end at 0000:01 on December 5th. If the BRS goes on strike on December 5th, BMWED Members are to honor any lawful picket line. Regardless of the when the status quo period ends for any Rail Union, we will continue to coordinate and work together through the end of this round of national negotiations. 

Over 55% of Railroad Workers (SMART-TD BMWED, BRS and IBB have made it very clear that the tentative national agreements are not satisfactory settlements for the workforce. The most common sticking point for BMWED, BRS and IBB Members has been the lack of quality-of-life improvements, namely the lack of paid sick leave. BMWED, BRS and IBB have made paid sick leave proposals to the railroads, but the railroads have made it clear that they will neither engage in any meaningful discussions nor accept any sort of proposal regarding such. This is very concerning, given the already perilous state of the railroad industry and its exhausted workforce. 

“Over the last year, numerous employers throughout the world have analyzed what they could do to attract and retain talented employees. The railroads have done the complete opposite. They’ve ignored industry regulators and customers’ concerns about maintaining an adequate workforce, and they’ve ignored the workforces’ pleas for improvements to their working conditions and quality of life. This has gone on long enough. It is time for the railroads to improve the quality of life for their workforces. It is time for the railroads to provide paid sick leave to all their employees, not just its executives, management, and office staff. We remain hopeful the railroads will do the right thing,” BMWED President Cardwell said.

Instead of addressing the real concerns of their employees and implementing common-sense attendance policies that ease tensions and provide some level of compassion, railroad managements continue their stubborn refusal to provide what others now recognize as a basic right. It is our belief that railroad management simply seeks to punish their employees for attempting to exercise their democratic rights to reject a tentative agreement and engage in collective action to gain paid sick time off. They do not want this campaign to succeed because it would prove that solidarity works.
It would be simple for railroad management to provide its Union laborers with paid sick time off, as it only would cost them $0.01 of every dollar of their record profits to provide it for all railroad workers. They already do it for their office staff and corporate leadership. But doing so here would illustrate a winning formula for organized labor and instead of meeting their employees’ honest and reasonable request, they’d rather risk a strike and potential economic calamity for the entire nation for the sake of hoarding more of their record profits."


----------



## joelkfla

Omigosh! I hope I don't have to cancel my final attempt at a trip this year, from 12/1-12/6. Between train downsizing, hurricanes, strike threats, and my cat's dental work, I've cancelled or postponed at least 4 times this fall. And this time my hotel is only refundable if I cancel by 11/26.

C'mon Congress, get in there and make them wait a couple more weeks before Amtrak starts preemptively cancelling trains. Pres. Biden says a strike is "unacceptable"!


----------



## Winecliff Station

joelkfla said:


> Omigosh! I hope I don't have to cancel my final attempt at a trip this year, from 12/1-12/6. Between train downsizing, hurricanes, strike threats, and my cat's dental work, I've cancelled or postponed at least 4 times this fall. And this time my hotel is only refundable if I cancel by 11/26.
> 
> C'mon Congress, get in there and make them wait a couple more weeks before Amtrak starts preemptively cancelling trains. Pres. Biden says a strike is "unacceptable"!


Hopefully that 3 day buffer you have between the end of your trip and the end of the status quo period will be enough to save your trip. I’ve seen cases where they cancel service one or two days before a strike but not three.


----------



## joelkfla

Winecliff Station said:


> Hopefully that 3 day buffer you have between the end of your trip and the end of the status quo period will be enough to save your trip. I’ve seen cases where they cancel service one or two days before a strike but not three.


What has me most worried is that the smaller unions can strike as soon as 12/5. Last time, Amtrak started shutting down a few days before the threat of a strike. If they do again, they probably wouldn't have things back to normal by the start of my return on the 5th. I might make it out, but I would have to fly home on the return.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon

joelkfla said:


> What has me most worried is that the smaller unions can strike as soon as 12/5. Last time, Amtrak started shutting down a few days before the threat of a strike. If they do again, they probably wouldn't have things back to normal by the start of my return on the 5th. I might make it out, but I would have to fly home on the return.



I shortened a trip for that very reason. I had a trip planned with a friend to go to Philly then Alexandria starting November 29 and returning December 5.

We shortened it to just the Philly part, going home on December 1.

I’m on the NEC so would probably be fine—I could get from ALX to WAS by metro or Lyft or whatever and take a train from there, but he’s in upstate New York so would be taking a chance leaving that late.


----------



## MARC Rider

My sympathy is for the unions in this case, but I wouldn't be surprised if they are forced back to work with either another cooling-off period, or Congress forcing a settlement. I wonder if they have other means short of striking that would allow them to cause some pain to the Class 1s and force them to yield without the workers having to risk taking the blame for any inconveniences to the citizens. I'm thinking of stuff like "work to rule," or "quiet quitting." I'm thinking of stuff that would ensure the trains would continue to run, but it would be much less efficient and more costly for the railroad. Of course, a long-distance Amtrak trip under those conditions might not be the most pleasant experience, unless of course the "work to rule" tactic is that the dispatchers prioritize Amtrak trains like the law says they're supposed to do, anyway.


----------



## joelkfla

MARC Rider said:


> My sympathy is for the unions in this case


Me too. I think they are certainly being exploited by the railroads in pursuit of absurdly high profits. And the workers aren't the only ones.

I'm just selfishly hoping things are delayed a week or 2 so I can finally get my trip in.


----------



## Rover

I stand with the Union workers here over the RR Stockholders in this case.


----------



## joelkfla

Biden Asks Congress to Intervene in Rail Dispute as Strike Deadline Looms​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.

Click on headline to read NY Times article.

And here is the Wash Post article:


https://wapo.st/3VdTupZ


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Received new replies










President Biden

@POTUS
·
7m





United States government official
I'm calling on Congress to pass legislation immediately to adopt the Tentative Agreement between railroad workers and operators. Let me be clear: a rail shutdown would devastate our economy. Without freight rail, many U.S. industries would shut down.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

President Biden

@POTUS
·
12m





United States government official
As a proud pro-labor President, I'm reluctant to override the ratification procedures and views of those who voted against the agreement. But in this case – where the economic impact of a shutdown would hurt millions – I believe Congress must use its powers to adopt this deal.


----------



## Rover

Biden calls on Congress to head off potential rail strike


OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — President Joe Biden on Monday asked Congress to intervene and block a railroad strike before next month’s deadline in the stalled contract talks, and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said lawmakers would take up legislation this week to impose the deal that unions agreed to in...




apnews.com





Pelosi said the House would not change the terms of the September agreement, which would challenge the Senate to approve the House bill without changes.


----------



## Rover

Statement from President Joe Biden on Averting a Rail Shutdown | The White House


I am calling on Congress to pass legislation immediately to adopt the Tentative Agreement between railroad workers and operators – without any




www.whitehouse.gov


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Why can’t the employees and the railroads just talk to each other, and work thing out with the need of the Congress to get involved? I get the impasse arguments, but a work stoppage does wonders to get people motivated to negotiate.

Personal a strike would be very beneficial. Fuel price would drop, freight rates would go up. This is a slow period for trucking. The Christmas stuff is at the stores. Only the package deliver folks are working hard.


----------



## Bob Dylan

Dutchrailnut said:


> Received new replies
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> President Biden
> @POTUS
> ·
> 7m
> 
> 
> 
> 
> United States government official
> I'm calling on Congress to pass legislation immediately to adopt the Tentative Agreement between railroad workers and operators. Let me be clear: a rail shutdown would devastate our economy. Without freight rail, many U.S. industries would shut down.


While I understand the reasoning behind the Presidents request, ( Economics)I still support the Freight Railroad Workers 100%!

But why won't he and the Unions insist that the Bill include provisions requiring the Railroads to offer Sick Leave and More Rest between runs??

Marking Off for Health Reasons without Discipline should be a Right, not a Privilege.


----------



## AmtrakMaineiac

Three unpaid sick days that have to be scheduled at least 30 days in advance. If that was offered to me at one of my job offers, I would have said are you kidding? You usually don't know 30 days ahead that you or one of your kids is going to get sick.


----------



## John819

Of course, Congress could solve this problem by amending the Hours of Service law to require a minimum number of sick days.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

To outsiders it does not make sense , but a railroader unlike others, can't just take few hours off to go to Doctor he/she has to mark of for entire shift.
Even to non-operations railroaders it is not in their thinking .
As for how this is playing out ?? you could have all come to conclusion that claiming to be essential workers, also kind of burned the possibility of a strike.
specially while our country is trying to recover from covid setbacks and transportation isues.


----------



## joelkfla

CNN has been giving heavy coverage to Biden's request to Congress today. 

Apparently, both parties' leaders in the House and Senate have said they will vote to enforce the settlement. It will likely pass in the House. But in the Senate, unanimous consent is required to expedite a vote. Some senators are saying they're not comfortable with it. It takes only one senator dissenting to delay the vote, and it's unclear whether the vote would take place before the strike deadline if it were to be delayed.

CNN is still saying the strike deadline is 12/9. If the union leader who said everyone had agreed to 12/15 can be taken at his word, perhaps there is less chance of a Senate vote being delayed past the deadline.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51

Essential business maybe, but the employees need to take care of themselves too. Don’t think upper management has a problem visiting the dentist.

So essentially business yes, but there so many ways to deal with this if they were motivated to do so.

I will stick with the 28 days on, 28 days off schedule. Work hard, play hard.


----------



## GDRRiley

Dutchrailnut said:


> To outsiders it does not make sense , but a railroader unlike others, can't just take few hours off to go to Doctor he/she has to mark of for entire shift.
> Even to non-operations railroaders it is not in their thinking .


there use to be an extra board for this reason. you'd take spare trains or cover for crews who couldn't make it. typically given to the newest crews. Meanwhile as a 20 year employee you'd could pick the daily run that got you back home every night or at least every other

Airlines have plan stuff out as best they can for 1-2 months no reason railroads can't do the same


----------



## PaTrainFan

Bernie Sanders says he will block it in the Senate if a provision isn't added to give 7 paid sick days. I don't want to see a strike but I say good for him. Maybe that will force the right kind of movement in favor of the workers, who deserve better than they are getting now.


----------



## lordsigma

PaTrainFan said:


> Bernie Sanders says he will block it in the Senate if a provision isn't added to give 7 paid sick days. I don't want to see a strike but I say good for him. Maybe that will force the right kind of movement in favor of the workers, who deserve better than they are getting now.



As much as I’d like to see it be forced down the roads throat - I don’t think they’d have to votes to add that. And I suspect the September agreement will get pushed - with inflation and all the other supply chain problems I don’t see Congress having the appetite to just allow a strike to go ahead which would probably be the only way for the workers to get the 7 days.


----------



## GDRRiley

lordsigma said:


> As much as I’d like to see it be forced down the roads throat - I don’t think they’d have to votes to add that. And I suspect the September agreement will get pushed - with inflation and all the other supply chain problems I don’t see Congress having the appetite to just allow a strike to go ahead which would probably be the only way for the workers to get the 7 days.


there are some members of the GOP have said they would support Sanders plans now will they vote that way is another story.


----------



## lordsigma

GDRRiley said:


> there are some members of the GOP have said they would support Sanders plans now will they vote that way is another story.


Would have to be enough for the bill to pass the 60 vote margin with the amendment.


----------



## joelkfla

This is new -- from Politico:

On Tuesday evening, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the chamber will vote on legislation Wednesday to adopt the tentative agreement and then have a separate vote to add seven days of paid sick leave to it, after some Democrats threatened to vote against a bill that did not include additional sick leave. The package will then be sent to the Senate.​​If the House can pass an amendment to add sick leave before sending the bill to the Senate, that would appease the senators expressing concern about that issue. The question is whether that would cause other senators to oppose a quick vote.

The full Politico article:








Congress lines up behind Biden's strike plan — but it might not be quick


On Monday, Biden urged Congress to pass legislation to force the tentative agreement into effect.




www.politico.com


----------



## lordsigma

joelkfla said:


> This is new -- from Politico:
> 
> On Tuesday evening, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said the chamber will vote on legislation Wednesday to adopt the tentative agreement and then have a separate vote to add seven days of paid sick leave to it, after some Democrats threatened to vote against a bill that did not include additional sick leave. The package will then be sent to the Senate.​​If the House can pass an amendment to add sick leave before sending the bill to the Senate, that would appease the senators expressing concern about that issue. The question is whether that would cause other senators to oppose a quick vote.
> 
> The full Politico article:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Congress lines up behind Biden's strike plan — but it might not be quick
> 
> 
> On Monday, Biden urged Congress to pass legislation to force the tentative agreement into effect.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> www.politico.com


The bigger issue is how the Senate Republicans would react if that amendment goes in - it could be a much bigger thing than just delaying a quick vote. If the amendment is a non starter for McConnell and he then whips his caucus into a filibuster it could be tricky to get the 60 votes.


----------



## TrackWalker

Received today from BMWED 11/29/2022


WHITE HOUSE DECISION TO FORCE TENTATIVE AGREEMENT DOES NOT ADDRESS RAIL INDUSTRY DISEASE"The Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters is deeply disappointed by and disagrees with United States President Joseph R. Biden’s statement, calling upon Congress to pass legislation that would adopt tentative agreements between Railroad Workers and railroads that do not include paid sick days for Railroad Workers.

It is not enough to “share workers’ concerns.” _(My personal opinion: Sort of like "thoughts and prayers.")_ A call to Congress to act immediately to pass legislation that adopts tentative agreements that exclude paid sick leave ignores the Railroad Workers’ concerns. It both denies Railroad Workers their right to strike while also denying them of the benefit they would likely otherwise obtain if they were not denied their right to strike.

Additionally, passing legislation to adopt tentative agreements that exclude paid sick leave for Railroad Workers will not address rail service issues. Rather, it will worsen supply chain issues and further sicken, infuriate, and disenfranchise Railroad Workers as they continue shouldering the burdens of the railroads’ mismanagement. Indeed, the big corporations, the monopolies that control America – the robber baron railroads – have again profiteered from the problem they created and shifted the consequences of it onto the Railroad Workers, the customers, and the general public. This cannot continue. There must be a change. 

Regardless of what happens next, President Biden, Congress and the railroads need to know that this problem is not going away soon. The railroad is not a place to work while you’re sick. It’s dangerous. It requires full concentration, situational awareness, and decision-making. Because carrier management decided to egregiously reduce workforce, it’s more dangerous than ever, and the onus of that rests with them.

BMWED calls upon President Biden and any member of Congress that truly supports the Working Class to act swiftly by passing any sort of reforms and regulations that will provide paid sick leave for all Railroad Workers. BMWED will continue fighting for paid sick days for every Railroad Worker because it is unreasonable and unjust to insist a person perform critical work when they are unwell."

***
In my career with the RR I was always a gruntled employee but I've said before and I will continue to say it...1 month salary for the CEO equaled 38 years salary for me.


----------



## Rover

The reasons that Biden gave for not allowing the strike and insisting that Congress "force" the lame agreement the Union reps agreed to, was the damage to the economy, and national security concerns, etc....

Well, then, RR workers must actually be Federal Workers (without the Federal Benefits) and not know it, because practically speaking RR workers do not have a real option to actually go on strike, EVER.... because economy and national security, etc...


----------



## Rover

_"A letter from House Speaker Nancy Pelosi to Democratic colleagues promised two votes, reflecting the consternation she was hearing from members. The first vote will be on adopting the tentative labor agreement. The second will be on a measure to add seven days of paid sick leave for railroaders to the agreement."_









House votes to avert rail strike, impose deal on unions


WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. House moved urgently to head off the looming nationwide rail strike on Wednesday, passing a bill that would bind companies and workers to a proposed settlement that was reached in September but rejected by some of the 12 unions involved.




apnews.com


----------



## jis

Some more on Speaker Pelosi's plan and the_ Railway Age_'s take on it:









Strike-Averting Resolution: New Developments (UPDATED 9:30 AM, Nov. 30) - Railway Age


Just when it appeared that the House and Senate were in sync in moving a Joint Resolution implementing a tentative new wages, benefits and work rules agreement only partially ratified by railroad




www.railwayage.com


----------



## Dutchrailnut




----------



## jis

The House has passed the Bill and also the Addendum for 7 days paid sick leave









House votes to avert rail strike, provide workers paid sick leave


The House passed a bill on Wednesday to avert a railway strike, taking the first major step in avoiding a walkout of workers that would have drastic effects on the U.S. economy as it heads into the…




thehill.com


----------



## TrackWalker

jis said:


> The House has passed the Bill and also the Addendum for 7 days paid sick leave
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> House votes to avert rail strike, provide workers paid sick leave
> 
> 
> The House passed a bill on Wednesday to avert a railway strike, taking the first major step in avoiding a walkout of workers that would have drastic effects on the U.S. economy as it heads into the…
> 
> 
> 
> 
> thehill.com



It is heartening to read in this article, "Union leaders had asked for 15 days of paid sick leave..." rather than the typical, "Union leaders demanded..." 

Very rare, indeed.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

Rover said:


> The reasons that Biden gave for not allowing the strike and insisting that Congress "force" the lame agreement the Union reps agreed to, was the damage to the economy, and national security concerns, etc.... Well, then, RR workers must actually be Federal Workers (without the Federal Benefits) and not know it, because practically speaking RR workers do not have a real option to actually go on strike, EVER.... because economy and national security, etc...


This goes far beyond rail workers. Everyone gets sick but there is no mandatory sick leave for Americans at the national level. There was a push to resolve this during the pandemic but as with many other potential solutions the proponents did not have the votes to override a filibuster. If you really want mandatory paid sick leave complain to your congressperson and if they refuse vote them out.


----------



## Rover

Biden has demanded that the 1st Resolution be on his desk to sign by the weekend, with, or without the 2nd Resolution (with the Paid Sick Leave) being passed. See what they're doing there...

“Unless Congress wants to become the de facto endgame for future negotiations, any effort to put its thumb on the bargaining scale to artificially advantage either party, or otherwise obstruct a swift resolution, would be wholly irresponsible,” said Ian Jefferies, head of the AAR.

On the other hand, the Transportation Trades Department labor coalition that includes all the rail unions praised the vote to add sick time and told lawmakers who voted against it they had “abandoned your working class constituents.”

The focus now turns to the Senate where the timing for a vote is unclear. Labor Secretary Marty Walsh and Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg will meet with Democratic senators Thursday to discuss the rail negotiations.









House votes to avert rail strike, impose deal on unions


WASHINGTON (AP) — The U.S. House moved urgently to head off the looming nationwide rail strike on Wednesday, passing a bill that would bind companies and workers to a proposed settlement that was reached in September but rejected by some of the 12 unions involved.




apnews.com


----------



## Dutchrailnut

good article on why railroads opose sick days.








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


Wall Street’s new robber barons can’t make the trains run on time.




nymag.com


----------



## 33Nicolas

I'm not following this topic much, unfortunately but this newsletter I get from The Intercept covered the political and strike angle issue. 

This is mostly an FYI. 









Railroads Have Invested Heavily in Congress. They Need Their Payoff in the Senate.


A looming Senate vote on seven days of sick leave for rail workers puts pressure on a Republican Party that has increasingly positioned itself as a champion of the working class.




theintercept.com





I'd love to have a synapsis as to what is happening if anyone has a fast-read recap. 

Thanks,
Nicolas


----------



## Devil's Advocate

As for the Senate...








Senate passes legislation to avert a rail shutdown | CNN Politics


The Senate on Thursday passed legislation to avert a rail shutdown following a grave warning from President Joe Biden about the economic danger posed by a strike.




www.cnn.com


----------



## lordsigma

There will not be a strike. Bernie’s 7 day sick leave amendment failed and the bill is passing overwhelmingly. Vote isn’t done yet but already 69 yes.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

lordsigma said:


> There will not be a strike. Bernie’s 7 day sick leave amendment failed and the bill is passing overwhelmingly. Vote isn’t done yet but already 69 yes.


Most Senators and Representatives were willing to vote _for_ the provision to grant RR workers seven days of paid sick leave per year. Unfortunately thanks to blanket use of the filibuster a majority is no longer enough to pass most bills and allows a minority to dictate most legislative outcomes. 



> The proposal to give workers seven days of sick leave, which was championed by Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and other liberal Democrats, failed to pick up enough Republican support to overcome a 60-vote threshold set for adopting the measure and fell 52-43. Six Republicans voted for the sick leave measure: Sens. Mike Braun (Ind.), Ted Cruz (Texas), Lindsey Graham (S.C.), Josh Hawley (Mo.), John Kennedy (La.) and Marco Rubio (Fla.). Sen. Joe Manchin (W.Va.) was the only Democrat to vote against it.











Senate rejects proposal to give rail workers seven days of paid sick leave


The Senate voted on Thursday to reject a proposal to give railway workers seven days of sick leave, a benefit that was left out of a labor deal between freight rail companies and unionized wor…




thehill.com


----------



## jis

Now we know why Pelosi did the sick leave thing as a separate Bill. Once the Senate passes this Bill it is done. No more shuttling between the House and the Senate.


----------



## lordsigma

Final vote 80 - 15. It’s on its way now to Biden.


----------



## lordsigma

jis said:


> Now we know why Pelosi did the sick leave thing as a separate Bill. Once the Senate passes this Bill it is done. No more shuttling between the House and the Senate.


Yep that was smart - if the amendment had been adopted in the senate the bill probably would have had to go back to the house for an up or down vote.


----------



## GDRRiley

lordsigma said:


> Yep that was smart - if the amendment had been adopted in the senate the bill probably would have had to go back to the house for an up or down vote.


I'd argue it wasn't smart, you could have forced their hands a bit more to get 7 days of sick leave


----------



## zephyr17

Schumer scheduled 3 votes today, one to extend negotiations by 60 days, one for the 7 days sick leave, and one for the contract negotiated in September. Per @lordsigma's post above the third one on the contract itself is passing with flying colors.

Freight rail strike averted, after frenzied negotiations

Also, per the article, it looks like AFL-CIO officials are giving some political cover to the Democrats on mandating a settlement, saying effectively there was no point to extending negotiations due to rail management recalcitrance.


----------



## lordsigma

GDRRiley said:


> I'd argue it wasn't smart, you could have forced their hands a bit more to get 7 days of sick leave


It would have just delayed the inevitable. This was the cleanest way to allow for the 7 day vote while not delaying this and risking the disruption. Unfortunately the votes weren’t there for the 7 days. Don’t get me wrong I would have liked to see them get it for sure. But I understand the politics of why they did it the way they did for better or worse.


----------



## jis

GDRRiley said:


> I'd argue it wasn't smart, you could have forced their hands a bit more to get 7 days of sick leave


It most likely would not have worked. The entire bill would have failed and people's raises would have been delayed indefinitely, until the next Congress convened and got its act together etc. etc. Even the Unions did not want that as the other proposal to just pass a 60 day cooling off period for another round of negotiations to incorporate the sick days in the agreement that was vigorously opposed by the Unions suggests. The Republicans overall were in the pockets of the Railroads and would never let a non-negotiated position forced down the throats of the Railroads at this point. At least that is my understanding.


----------



## zephyr17

GDRRiley said:


> I'd argue it wasn't smart, you could have forced their hands a bit more to get 7 days of sick leave


Would not have passed filibuster, the strike would have gone forward, and the Republican's could have hung the blame for the vast disruptions of a rail strike on Democratic "overreaching" when there was a deal in hand that the Republicans would support.

It was smart politically for the Democrats to split it. It showed their constituencies they supported the additional sick leave, and left the Republicans to shoot it down and take the blame for its absence.

Do not get me wrong. I support additional sick leave. In fact, I support the union's demand for 15 days, not just 7. But from a political standpoint, splitting it out and letting it lose was the right play. Once it came fully into the political arena, its fate was sealed. The unions couldn't get 15 days out of rail management in negotiations, they barely got one under the threat of imminent strike in September. They only way they possibly could have gotten it was to have been allowed to strike, causing vast disruption to the economy.

That does not change my opinion that rail management has been unconscionable throughout this.


----------



## joelkfla

GDRRiley said:


> I'd argue it wasn't smart, you could have forced their hands a bit more to get 7 days of sick leave


Pelosi is known for her political savvy and vote counting. From that perspective, it was smart.


----------



## GDRRiley

zephyr17 said:


> Would not have passed filibuster, the strike would have gone forward, and the Republican's could have hung the blame for the vast disruptions of a rail strike on Democratic "overreaching" when there was a deal in hand that the Republicans would support.


It may not have but passed but then the blame game can be played both ways. the house could have easily come together today and passed a bill without the sick days.


----------



## jis

GDRRiley said:


> It may not have but passed but then the blame game can be played both ways. the house could have easily come together today and passed a bill without the sick days.


And what if it did not pass?  We have seen enough cases where something that passed in the morning would have failed to pass the same evening. None of the positions are static. One has to trust the guts of the likes if Pelosi and Schumer who have done this for a lot longer than amateurs like me and you.


----------



## zephyr17

GDRRiley said:


> It may not have but passed but then the blame game can be played both ways. the house could have easily come together today and passed a bill without the sick days.


The blame game _was_ played both ways. The House passed a separate bill with 7 days sick leave, supporting their constituencies. Senate Majority Leader Schumer scheduled a vote putting that bill before the Senate. The Senate Republicans shot it down, and take responsibility.

That is how the game is played.


----------



## Dutchrailnut

Senators with unlimited sick days vote down paid leave for railway workers


Though the measure ultimately failed, it did receive some bipartisan support.




www.newsweek.com


----------



## Devil's Advocate

GDRRiley said:


> I'd argue it wasn't smart, you could have forced their hands a bit more to get 7 days of sick leave


The RR's knew the House would be on their side in a few weeks so it's unlikely that they would have buckled now. Most current Senators (and Representatives) voted for guaranteed paid sick leave for RR workers so it’s possible this can be fixed at some point in the future.


----------



## alpha3

God, this is just unconscionable. How can major companies like these railroads not give workers paid sick time??????? During my years in the airlines industry we accrued sk hours as time went on; so much the better if you didn't get sick, you rolled the hours over to the next year. Great for me, when I had cancer surgery I took two and a half months off, and had enough hours to cover it. 

Robber barons, indeed.


----------



## MARC Rider

The battle may have been lost, but not the war. Mandatory sick leave for all. Looks like we have a hot political issue for the 2024 election.


----------



## lordsigma

It’s also important to note the other realities - inflation is a huge problem right now. Anything that could disrupt supply chains and contribute to inflation right now is not going to be palatable to the politicians. To be honest the biggest enemy of the workers here is the present economic issues and inflation. People might have been more willing to let a strike happen if not for these circumstances.


----------



## zetharion

With Congress guranteed to always vote in favor of the railroads why would they ever bother negotiating contracts? They know that Congress will not let the workers strike to get what they want so what incentive is there for any real negotiations on their part?

The paid sick leave bill will go nowhere, its too anti corporate to be allowed.


----------



## Devil's Advocate

lordsigma said:


> To be honest the biggest enemy of the workers here is the present economic issues and inflation.


We're talking about a problem that has existed since the 1800's and inflation is nowhere near the apocalyptic levels that would be necessary to substantiate this claim.



lordsigma said:


> People might have been more willing to let a strike happen if not for these circumstances.


In what way would a December strike have led to more paid sick leave? For what logical reason would railroads have capitulated just before their hand was strengthened in January?



zetharion said:


> With Congress guranteed to always vote in favor of the railroads why would they ever bother negotiating contracts? They know that Congress will not let the workers strike to get what they want so what incentive is there for any real negotiations on their part? The paid sick leave bill will go nowhere, its too anti corporate to be allowed.


A majority of current Senators and Representatives were in favor of paid sick leave. We were only six votes away from overriding a filibuster. That is damn close and worth remembering.


----------



## daybeers

jis said:


> Now we know why Pelosi did the sick leave thing as a separate Bill. Once the Senate passes this Bill it is done. No more shuttling between the House and the Senate.


Yes, so Congress can take their paid leave


----------



## Matthew H Fish

I left a Facebook group over this today, because someone posted a bunch of jargon about the "violence of the ruling class". Probably a LARPing college kid. 
It is a complicated issue for several reasons, and some of the articles I read about it seem very...overblown. Like, The Guardian had an article with the title "Biden just knifed labor unions in the back" which seems like hyperbole to me. 
There are three reasons why I think that this makes sense. Not even that I agree with it, but that I think it makes sense:
1. Most of the unions (if not most of their members), had ratified the agreement. Even the ones who didn't were close in the vote. Most of what the unions were seeking was granted. The remaining item was paid leave, which is a really reasonable thing to want. But it was at least a partial victory for the unions, including a retroactive pay raise. 
2. The people that would suffer most from this are the poorest people, both because it is going to disrupt employment, and also because if there is inflation in the price of food, they are going to be hit the hardest. Which brings up a second issue---railroad workers are union workers, but they are also paid more like professionals. I've read different estimates (people on here can probably correct me about this) but engineers/conductors make anywhere from around $60-100,000 a year. There are many people in the US making much less than that. It turns into a decision about a small amount of workers that are already making in the high five or low six figures, versus millions and millions of retail and other low wage earners that might be making $20,000 a year or less. I can certainly understand the utilitarian argument that they are weighing a few hundred thousand people who are already middle class against millions of people who are hovering next to poverty. 
3. At least in the house, the vote included most of the leave provisions that were the next thing that the Unions wanted to win. The problem is that the Senate is much more conservative. And that is something that neither the Administration or the House can do anything about. And the incoming house is more conservative. So they basically had three weeks to think of something. 
I am not saying it is a perfect solution, but the people who are suggesting, quite seriously, that "the solution is just to nationalize the railroads" are...playing Fantasy Football, not trying to actually come up with solutions.
So my opinion is---the Unions got most of what they wanted, the Democratic Administration and Congress had limited political resources, and had to use them to help millions of people at or below the poverty line that could have been devastated. 
At least...that is one way to look at it.


----------



## Matthew H Fish

And here is another issue that I am not seeing addressed elsewhere:
Why is there a labor shortage in the railroads? I can believe that companies are squeezing their workers, but I am sure that the companies would also like to have more employees. I think that the shortage in railroad workers, and difficult hours, is the same thing that is happening in other sectors, especially health care. As the population ages, there are many key sectors where employee shortages are going to start making working hours more and more difficult. As much as misconduct and mismanagement on big company's part plays a role, there is also a systemic problem which involves training more workers.


----------



## GDRRiley

Matthew H Fish said:


> Why is there a labor shortage in the railroads? I can believe that companies are squeezing their workers, but I am sure that the companies would also like to have more employees. I think that the shortage in railroad workers, and difficult hours, is the same thing that is happening in other sectors, especially health care. As the population ages, there are many key sectors where employee shortages are going to start making working hours more and more difficult. As much as misconduct and mismanagement on big company's part plays a role, there is also a systemic problem which involves training more workers.


Because railroads have spent the last 6 years cutting every bit of costs they can as part of PSR. From operating crews and mechanics to locomotives and car inspectors. their only goal is to pay wall street ever increasing profits. The metrics the use to show they are doing well have been flawed sense their creation 100 years ago.

Completely ignoring the fact in the next 3-5 years crews who were hired on around 2000 in the large coal boom from the west coast are going to be hitting retirement age.
Shop crews are being told to work 18 hour days because there isn't enough staff. the only reason road crews aren't working longer is because they are limited to 12 hours.

The American class 1 (because CN and CP do it a bit differently) refuse to spend money on longer sidings to fit trains which means 50s era siding tracks can not fit the ever growing train lengths. That results in crews often timing out sitting at the end of a double track or in a long siding, requiring a 3rd crew to bused in and resulting in cargo being 12+ hours late


----------



## joelkfla

GDRRiley said:


> Because railroads have spent the last 6 years cutting every bit of costs they can as part of PSR. From operating crews and mechanics to locomotives and car inspectors. their only goal is to pay wall street ever increasing profits. The metrics the use to show they are doing well have been flawed sense their creation 100 years ago.
> 
> Completely ignoring the fact in the next 3-5 years crews who were hired on around 2000 in the large coal boom from the west coast are going to be hitting retirement age.
> Shop crews are being told to work 18 hour days because there isn't enough staff. the only reason road crews aren't working longer is because they are limited to 12 hours.
> 
> The American class 1 (because CN and CP do it a bit differently) refuse to spend money on longer sidings to fit trains which means 50s era siding tracks can not fit the ever growing train lengths. That results in crews often timing out sitting at the end of a double track or in a long siding, requiring a 3rd crew to bused in and resulting in cargo being 12+ hours late


And the class 1's don't care if shipments are late because they have a captive customer base.

The FRA held hearings about this 6 months ago, but it seems that despite a lot of anger, nothing has come of it so far.


----------



## lordsigma

Devil's Advocate said:


> A majority of current Senators and Representatives were in favor of paid sick leave. We were only six votes away from overriding a filibuster. That is damn close and worth remembering.


It is worth remembering and just because they didn't win the battle here doesn't mean they should give up the fight for this in the long term - hopefully eventually this benefit will be provided. The roads are going to get to the point where they can't find anyone that wants to work there and hopefully that will increase the pressure over time. And it probably in actuality is more like 5 votes away as there were some senators that weren't there to vote - such as Warnock who is campaigning for the runoff. I think we'll see it eventually - and not decades from now.


----------



## jis

MODERATOR'S NOTE: Since the current set of rail labor negotiations are over and a new set of contracts have now been written into law we will lock this thread as we tend to try to limit political discussions to the minimum necessary on this forum. If and when significant developments take place on the rail labor contract negotiation front we will either reopen this thread or start a suitable new thread.

Thank you for your understanding, cooperation and participation.


----------

