Why did republicans kill paid leave for rail workers?

Discussion in 'Politics' started by JimHastertTrumpMooreGaetz, Dec 10, 2022.

  1. House passed both rail worker requests (thanks to dems), the 24% raises and the paid leave, but senate republicans killed paid leave and would only pass the 24% raises.

    Raises (yes/no)
    House (290/142) - 67.1% yes
    D (211/8) - 96.7% yes
    R (79/134) - 37.0% yes
    Senate (80/20) - 80% yes
    D (44/6) - 88% yes
    R (37/13) - 74% yes

    Paid leave (yes/no)
    House (221/211) - 51.1% yes
    D (218/1) - 99.5% yes
    R (3/210) - 1.4% yes

    Senate (52/48) - 52% yes
    D (47/4) - 94% yes
    R (6/43) - 12% yes



    Chronological order
    11/30 1:02pm (raises, House)
    Roll Call 490 Roll Call 490, Bill Number: H. J. Res. 100, 117th Congress, 2nd Session
    11/30 1:20pm (paid leave, House)
    Roll Call 491 Roll Call 491, Bill Number: H. Con. Res. 119, 117th Congress, 2nd Session
    12/1 (paid leave, Senate)
    U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 117th Congress - 2nd Session
    12/1 (raises, Senate)
    U.S. Senate: U.S. Senate Roll Call Votes 117th Congress - 2nd Session

    Why do republican politicians who have unlimited amount of sick days vote against blue collar workers getting sick days?
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  2. They probably thought meddling in union affairs is not their job, because it isn't.
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  3. #3 TimJ, Dec 11, 2022
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2022
    The agreement passed by Congress was approved by eight of 12 transportation unions involved in negotiations. The four dissenting unions, representing about 100,000 rail workers, said the deal was unfair because it included insufficient paid-sick leave time. They had asked for seven paid sick days, but Congress did not include their demand in the bill, despite an effort from progressive lawmakers and even some conservatives like Sen. Josh Hawley, R-Mo., and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., to amend the legislation.
    Just a guess. But, maybe this is why.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  4. I read where the two main reasons were that it is not congress's job to interfere in union negotiations and there was also a lot of pork in the bill also that had nothing to do with the issue. I didn't read the bill but since almost every single bill passed has pork in it, I believe it.
     
    • Agree Agree x 4
  5. not according to the Railway Labor Act and they had no issue meddling in union affairs when they passed the raises?
    senate republicans voted the paid leave ammendment down, thats why it wasnt included in the raises bill
    no pork in the ammendment, just at least 7 days of paid sick leave and ensured you couldnt get punished for using it, the ammendment is only a page long, here take a peek
    Screenshot_20221211-132652_Chrome.jpg

    congress has power to arbitrate rail and airline union agreements in event of strike in order to mitigate economic fallout from prolonged strike



    im guna say that GOP voted down the ammendment bc it came from the left, specifially bernie sanders. it has no pork in it, well within their duty to act on it (they still voted for the raises), so imo its just another example of GOP obstructing as much as they can from anything coming from the left at the expense of the american ppl, bc giving the left wins is seen as a slippery slope to finanicial loss for the donor class(?), idk, i mean we talking voting down 7 days of paid sick leave when congress has unlimited, its not a big ask, but cant let the left have that victory lap??? cant really see any other valid reason?
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  6. Well, my congressman, a lefty said there is pork in it. I'll take his word for it rather than something you came up with...
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Funny Funny x 1
  7. #7 Possuum, Dec 12, 2022
    Last edited: Dec 12, 2022
    this letter is from the AFL-CIO TTD railroad union website. note the endorsement of many different rail associated and federally regulated industries this negotiation involved.

    https://smart-union.org/afl-cio-ttd...is-fixed-and-rail-workers-are-treated-fairly/

    In his letter the AFL-CIO claims republicans are largely right-to-work, anti-union thinkers. one would have to dig very deep but the bunny holes to go down are: who are the majority owners of public traded and privately held railroad companies, and what political affiliation are the majority stock holders/ownership individuals. they're one or both of either miserly or they're anti-union who contribute to like-minded republicans in congress.

    at the end of debate it boils down to money. there's also a history of railroad retirement, tax liability, and other special treasury status post 1935. idk if that really has much to do with this issue but the fedZ have always treated railroad companies with a different tax status than the rest of "us". there's actually a distinct line on a 1040 form that requires entering railroad derived income because of how the irs decides to tax it. if we know the irs is involved we know railroads and their unions are likely dragged down in over regulation.

    edit: if there was pork in the bill i support rejecting it not even knowing what was in it. it is ridiculous to try and pass legislation on a single issue without the bill having 'X' amendments of bills which have nothing to do with the original issue. this happens all of the time.

    on the surface it reads like rail workers have some tough working conditions that normal employees would not have to endure.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
  8. They take credit for infrastructure deals that they promised for years but voted against when Brandon got it done. Same old shit, obstruct and blame others.
     
    • Informative Informative x 1
  9. Same exact thing from both parties dobro49. In my opinion neither party works for the middle class tax slaves. It was Obama that signed the bill into law that fined those on SS for not having pharmacuetical drug coverage. I couldn't afford it. Now, I have a 70$ monthly fine taken from my dwindling SS check for the rest of my life. The bill was created by George Bush. Therefore neither party gives 2 shits about the poor middle class. Now, you can all justify why one party line is so much better than the other.
     
    • Agree Agree x 3
    • Like Like x 1
  10. #10 KillaNugz12, Dec 14, 2022
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2022
    well the "congress" just showed why and how unions can be taken over. As a union pipefitter there's a thing called Presidential and National union maintenance agreement. Where that the jobs your on under this agreement DO NOT STRIKE if a strike is voted on by ones union in the jurisdiction because its considered critical infrastructure.

    I, as a union member do not agree with what the federal government did. THEY aka DEMOCRAT'S just acted REPUBLICAN AS FUCK breaking down basic union rights and rules.

    AND MOST OFF ALL.... please people... public funded UNIONS are different then SELF FUNDED UNIONS like most construction trade UNIONS are and operate!!!!! stop getting tricked in supporting busting these DIFFERENT types of unions down that arnt the same and fucking the rest of us BLUE COLLAR workers.


    I hope i am seeing the death of the Blue and Red.... lets get everyone's head out of their own ass and come together with integrity an justice for all.

    TOKE TIME:smoking:
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • Informative Informative x 1
    • Friendly Friendly x 1
  11. #11 Possuum, Dec 14, 2022
    Last edited: Dec 14, 2022

    I don't know much about laws/rules/governance of unions. the union in question with the railroad is a self-funded union, yes? there is a line on a 1040 form to report railroad retirement income and yada, yada, the irs decides if it's taxable or not.

    If you know, what is it about this railroad union that makes it so different from another union such as yours that the irs looks at the retirement income differently, and what, if anything does the way the railroad union is setup have to do with this government intervention? should the railroad union in question be reclassified as a "critical infrastructure" union ( if i'm asking it correctly)?

    I'm curious and am always looking to learn something new.

    edit: if you don't know that's kewl. not trying to put you on the spot.
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Informative Informative x 1
  12. #12 KillaNugz12, Dec 15, 2022
    Last edited: Dec 15, 2022
    I think for sure the Railroad jobs are critical for the operation and infrastructure of this country. Like nuclear plants and refineries and power houses(electrical generating plants) are a couple of the jobs in my line of work that we still show up to work if we authorize a strike. They are deem essential and just like the railroad unions got fucked in their bargaining rights we did in the past to. What we do is just take turns of half the work fource calling in sick in turns lol. If we have to man that job during a strike we will but we will sure as fuck slow it down.

    As for being a self funded union i don't know any of the details of the railroad workers but like mine all our benefits and retirement is paid by still working members. If we have no members currently working putting money into each fund ain't no retire getting a check. Another example is mine has 2 credit union branches that's for members only and all money from member's.

    Teachers unions for one is publicly funded and paid for union.

    lmao stoned and tried to type that all out if anything i said helps hopefully. Plus please don't mind the granmarr. My brain works faster then my fingers.
     
    • Informative Informative x 2
    • Like Like x 1
  13. thanks @KillaNugz12. i reckon it will get worked out. from the little i've read about the rail workers issues it reads like they have a few valid complaints. cheers mate! i'm medicated right there with you :smoking:
     
    • Like Like x 2
    • Winner Winner x 1
  14. Always amusing to see what things Republicans decide to intervene with and which not.

    They claim to be the party of "small government" but we all know they only say that to placate their gullible followers who can't think much deeper than "government bad".
     
    • Agree Agree x 1
  15. I aim to amuse. I do agree tho "government bad".
     
    • Like Like x 2

Share This Page