Joe Biden to join picket line with striking auto workers in Michigan
WASHINGTON - President Joe Biden will travel to Michigan on Tuesday to join United Auto Workers on the picket line in one of the most extraordinary displays of support a president has ever taken in the middle of a labor dispute.
Biden's trip comes after United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain invited Biden to the picket line in remarks Friday as the UAW ratchets up its strike against the nation's three largest automakers.
"Tuesday, I’ll go to Michigan to join the picket line and stand in solidarity with the men and women of UAW as they fight for a fair share of the value they helped create," Biden said in a statement. "It’s time for a win-win agreement that keeps American auto manufacturing thriving with well-paid UAW jobs."
Further details about Biden's trip, including which striking site he will visit, remain unclear.
Former President Donald Trump, the frontrunner to capture the 2024 Republican nomination, has said he plans to meet with striking auto workers in the Detroit area Wednesday in a push to court rank-and-file union members and other blue-collar workers for his 2024 run.
Biden faced pressure from progressives to join UAW workers on the picket line after Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Sen. Bernie Sanders and others each traveled to striking sites this week.
For the first time Friday, Fain publicly invited Biden to the picket line.
"We invite and encourage everyone who supports our cause to join us on the picket line − from our friends and families, all the way up to the president of the United States," Fain said.
Biden faces a political tightrope with the UAW strike. He has decades of close ties with organized labor and said he wants to be known as the "most pro-union president" in U.S history. But Biden also wants to avoid national economic repercussions that could result from a prolonged strike.
Biden has endorsed UAW's demands for higher pay, saying last week that "record corporate profits, which they have, should be shared by record contracts for the UAW." But at the request of the UAW, Biden has stayed out of negotiations with Ford Motor Co., General Motors and Stellantis.
Fain extended the invitation after announcing plans to expand UAW's strike to 38 new sites across 20 states. He said the union has made good progress with Ford Motor Co. this week, but General Motors and Stellantis "will need some pushing."
White House press secretary Jean-Pierre said the White House "will do everything that we possibly can to help in any way that the parties would like us to."
A White House team led by Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su and White House adviser Gene Sperling was originally scheduled to visit Detroit this week. But the trip was scrapped after UAW's leadership made it clear they did not want help at the negotiating table.
As a Democrat who voted for Biden because he didn't want to see fascism, but was very sore about doing so because Biden is a milquetoast moderate at best...
This is sick. Props.
He's been a lot more progressive in his policies than I think people thought he'd be. He's not flashy about it though, so people tend to only hear the complaining that comes from much louder people
Just remember, this isn't Biden having a change of mind necessarily, this is more about Biden answering to pressure. The reason why Biden behaves like this is mostly because the UAW has witheld their endorsment for him, saying that "Biden has to pick a side, either the working class, or the billionaires", that "he has to earn his endorsment" and that "they expect actions, not just words".
Although also to be fair, there's a long line of democratic politicians NOT bowing to progressive pressure (presumably over their donors). So this is a massive improvement.
This is a first step. No one should be satisfied with this alone.
No one ever said anything about "satisfied" Jesus Christ you people are exhausting.
1. You will never get everything you want immediately. It will take a series of steps over time. Probably lifetimes.
2. If you don't reward politicians for each step they take, THEY WILL STOP TAKING STEPS AND YOU WILL GET NOTHING.
Sorry. Forgot we needed to grovel and worship every time someone does the sort of nothing centrists like. Characterizing a photo op as a massive improvement is hogwash.
Do you ever get tired of being a cynic?
Announcing everything as a huge improvement when it obviously isn't breeds cynicism, especially when you expect everyone to accept the announcement itself as the improvement. That's not progress; it's a bill of goods.
If he's willing to concede that very reasonable point and fight for the UAW, I think he'll earn it.
Did we get buttery emailed with misinformation?
Nah, we just got Hunter Biden dick pics on the House floor.
Ditto
I might actually vote for him if he does this
Otherwise what, you're voting for Trump?
Nah not voting for Biden. It doesn't matter anyway. Blue state and all that
What about the down ballot races? And honestly, your choice is trump or no trump. Not voting for Biden is pretty close to accepting fascism because you didn't get your perfect candidate.
Lol. I consider Biden the accelerationist choice.
That would be trump
Interesting I hadn't considered that
Vote anyways, dude. If you're in a blue state, it's probably super easy, barely an inconvenience.
He sold out the rail unions not even a year ago
He ended up getting them what they wanted just a couple months later. Check out the top comment threads here
He got them some sick days. A far cry from having their demands met. Particularly in the aspects concerning safety
Copying my response to the other guy here too:
Safety is absolutely a serious concern, but can you show me some sources where safety was a sticking point leading up to the strike vote? The union literature from the time is very focused on sick leave
No he didn't, one of their largest complaints was safety. Democrats downplayed their strike as 'sick days' so it sounded like their demands were trivial.
Safety is absolutely a serious concern, but can you show me some sources where safety was a sticking point leading up to the strike vote? The union literature from the time is very focused on sick leave
As per usual, crickets.
the fact dumbasses here are splitting hairs around sick leave, safety, and insane schedules is absurd. All are serious problems that shouldn't exist.
and it was viscerally demonstrated with multiple train crashes occurring during the period the unions were threatening to strike.
When someone says that sick days weren't a major strike demand and falsely claim without any evidence that safety was the biggest issue, it isn't splitting hairs to ask for proof. If the distinctions don't matter, then makes no sense to complain about safety vs sick leave.
Which train crashes are you referring to?
No, their largest complaints were sick days and a brutal scheduling policy. That's what I remember from looking into this at the time, and what I'm finding looking into it now too.
Can you show me where getting 7 sick days per year was what the unions were looking for?
The railroad guys got dealt a realllllllllly shitty hand with that one.
Nope, he got them their sick days. He kept the pressure on even after imposing the contract. Directly from the IBEW union:
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
Yeah...
Biden isn't pro union. He's pro-re-election.
I'm glad he's going out there to support the workers. But let's not look past the fact that Biden forced the rail union to get fucked in the ass.
I'm totally OK with pro-re-election as long as he sees the direction the winds are blowing. They aren't blowing towards conservatism or neo-liberal economic policy, even if that's where he stands. Meanwhile most of the republican candidates in the primary are saying how greedy the workers are... I'll take Biden. He's not my first choice, and I don't even like his political position on almost anything, but he is doing far better than I expected.
The day after the general election the direction of those winds will change, they always do
I doubt it. Biden is nothing if not a party man. I'm certain he wants his legacy to be that he brought the democratic party into new strength. He'll accomplish that by pushing for more progressive policy that actually helps people. Will he fully go against corporate interest over people? Of course not. He won't be as bad as you're implying though.
He's doing the same thing Obama did in his third year, sounding progressive as hell with lots of populous talk, gets reelected and turns full on corporate owned neolib.
Biden was pushing for unions before the current pro-union zeitgeist bubbled up, which I think started with the first Starbucks successfully unionizing at the end of 2022. The CHIPS act and IRA both required recipients to employ unionized labor.
First Starbucks unionization in that movement was Dec 2021, not end of 2022.
I ain't a Joe Biden fanboy, but I would like to say if Bernie got elected president and he did this then the streets would go wild. This is insanely (good) that a president is showing so much solidarity and support to striking workers. This gets eyes and ears about the UAW strike, people see this support, they become emboldened, and now start thinking, "Hey, maybe we should strike or unionize..."
This is such a huge win for America and leftism in general. Let's Go Dark Brandon
Very true. I see Biden as just another neoliberal capitalist, but tbh this is very good to see. Unions are great for society and the working class, and to see a president openly support this is great to see.
As a liberal, centrist, capitalism friendly Democrat...
UNIONS👏ARE👏GOOD👏FOR👏THE👏ECONOMY
Careful, advocating for a market economy will get all the down votes on lemmy.
Yeah. He sure showed solidarity when he broke up the train strike....
Yes, he stopped the train strike. He then worked with the rail unions for weeks negotiating with the bosses and now the rail workers have the sick days that was one of the big drivers of them going on strike for. Here's the statement straight from the IBEW.
They literally thank Biden's administration directly for applying pressure in the weeks after blocking the strike that eventually led to the union getting what it was asking for. I'm no big fan of Biden's, but trying to paint him as anti labor especially using him blocking the rail strike is just patently untrue. With everything that's been happening around Biden's NLRB under Lina Khan he is easily the most pro worker president we've had in decades.
Wow legit had no idea about this, guess the story wasn't as sexy 🤷♂️ thank you for sharing
Unfortunately he followed the law. The Railway Labor Act of 1926 prevents railroad workers from striking. They instead have to follow the exact process that was followed and continue working while in negotiation. As a rail worker, to go on strike is to quit your job.
Edit: After rereading, the RLA 1926 will allow for "self-help" remedies after a minimum of 60 days have elapsed from the time the National Mediation Board begins it's process. This allows 30 days of NMB mediation, followed by 30 days for a Presidential Emergency Board investigation, either of which can be extended and with the caveat that
100 year old law written by the people who caused the great depression.
Yeah, labor protections in the US are long past due for an upgrade, and if they can't strike then the process needs to be weighted in the workers favor a lot more.
It's not like laws automatically expire.
Bernie would have stood with the rail workers as well. This is makes his current stand seem less sincere and more like a photo op.
Take a look at some of the top voted comments, Biden ended up getting the rail works what they were asking for 2 weeks later
He did do that. I feel like there were some behind the scenes stuff where he had to do that.
But they could have gotten a hell of a lot more if they did strike
Perfect is the enemy of good
Choose the lesser of two evils every time and you'll end up with the most evil imaginable.
Was coming here to complain about this compared to the rail strike - found out that Biden actually got the rail strikers what they wanted in this thread.
Now I've got to complain something else. Hmmm, how about how Biden isn't proud of his union support. Make noise! Show that unions actually work! Stop acting like unions winning is something is something that you should be ashamed of and hide. Good, still got to complain about something.
The auto strike has a 75% approval rating. That's way bigger than most things in US politics. Not supporting the auto strike is a losing issue.
You would think so, but then you've got some of the GOP candidates who missed that memo. Tim Scott (R-SC), taking his strategy from the ghost of Reagan, has said the strikers should all be fired. And Nikki Haley says that Biden is too pro-union and it's his fault unions are asking for more than poor, long-suffering auto companies can afford.
This is great to see!
Biden may not be a progressive as an individual but his administration's agenda is easily the most progressive of my lifetime--and I was old enough to vote for Obama twice. It would be even more so if Congress gave him progressive bills to sign, too!
So far the biggest positive story of 2023 is the massive increase in labor action across multiple industries.
I'm about the same age as you. It's not saying much to be the most progressive administration of our lifetime. We haven't had any progressive administration. Obama wasn't bad, but it'd be a stretch to call it progressive. It did boost Healthcare some, and it helped LGBTQ+ rights, but not much else. Pretty much every republican has been regressive though.
I feel like I voted for Bernie instead of Biden. Wtf is going on. This is amazing.
Perhaps the man's turned a new leaf in his old age. He ain't perfect, sure, but I'd be lying if I said he wasn't far better than I (or most others) had expected.
This is less about Biden coming to his senses, at the end of the day, Biden does what is politically viable and smart for him. Sure, maybe he has become more progressive, but I think this has more to do with the UAW new militant approach.
And one important thing, which puts a lot of pressure on Biden, is that the UAW has recently always endorsed the democrats, but they now have withheld endorsment for Biden until "he has earned it" and "prooves his solidarity with the working class, not the billionaire class".
And Trump is also trying to pander to the union, so Biden is in a lot of pressure to gain the union's endorsment.
I think that whatever the reason is, though, we can accept this as a very good thing. The power of the presidency extends beyond the strict executive authority provisions, and we should support whenever that power is used to advance the interests of middle and working class people.
Absolutely, this is a good thing. The only reason why I mention it is so that people remember to keep up the pressure and don't just start to blindly trust Biden to "do the right thing" all by himself. Biden needs "encouragement" and if he doesn't get it from the unions, he will get it from some industry lobby.
I fear the politician who has never changed their mind more than the one who has. It's a really important skill to be able to accept your beliefs were wrong and adapt with new information.
Biden has been the most progressive president in my lifetime, and that's because the party has moved leftward too.
Cringe. I'm no berniestan but he's been out there protesting for decades. Biden was in the senate approving rapist supreme court justices.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2019/3/27/18262482/joe-biden-anita-hill-2020-christine-blasey-ford-brett-kavanaugh
A justice he helped put on the bench of the supreme court who just recently was revealed to be taking off the books gifts and bribes from billionaires.
Oh forgot to say that justice also voted to repeal roe vs wade.
Remember rail strike?
You mean when he in the three months afterwards helped the workers and the union to make sure they got their demands, while also not causing an actual rail shutdown that would cause massive harm to multiple areas?
See if that's true that's sad because that is the best possible outcome and I haven't heard a damn thing about it.
Here's about rail: https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
Biden seems to do a lot of things that don't get much attention or unfairly get bad attention. For example he drastically reduced number of drone strikes (trump actually increased them after Obama, but blocked reporting).
When he lifted sanctions on NS2 he got a lot of bad flak, some even from democrats. Only months later we learned that Russia was planning attack on Ukraine and he was doing it to repair our relationship with Germany. He managed to persuade them to drop it themselves which is how we supposed to deal with allies.
“Without making a big show of it, Joe Biden and members of his administration in the Transportation and Labor departments have been working continuously to get guaranteed paid sick days for all railroad workers."
I'm glad yo hear that not everything has to be a show, but this would be a great message to get out to the progressive democrats
I'm a bit torn on it. Yes it would be good to publicize, but I really like that he prioritized getting shit done over publicizing it. That's what good leaders should do.
Arguably, this is something that progressive Democrats should be aware of if they truly care about the issue, and aren't just looking for talking points.
Why not do both? The executive branch can walk and chew gum.
I guess it's naive idealism on my part.
Here's an article on it: https://www.axios.com/2023/02/09/white-house-biden-administration-railroad-companies-paid-sick-leave
Wow he ended Precision Scheduled Railroading? Didn't hear that /s
He got them some sick days, but definitely not the whole of their demands.
Plus the original demand was 15 days of sick leave, and then a tepid 7-day sick leave proposal was sent to die in congress. It's not a miracle that Biden was able to get 5 days. Breaking the strike with state power and then casting crumbs in our direction was a flex on the working class saying "nah you'll only get what we allow you to have. You don't deserve to demand shit."
I'm not holding out any hope that this is anything more than a PR campaign like kneeling cops and kente scarves.
It's a complete failure of his administration that he said absolutely nothing about this and just allowed everyone to believe that he was against those workers for months.
I found this out a week or so ago and it baffled me that he just said nothing.
It's been a general thing that his administration has just done the positive things without hyping them up or crowing about them on the news.
He learned nothing from Trump when that's the one lesson Trump should have taught him: Brag.
I mean... Trump didn't get re-elected. So you could argue that it didn't help.
Maybe I'm uninformed, but how are rail strikes, which are common in my country, massive harm that a government of half a continent feels the need to step in?
It was going to be a massive rail strike in a situation where logistics were already strained. The US is run by rail, despite how little we invest into it. It's an absolutely massive amount of land area, and the only reasonable way to transport things across it is rail. It would have crippled almost every business.
That said, if the workers are that important they should get everything they demand. The Biden administration did get them some of their demands, which is better than I expected, they should get more.
Are you talking about passenger rail strikes or freight? Because in the States, we have no meaningful passenger rail, but our geographical area is SO enormous that freight rail is critical. It makes up like 40% of all freight transport. So shutting the entire thing down would have been more than an inconvenience. It could have cost a lot of other people in other industries their jobs. Also, it could have caused shortages of food, gasoline, chemicals for purifying water, etc.
https://www.pbs.org/newshour/economy/looming-rail-strike-would-take-a-major-toll-on-u-s-economy
https://thehill.com/opinion/finance/3644798-how-bad-would-a-rail-strike-have-been/
They aren't as common here and this was a rail strike that could prevent the transportation of any number of important things, enough to impact multiple states and millions of people.
Some people like strikebreaking for its own sake and will make up any excuse to do it.
Watch the news for whining about high car prices from people who were fine with high car prices a few weeks ago.
As if this thread will let me forget it for 30 seconds.
Yep, I'll remember this too.
People are measured by the sum of their actions.
I'm happy this is happening, and was unhappy that went down how it did.
No, which is the problem.
Beat me to it! Fuck these fucking fucks.
They worked to get what the Union asked for and the Union thanked them for it.
Yeah wouldn't trust him on this. He definitely not on the side of workers.
What are you talking about? Yes, they ended the strike without getting paid go leave, but the WH continued to work on it after and they did get what they were asking for. Just media didn't bother reporting on that little detail as it wasn't "newsworthy".
Edit: https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
Not doubting you, but got any links? Like you said, there wasn't any real coverage to speak of, so I was completely unaware of this.
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
That's still not great. The point of strikes is to be disruptive. This undermines the power of unions. Sure the union got what they wanted, but next time they might not. This whole thing is just the usual Dems playing both sides
The point of strikes is to get employers to meet the demands of the workers
But nothing.
There are bunch of people here who think revolution is an inherently beneficial goal in and of itself, which is crazy. Here I am at work unionizing, explaining to my colleagues that the goal is NOT to strike. That strike is a last resort only if the corporation refuses to give us our critical demands (in our case, safe nurse-to-patient ratios). That we only strike when we reach the point where we all know we'd quit these jobs anyway because we feel like we can't keep our patients safe.
No, the GOAL of a union is COLLECTIVE BARGAINING POWER, kids. The right to strike is a last, desperate resort
Teenager logic.
It really is though
A whole lot of people don't realize that a revolution would be terrible for the working class. If people are struggling to make ends meet, a massive disruption is going to result in people going hungry and cold. Someone who needs medication to survive will die. It's an incredibly privileged position to think you'll be fine in a revolution.
It seems these same people stopped reading about the French revolution after the part with beheading the rich. What followed was anarchy and betrayal. You could be in full support of the revolution one day and under the guillotine the next. And the person who ordered your death would be the next one under it. Plus, in the end, it culminated in Napoleon, which wasn't exactly the goal.
I always have to remind people of Robespierres ultimate fate
The struggle for workers' rights is not one battle, and enforcing a precedent that the government can and will back corps during a strike diminishes the power of the strike, arguably the most powerful tools for workers' rights, at is core. Biden essentially declared strikes aren't acceptable, but they'll deign to help groups when they see fit, and when this happens under a republican government, we all know there'll be no work done afterwards to satisfy the workers, who now have a diminished position to work with.
The foundation of workers' rights that's been built up over the last hundred+ years was very much damaged by Biden, and he shouldn't get a pass for that. At best it was a stupid blunder he worked to fix, at worst it was a manipulative effort to weaken the effectiveness of these groups while also establishing a reliance on "sympathetic" governmental powers as necessary to get anything done. Neither is particularly great.
Alternatively, you could look at it as the Biden administration declared that strikes above a certain level of disruption to critical infrastructure warrant the government stepping in, even if the demands are valid.
Something about the administration unambiguously endorsing a large but not critical infrastructure strike, like they are with the UAW, implies that maybe the point isn't to signal that strikes are unacceptable.
It's almost like the executive branch has to balance a myriad of competing interests, all of which are important.
The government could've stepped in in support of the striking workers, but they didn't. Now that the strike isn't causing "problems", they're all for it!
Yes, that's almost precisely it. The administration wants to avoid problems with critical infrastructure, but supports strikes that aren't threatening critical infrastructure.
It's why you see the administration negotiate to prevent a strike, block the strike, and then help negotiate for what the strike was aiming to get, and then go on to support workers who are on strike.
That's not hypocrisy, that's nuance.
I never claimed it was hypocritical. I'm saying it's duplicitous. When the chips were down, Biden chose corporate interests over workers when he just as well could have pressured the corpos instead. Now he's acting chummy-chummy with workers when it suites him better.
The point of strike is to get what is demanded. Much better outcome for everyone involved (including the very people who are striking) is to get demands satisfied without having to strike. Do you think people strike, because they love doing that? No one does.
He forced them back to work before their demands could be met. That is a fail. He may have gotten something after the fact, but that doesn’t change that he forced workers back to work instead of striking. What if he wasn’t able to get that done?
FWIW, rail workers were asking for 7 sick days a year. 7. And Biden got them 5 with the ability to convert 2 personal days to sick days. As a note, even 7 is a ridiculously low number.
He should have sided with unions then, too. The only reason he’s doing this is because Republicans are saying that the UAW is being damaged by Biden’s policies.
This all-or-nothing approach is what gives you nothing more often then not
My point is, it shouldn’t be Biden inserting himself into what should have been a conversation between the union and the railroad. He forced the union’s hand and then said “trust me”. I want you to imagine a world where a politician forced a company to accept a union’s offer and then told the company to “trust them”.
As if an American politician would ever force a company to accept a union’s (very reasonable, FWIW) offer.
Between "Biden doesn't do anything" and "Biden shouldn't be involved in anything" there is very little rhyme or reason to what y'all actually think he should be doing. So the only thing that's left is to look at the overall outcome, and so far it was in the realm of "things are going to the right direction, although not quickly and not far enough", which is frankly way better than anyone could hope for in this environment
He also robbed the right wing of a "unions bad" moment when a rail strike disrupted the whole economy.
If our infrastructure is so brittle that one strike can disrupt the economy as severely as pro-strikebreaking centrist Democrats say, the current rail companies cannot be trusted to continue operating it.
You think he's just going to steal their snacks?
Like Bill Clinton at McDonald's.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eYt0khR_ej0
Source - CNBC and Kristin Dziczek, vice president of industry, labor and economics at The Center for Automotive Research
"Guys, I was being rhetorical, now what are we supposed to do?"
A couple of my friends had the president visit the military base they were stationed at. They said it was by far the worst week of their military career. All the security, and the security for the security, and the security theater on top of those so nobody could think they're taking it less than 150% seriously.
And the cleaning. Oh, the cleaning. Basic training has nothing on the minute bullshit "mess" that you can get in trouble for when the president is visiting in 2 days.
I had the vice president and most of the the cabinet visit my workplace once in the military years back.
To give you an example of the level of inanity, we took an "emergency" wrench off the wall where it had been bolted for 20 years, painted behind it, the rebolted it it the wall, hiding the paint job we just did. We then painted over the front of the wrench, a wrench that should not have been painted.
The VIPs? Walked through our workplace without stopping. They were there for roughly 20 seconds, never broke their stride. Largely, they just looked bewildered.
On the plus side, I got to evil eye a shitty VP, Secretary of state and Secretary of defense, so that was fun.
Evil? Cheney?
You gave the dark lord the evil eye and lived to tell the tale? Preposterous.
... Why?
If I was president on a military base I'd sort of expect it to look prepped for war, not mass surgery
My understanding of military people is that you make things Correct™. Full stop. Perfectly made beds and shiny toilets is what war readiness looks like.
Probably attention to detail and the like. "Messy" is sloppy, and not ready. "Disorganized".
American auto companies: "Fuck."
President Joe Biden has genuinely been one of the more pro-labor presidents in American history. While I strongly disagree with how he handled the rail strikes, the policy coming from his NLRB and the way he's been handling the auto strikes I think are a strong indicator of the policy that he stands for. The United States presidency has an extremely poor track record when it comes to working with labor, and I'll take whatever progress I can get.
Actually he handled them really well, maybe not so good from the PR point of view, as almost no one reported on it:
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
The ibew is one of the more conservative of the 13 separate rail unions, whose strategy involves lobbying Democrats instead of organizing. So of course they're going to praise Biden. My own union isn't as bad, but also throws praise at Biden even tho his administration was a negative influence on our negotiations. For a better view of rail labor, I'd listen to Railworkers United, a caucus of rail workers across all 13 separate unions to pressure the unions to work together and demand more for members. https://myemail.constantcontact.com/RWU-Issues-Official-Statement-on-PEB--250.html?soid=1116509035139&aid=Bt3zn_HU0ik
That was RWU's statement on the prevention of the strike immediately after it happened, but collective bargaining continued with the support of the White House, and they later won sick leave
From RWU:
This is pretty scathing of him actually. Basically no credit was given to Biden and he was blamed for how difficult it was and for screwing them over, along with union officials who wanted to accept weak deals from the railroads and the White House. Their statement seems to be that only through popular pressure and media attention was there then the pressure on Congress to try to pass another law, and the threat of that is how they succeeded.
It's not saying government breaking strikes is good, they're saying it's a common tactic that has bee done throughout history that they need to be prepared for and overcome.
From your link (emphasis mine) :
Biden was a bad influence on West Coast longshore negotiations. As our negotions started, he had both the ILWU president and the employer's representative onto the battleship Iowa to pledge to not prepare for a strike. The union did not prepare for a strike, but the shippers diverted a huge amount of cargo away from the West Coast thru the Panama Canal. Granted, a West coast longshore strike stops 40% of US imports. But removing the threat means the employers have zero incentive to budge.
No other politician has learned and evolved like President Joe Biden (Dark Brandon FTW) has. He's cool AF
He didn't do well with the rail strikers but I guess he's trying to redeem himself. But I prefer that over a President who's consistently against labor, like any Republican one would be.
I mean that's one way to put it, but at the end of the day, he isn't some manga anti-hero, he is a politician and politicians want to be elected.
I am pretty sure this is about the UAW's change of attitude that puts immense pressure on Biden, especially that they are withholding their endorsment for Biden until he "earned it". And of course Trump is also trying to suck up to the unions, so Biden has to step up his game.
https://eu.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2023/09/17/uaw-auto-strike-joe-biden-union/70884657007/
Hopefully they're smart enough to know that Trump would just endorse whichever side he could grift the most money from once in office.
I love it. Make the politicians work for our love until they help us lol. Seems to be working with Biden.
The IBEW itself applauds Biden's handling of the rail strikes https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid#:~:text=The%20IBEW%20and%20BNSF%20Railway,personal%20days%20to%20sick%20days.
Some other union member mentioned either in here or another thread that the IBEW is only one of 13 rail unions, and they're one of the most conservative ones, preferring lobbying Democrats over striking or using actual worker power. Their union officials also tried making deals earlier that the rest of their members rejected and didn't like, which they hinted at but seem to be down playing a lot in this statement naturally. That commenter said the Rail Workers United statement, which is a coalition of rank-and-file workers from among all the unions, has been a lot more scathing towards the White House's interference in the strike and negotiations even after they helped get them some sick leave.
Separately, it's not good that we set the precedent that power comes not from workers, but from up on high to be doled out at our rulers' whim. What happens when we get a conservative President next? They'll destroy the strike and we all just collectively shrug? People need to learn that power comes from numbers, a popular mandate, and withholding labor, not from back room deals secretly negotiated by higher up union officials, CEOs, and the President. Letting these actions continue builds relationships, trust, and solidarity among the workers that is important for future labor action.
There were a lot of external concerns with a strike too. The delays would have left some municipalities without water purification supplies. Delays in coal and gas would mean no electricity or heating in the middle of December
If he broke the strike just to make sure Christmas deliveries were made on time that would be unconscionable. Concerns over power and heating are more understandable.
Really this just shows this sector is so critical to the economy and our lives that it needs to be nationalized, and the workers deserve their demands as a minimum.
They never mentioned any of that stuff. They would always just gesture broadly at the "economy" which hints at Christmas deliveries.
Exactly.
It was certainly a concern that came up in articles and such, I remember city municipality workers talking about how their supplies wouldn't last through delays.
I certainly believe it though that it didn't come up in the politics, which is really unfortunate. Delays in gas and coal and chemicals aren't often thought about, and without considering that, breaking the strike is absolutely unacceptable.
I'm glad to see the public become overwhelming in favor of unions. At least partial nationalization should become more viable.
This is good for him but I feel like his secret sevice detail will be stressed to the gills by this.
https://www.levernews.com/amazon-gets-huge-contract-despite-bidens-union-pledge/
https://www.nlrb.gov/news-outreach/news-story/national-labor-relations-board-issues-final-rule-to-restore-fair-and
OK?
"Sure, he killed a strike last year, but he's learning"
He's a neolib that considers the PR of killing this strike more hurtful to his reelection than the last one.
Happily, this is a misunderstanding. The block on striking was short and temporary, essentially until the agreement was either accepted or rejected as a whole. The Railway Labor Act is still in effect, but it's been in effect for almost a century now, so that's nothing that's new or changed.
If the unions wanted to take up arms and get people riled up again, there's nothing stopping them from threatening another strike, except for the motivation (and material conditions) of their own members.
Yeah, just deleted the comment because I went and double checked, you are indeed correct.
First I thought it was onion, but now as I think of it, it is quite smart move. It will be very hard for the companies reject these demands, and hopefully will cause the strike to end soon.
Elections are around the corner.
I hate Republicans. But that doesn't mean I like Biden. I still can't forgive him for what he did to the railroad workers.
Edit: I stand corrected. They reached to a better agreement later.
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid#:~:text=The%20IBEW%20and%20BNSF%20Railway,personal%20days%20to%20sick%20days.
Well thank God Biden didn't stop working with them and assisted in getting them what they wanted. They seem satisfied.
I happily stand corrected.
The media did not cover this at all so it makes sense. Unfortunate, because it is such great news for all parties.
I read this article but didn't see, mind helping me get clarity?
What I read from the article is that the companies wouldn't give in to the unions' demands, Biden forced the unions to keep working but then kept pushing(?) for the demands of the unions'.
What powers does the president have to force / encourage the rail companies to adopt the demands of the unions? How did Biden keep pushing? What does pushing mean in this context?
I am surmising that he put pressure on the companies by constantly talking to them and being a type of mediator. I wish the article gave details, but it is so hard to find anything on this. Everything that is Googled is just about congress stopping the strike and not this.
I wish I knew more as well, but I am satisfied that the railworkers are sated and are talking well about Biden and his admin.
Frustrated is too small a word for the feeling of having a question that should have a readily available answer
Didn't biden just sign anti labor legislation to stop the rail worker strike?
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/biden-signs-bill-block-us-railroad-strike-2022-12-02/
Not sure if we should start lining up to blow him quite yet about this kind of issue. But I'm not familiar enough to fully comment. I'm sure lemmings will line up to tell me why I'm wrong about this..
Supposedly he signed that, then turned around and demanded the sick days:
https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid
He still took rights away from the workers.
Is this a bad thing? If you're wrong, it's good to be corrected.
I've found lemmy to be the single most toxic malicious place on the internet I've ever been and every time I post I literally cringe waiting for the horde to attack. I'm probably closing my account soon tbh because I can't take it anymore. For the record I like being wrong because it means I'm about to learn something new. But around here I was expecting fifty downvotes and a bunch of replies saying FUCK YOU CORPORATE BOOTLICKER SCUM, words to that effect.
And of course, you got called out through no fault of your own, right? If you don't want to be called a bootlicker, stop licking boots...
Yup, there it is 🙄
Fair enough. The userbase here is much more toxic than reddit.
He broke the rail strike, then made a big song and dance about sick days as if that was the only thing rail workers needed to strike over.
Fucked over workers and pissed all over their broad set of grievances and demands.
I don't think he should be welcomed.
Well I am glad he didn't stop fighting along side them and get them what they wanted.
"Biden deserves a lot of the credit for achieving this goal for us,” Russo said. “He and his team continued to work behind the scenes to get all of rail labor a fair agreement for paid sick leave.”
The rail strike affected the supply chain, it wasn't just a straight up workers vs. the company kind of thing. A lot of collateral damage to consider downstream. And he hardly fucked them over. He forced a deal that was likely how it would've worked out anyway.
Biden has done more for unions than any President in history. That just doesn't fit with the doomer narrative though.
The damage is the fucking point.
Yes, that's the doomer philosophy. But you understand there are people that aren't doomers that like having groceries on the shelves at the store?
What should have happened here is that Biden should have pressured the companies to resolve the strike as quickly as possible.
Workers generally don't like striking. Not getting paid sucks. It's really the only lever of power they have in a lot of cases though.
Banning their ability to strike means that the only options they have left are to suck up whatever awful conditions they have or quit. Quitting en mass would do the same damage you're talking about, but far more permanently.
He did. The companies were forced to accept Biden's deal just as much as the union was forced to accept the deal. It's just being characterized as Biden forcing the union to accept in the narratives you're consuming.
And? The point of strikes are to put pressure on the employers because they haven't responded to workers demands. If they aren't going to pay a wage worth the work or benefits like employees being able to spend time with their families or take sick leave, they aren't entitled to the workers time, or labors.
And the knock on effects like let's say... not being able to get your groceries sucks for you in the here and now, the benefits of not having LITERAL TOXIC WASTE DUMPED ONTO SMALL TOWNS AND CATCH ON FUCKING FIRE because the railworkers aren't well rested, or inspections/maintenance haven't been being properly done kind outweighs you being able to get your bag of Doritos and two liter of Mountain Dew. Oh and it also adds more pressure to the rail companies to come back to the negotiating table.
I find hope and inspiration in workers striking, not doom.
I find hope in workers being treated well and not needing to strike. I also find hope in there being food on the shelves at my grocery stores.
Wanting things to be bad enough to necessitate labor actions like striking is doomer thinking.
Starting with the assumption that things are so bad everything needs to be destroyed so everything can be rebuilt is doomer thinking. Sure there are times that strikes are necessary and we should support them when they are, but making the assumption that everything is bad isn't all that healthy.
Wasn't Trump supposed to visit striking workers next week? He's about to be upstaged.
No trump is doing a rally event with hand picked union members that are anti union. He is not going there to support the union.
I don't know how long those "union members" will be welcome in the union if they can't seem to understand the value and purpose of a strike. And show up at rallies full of hateful people hoping they're all fired.
Well Republican voters aren't know for doing things in their best interest
I thought it would have been funny if Biden planned to go at the exact time and place and preempted trumps visit because the president is first.
Imagine trump joining a picket line. He’d be lining up an armed security force to protect scabs, and giving a speech about how unamerican the strikers are, how they’re anti-capitalism and thus anti-democracy.
Good. President is meant to send a signal to Americans during meaningful moments
it is election year so throwing people a bunch of hope that you actually care definitley will win votes biden spent four years ignoring campaign promises such as voting reform still am unable to vote as are a lot of others
why not choose a different colors and letters besides red and blue and r and d why do we as citizens allow such crap choices
biden will throw some good will around and just like trump did with his followers only during election time
It’s not a presidential election year. Every year is an election year though