An got the rail workers a 14% immediate pay raise, an additional 25% over 5 years, a PTO day, and in the followup as he promised, an additional 4 sicks days and 3 convertible.
He subverted the will of the union using the might of the government. It doesnt matter what happened after that, as a union man that is the definition of anti worker.
Context for a joke? Do you expect context in a Colbert monologue? I’m not sure if that makes it funnier. My point is factually correct. Its a joke, not a new york times article.
I was genuinely curious about your view point. If you lack the convictions to defend your characterization of my statement, and me personally by proxy, then maybe you shouldn’t be calling me a liar with such authority.
after threatening them with their livelihoods and retirement yes, he gave them a small amount of what they were demanding
not a victory and he is not a champion of worker’s rights
Presidential Emergency Board
In July 2022, a Presidential Emergency Board was convened under the Railway Labor Act by President Joe Biden.[11] His Executive order stated, “I have been notified by the National Mediation Board that in its judgment these disputes threaten substantially to interrupt interstate commerce to a degree that would deprive a section of the country of essential transportation service.”[12]
The board issued a report on August 16, starting a 30-day cooling off period that prevents any strikes or lockouts.[6] Reuters reported that the board proposed “annual wage increases of between 4% and 7% through 2024” in addition to retroactive pay increases, one extra paid day off and five $1,000 annual bonuses.[13]
By the end of August, three unions representing about 15,000 workers agreed to the recommendations made by the board.[14][15]
On September 14, near the end of the cooling off period, Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh hosted negotiations at the Department of Labor between the railroad companies, and unions in an attempt to prevent a strike.[16] The Washington Post reported that Biden was “personally involved in the talks”, wanting workers to have more flexibility in scheduling.[2]
Early on September 15, Biden announced a deal had been reached to prevent a strike, including an immediate 14% wage increase, but only one day of paid leave per year rather than the 15 days of paid sick leave unions wanted.[2][17] The deal still needed to be ratified by rank-and-file members of the unions, however no strike could take place for several weeks regardless of the outcomes of ratification votes.[2]
Congressional intervention
In September 2022, U.S. Senators Richard Burr and Roger Wicker introduced a bill that would have required labor unions to agree to the terms proposed by the Presidential Emergency Board, to prevent a strike.[18] It was blocked by Senator Bernie Sanders, who noted that freight rail workers receive a “grand total of zero sick days” while railroad companies made significant profits.[19] In the House of Representatives, Speaker Nancy Pelosi said, “We’d rather see negotiations prevail so there’s no need for any actions from Congress.”[16]
In late November, after some unions had rejected the agreement, Biden asked Congress to pass the agreement into law. On November 30, the House of Representatives passed the existing tentative agreement along with an amended version that would require railroad employers to ensure 7 days paid sick leave.[20] On December 1, the Senate passed the tentative agreement with only 1 day of sick leave.[21] President Joe Biden signed the legislation into law on December 2.[4] The Biden administration’s intervention in the dispute was condemned by over 500 labor historians in an open letter to Joe Biden and Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh.[22]
I corrected the misinformation by exclusion suggested by the statement.
Edit: And for the record, the followup was in February 2023. Which was after the part you posted from the Wikipedia entry, which kind of matches the whole… Misinformation by exclusion part I’ve been commenting on.
Biden only picked up that ball after the East Palestine disaster vindicated all the reasons the union wanted to strike in the first place. It was a PR move because he had blood on his hands.
For comparison a single socialist city council member in Seattle pushed and won the for 12 days of sick leave for the entire city back in 2012. 4 days is bread crumbs. They would have gotten a much better deal had they just been left alone to strike and negotiate.
And does any of that impact the ability to tell the whole truth, rather than partial?
When you exclude important details, you’re doing your argument a disservice through misinformation. This has nothing to do with my opinion on Biden, which is not a positive one, but my opinion on intentionally leaving out important details. Which, to me, is no better than just flat out lying.
my goal was to not have a screen’s worth of text unless people desired it hence the links
did not personally feel it interfered with the facts as of today’s date since Biden’s career has on the whole been center right in his politics especially with worker’s rights
but will in the future take more heed of the dates involved
IMO, at best its misleading. LOTS of straight up copied text from Wikipedia (just link to the section), making it appear as if there wasn’t anything else after that.
Just because he followed up on his promise doesn’t make him progressive, but ignoring it entirely is just playing games to play pretend that he did nothing but force an outcome.
To me, that’s just as bad as saying Trump is pro-labor because he said so one time, and ignoring all the other crap he did. Such as restricting the ability for union reps to advocate (federal workers), revoking a DOE contract (and their rights and protections stripped), putting union busting lawyers on the NLRB, opposing federal minimum wage increase, and I’m going to stop because he’s so damn depressing.
An got the rail workers a 14% immediate pay raise, an additional 25% over 5 years, a PTO day, and in the followup as he promised, an additional 4 sicks days and 3 convertible.
He subverted the will of the union using the might of the government. It doesnt matter what happened after that, as a union man that is the definition of anti worker.
I agree, but leaving it out is still lying about what actually happened.
It’s not lying at all, omission is only a lie if it’s misleading or nefarious, this is neither.
You can certainly make that call for yourself. I disagree.
I mean it’s a fact… You didn’t add context you added an excuse. “Oh it’s not as bad because x”
Cool story.
And can’t defend your actions either. -10 for childish bullshit.
How so? He broke a strike. I said he broke a strike. It can’t much more factual then that.
Context is important.
Context for a joke? Do you expect context in a Colbert monologue? I’m not sure if that makes it funnier. My point is factually correct. Its a joke, not a new york times article.
OK.
I was genuinely curious about your view point. If you lack the convictions to defend your characterization of my statement, and me personally by proxy, then maybe you shouldn’t be calling me a liar with such authority.
You could read the many, many other comments in the same thread.
You directly called me a liar and I directly asked why. This is weasle behavior. Do better.
I have explained it numerous times already, why repeat myself?
after threatening them with their livelihoods and retirement yes, he gave them a small amount of what they were demanding
not a victory and he is not a champion of worker’s rights
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2022_United_States_railroad_labor_dispute
I didn’t call him a champion of workers rights.
I corrected the misinformation by exclusion suggested by the statement.
Edit: And for the record, the followup was in February 2023. Which was after the part you posted from the Wikipedia entry, which kind of matches the whole… Misinformation by exclusion part I’ve been commenting on.
Please don’t do that.
Biden only picked up that ball after the East Palestine disaster vindicated all the reasons the union wanted to strike in the first place. It was a PR move because he had blood on his hands.
For comparison a single socialist city council member in Seattle pushed and won the for 12 days of sick leave for the entire city back in 2012. 4 days is bread crumbs. They would have gotten a much better deal had they just been left alone to strike and negotiate.
And does any of that impact the ability to tell the whole truth, rather than partial?
When you exclude important details, you’re doing your argument a disservice through misinformation. This has nothing to do with my opinion on Biden, which is not a positive one, but my opinion on intentionally leaving out important details. Which, to me, is no better than just flat out lying.
to clarify yes did cherry pick paragraphs
my goal was to not have a screen’s worth of text unless people desired it hence the links
did not personally feel it interfered with the facts as of today’s date since Biden’s career has on the whole been center right in his politics especially with worker’s rights
but will in the future take more heed of the dates involved
IMO, at best its misleading. LOTS of straight up copied text from Wikipedia (just link to the section), making it appear as if there wasn’t anything else after that.
Just because he followed up on his promise doesn’t make him progressive, but ignoring it entirely is just playing games to play pretend that he did nothing but force an outcome.
To me, that’s just as bad as saying Trump is pro-labor because he said so one time, and ignoring all the other crap he did. Such as restricting the ability for union reps to advocate (federal workers), revoking a DOE contract (and their rights and protections stripped), putting union busting lawyers on the NLRB, opposing federal minimum wage increase, and I’m going to stop because he’s so damn depressing.
And set the power of unions back decades by breaking the strike too!
A PTO day lmao. And you wonder why people are pissed he broke up the strike.
I’m not remotely surprised, and I didn’t support him pushing to stop the strike either.
That doesn’t mean I think its OK to leave out what he did do to exagerrate a position.
Do you know why they were striking? Low staffing levels leading to long hours, overworked staff, and building safety concerns as a result.
What part of my comment makes it appear as if I wasn’t aware?
He still broke the strike subverting the will of the workers. That is a slap in the face and undercuts the pto day they get a year.
He did.
As well as get a pay raise, a guarantee of additional raises, PTO, additional sick days, and convertible days.
Pretending nothing was done undercuts the issue, and spreads misinformation about what actually happened.
25% over 5 years works out to 4.5% a year, and he “won” that during 8% inflation.
In reality they’re getting a pay cut.