Kansas Crimson

KUTradition wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 11:06 am there’s part of me that thinks: if you don’t like the working conditions, then go seize the means of production.

(but i know it’s never as simple as that)

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 11:03 am
But the "socialist" lawmakers are instead siding with capital, saying workers should have to work sick cuz it's more important for ownership to keep enjoying record profits.

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 11:17 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 11:03 am
But the "socialist" lawmakers are instead siding with capital, saying workers should have to work sick cuz it's more important for ownership to keep enjoying record profits.

You intentionally misrepresent things at a high rate. It makes it impossible to take you seriously at times.

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 11:24 am

BasketballJayhawk wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 11:17 am

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 11:03 am
But the "socialist" lawmakers are instead siding with capital, saying workers should have to work sick cuz it's more important for ownership to keep enjoying record profits.

You intentionally misrepresent things at a high rate. It makes it impossible to take you seriously at times.

What do you think I’m intentionally misrepresenting, scrappy doo?

ousdahl wrote: ↑Thu Dec 01, 2022 12:56 pm oh, forgive me. Perhaps I neglected to clarify they're trying for paid sick leave. A whopping 4-7 days or something. I don't think that's necessarily a misrepresentation, nor do I think you've demonstrated that such a misrepresentation is intentional.

So, rather than me risk intentionally misrepresenting anything further, could you please take the lead here in helping us better understand the issue at hand?

where's it say they CAN currently take sick days? Did you double check whether they CAN just call in to take an unpaid sick day without consequence? Or have there been any examples otherwise?

And, if a worker is living paycheck to paycheck with no paid sick leave available, do you think there's any possibility of workers effectively having to choose to work while sick so their paycheck doesn't shrink?

and is paid sick leave the only thing they're trying to negotiate here? Are you familiar with the whole scheduling thing too - where workers claim they have to be on call 24/7 for 2 weeks straight, and if they aren't able to get to work within 90 minutes, day or night, or if they take an unpaid sick day, they're penalized as part of some "points" system of attendance? How's that work?

I'd try to offer what insight and evidence that I can, but again, I certainly don't want to intentionally misrepresent anything, so perhaps it's better to allow you to explain all this for us instead.

what's your opinion, anyway, illy? Do you think paid sick leave is reasonable or unreasonable?

How much of a dent would paid sick days really put in the railroad brass's profits, anyway?

What about the whole on-call 24-7 for 2 weeks straight thing?


oh, and thanks for the link. I know I just offered lots of questions, but your link does too. If you choose not to respond to my questions, please at least consider responding to these questions from your link:

why is the pressure not on the railroads to come to the table and negotiate four measly sick days, paid sick days for its workers?

why can't the legislation include the sick leave?

The Senate has approved a measure meant to avert a railroad strike in eight days — without the paid sick days rail workers have been asking for.

Senators passed the bill to force unions to accept a tentative agreement reached earlier this year between railroad managers and their workers and make an imminent strike illegal — without making any changes — by an 80-15 vote. They rejected a measure to offer paid sick leave, 52-43. Both measures required 60 votes to clear the Senate.

Both bills cleared the House on Wednesday.

Biden applauded the move and vowed to sign it as soon as Congress sends it to his desk — which could happen as soon as Friday.