WASHINGTON — Speaker Nancy Pelosi said on Monday that lawmakers plan to intervene this week in a deepening labor dispute between railroad companies and their union workers, voting on whether to impose an agreement that could prevent the closure of the nation’s freight trains just before Christmas.
The announcement came shortly after President Biden called on Congress to act, saying the dispute must not be allowed to “push this nation into a devastating rail shutdown”.
In a statement, Mr. Biden called on the House and Senate to quickly pass legislation imposing a compromise labor deal that his administration helped broker but that failed to win over all. railway unions.
“On the day it was announced, labor leaders, business leaders and elected officials all hailed it as a fair resolution to the dispute between the hardworking men and women of the railroad unions and companies in that industry,” Biden said in the statement.
He urged Congress to “pass the law immediately to pass” the deal.
Ms. Pelosi said in a statement shortly afterwards that “this week, the House will pass a bill that passes the tentative agreement – without poison or changes to the negotiated terms – and sends it goes to the Senate.”
It is unclear what will happen in the Senate, where Democrats have 50 seats in the 100-member chamber and most bills need Republican support to pass. The deadline for action is early December, when some labor unions plan to go on strike if no agreement is reached.
In urging Congress to impose a resolution to the dispute, Mr. Biden took a belligerent stance that would put him and his Democratic allies against the wishes of ordinary union members. who had long been frustrated with the treatment of the railway companies.
President Biden
This is where the president stands behind the midterm elections.
Matthew A. Weaver, a carpenter with the railroad maintenance workers union, said that vote down the deal, said that despite liking Mr. Biden’s many appointments, “the move seems to cater to the oligarchs”. Mr Weaver, who previously served as a union official, added that “all railway workers will suffer because of this.”
Statements by Mr. Biden and Ms. Pelosi both attempted to address their support for unions, calling the decision to intervene in the labor dispute a difficult one. Mr. Biden said he was “reluctant to rescind the ratification proceedings,” and Ms. Pelosi wrote that “the railroads sold out to Wall Street to boost their profits, making obscene profits while growing increasingly demanded more from the railway workers.”
But Mr. Biden’s call to Congress to act underscores the recognition that a rail strike could have a devastating impact on a fragile economic recovery from the Covid-19 pandemic. Freezing railroads would disrupt supply chains for commodities such as timber, coal and chemicals, and slow deliveries of cars and other consumer goods, pushing prices higher again.
“Let me be clear: Shutting down the railroads will wreak havoc on our economy,” the president said. “Without a freight rail, many U.S. industries would shut down. My economic advisers report that as many as 765,000 Americans – many union workers – could lose their jobs in the first two weeks alone. Communities may lose access to the chemicals needed to ensure clean drinking water. Farms and ranches across the country may not be able to feed their livestock.”
The President is a support loyal alliance who has previously argued against congressional intervention in railroad labor disputes, arguing that it unfairly interferes with union bargaining efforts. In 1992, he was one of only six senators to vote against the law that ended another harsh strike by railroad workers.
Mr. Biden’s decision to weigh in on the possibility of a nationwide rail strike comes after weeks in which his administration said labor unions and rail companies must find a way to deal with it. their problems without incurring work-crippling strikes. Just hours before Mr. Biden’s announcement, his press secretary urged the two sides to quickly find a solution.
“The best option that we believe, that the president believes in, is still for the parties to resolve this issue on their own,” said Karine Jean-Pierre, a White House spokeswoman, before the president’s statement.
Congress has the power to intervene in a many different ways. It could push back the strike deadline and prolong the negotiation, or require the two sides to resort to an arbitrator. It can also enact an agreement directly through legislation – whether it’s an agreement some unions have voted against or offer less generous that a presidential council issued over the summer.
A coalition of business groups sent a letter on Monday to Republican and Democratic leaders in Congress urging them to intervene.
“Stopping rail service for any length of time would be extremely damaging to American families and our economy, costing us $2 billion a day,” said the group led by the US Chamber of Commerce. Ky first wrote in the letter. “The sooner this labor stalemate ends, the better for our community and our national economy.”
The American Trucking Association, an industry group, recent estimates that relying on trucks to solve rail congestion would require more than 450,000 vehicles — an impossible feat due to a lack of equipment and drivers.
The railroad immediately backed Biden’s legislative call.
Ian Jefferies, chief executive officer of the Association of American Railroads, which represents major carriers, said in a statement: “No one benefits from a rail shutdown — not customers. ours, not the railroad employees, and not the American economy.” “Now is the right time for Congress to pass legislation.”
Four of 12 unions representing more than 100,000 employees at major rail carriers voted to reject the tentative deal the Biden administration broker helped in September. Most recently a large union that mainly represents conductors this month.
If unions are unable to reach a new agreement with the rail companies by early December, it could lead to an industry-wide strike as railway workers are likely to respect the lines of the railroads. other unions.
The deal, voted down by four rail unions, would raise wages by nearly 25% between 2020, when the last contract expires, to 2024. But the deal has been controversial among workers. railroads, who argue that the deal doesn’t go far enough to address what they say. to be punishment schedule that affects their personal life and health.
While the agreement will allow employees to quit up to three times to annual medical appointments, many argue that it does not address the unpredictable changes arising from chronic staffing shortages.
The Surface Transportation Board, the governing body for freight rail, recent estimates that major freight rail operators have reduced their workforces by nearly 30% in the past six years.
Some provisions of the agreement could lead to even more erratic schedules by allowing rail carriers to remove replacement workers who walked in when others called sick.
Some workers have long suspected that Congress would intervene rather than allow them to strike, a suspicion that Labor Secretary Martin J. Walsh Advanced in an interview with CNN this month, when he said that Congress would have to act if the two sides could not come to an agreement on their own. It is not clear whether Mr Walsh is speaking hypothetically or urging intervention.
Mr. Biden is a longtime railroad advocate, having spent most of his adult life commuting on Amtrak from his home in Wilmington, Del., to Washington. But for the president, the decision to accept congressional action as a resolution to the labor dispute is a high-risk gamble that risks angering some of his biggest supporters in the working community.
While many members will likely be upset by the possibility of congressional intervention, some union leaders may quietly prefer that intervention take place in December rather than January, when the House of Commons is in the seat. under Republican control and more likely to favor the savings deal.
In his statement, the president said the threat of possible economic disaster following a railroad strike had convinced him that Congress should act.
“I am reluctant to ignore the ratification procedures and the views of those who voted against the deal,” he said. “But in this case – where the economic impact of the shutdown will hurt millions of other workers and families – I believe Congress must use its powers to pass this deal. “
