553
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 27 Aug 2024
553 points (99.5% liked)
Work Reform
10132 readers
365 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
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?
I asked you a direct question and in response you called me a liar. You impugned my integrity and I asked you to defend it. You telling me to go through your comment history is insufficient after you impugned my integrity. If you want anybody to respect your position, you need to respect other people. Otherwise, you're just being a dick on the internet. You're not getting anything done. You're not changing anybody's minds. You're just being an asshole.
Not the words I used actually.
And as mentioned, already answered repeatedly. Enjoy your day.
Didn't realize you were just a fucking idiot. Sorry for wasting your time. I know you got a lot more work than the average person just to get through the day.
Dude, I'm not interested in the internet pissing match where you try and "gotcha". I've repeatedly explained my position, why I believe that, and why the context is important.
As I said. Enjoy your day, we are done.
If you dont want a pissing match then stop pissing on people. You're the worst.
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.