Biden helps avert railway strike.

[Dirty Hipsters]

You do remember we're talking about the entire government, right?

For the person specifically in charge of train maintenance, this is an immediate priority. For the President of the United States, there are factually more pressing issues.

If the president of the united states has "factually more pressing issues" than a working railroad system then why did Joe Biden stick his nose into the railway strike in the first place?

Clearly it's not above his purview if he already directly involved himself, so why shouldn't we expect a safe and working railway system to be a priority?

 

[tstorm823]

If the president of the united states has "factually more pressing issues" than a working railroad system then why did Joe Biden stick his nose into the railway strike in the first place?

Because politics is a silly place, where visibility trumps importance in the minds of the corrupt.

 

[Ag3ma]

Because politics is a silly place, where visibility trumps importance in the minds of the corrupt.

No, because the railroads are critical infrastructure where strikes risk hampering the movement of a vast amount of national freight and also passengers, causing potentially heavy disruption and costs. Comparing a derailment and toxic spill to the costs of a strike is necessarily not easy, as it's comparing very different things. But it's very reasonable to suppose that a series of strikes are potentially a lot more problematic overall than a toxic chemical spill (at least by the measures that governments use to decide action).

Secondly, if a strike is announced, it's a known event. An accident is however an unknowable. So it makes a great deal of sense to try to avert a known risk, where attempting to guess an unknown risk and how to stop it is much harder.

 

[tstorm823]

No, because the railroads are critical infrastructure where strikes risk hampering the movement of a vast amount of national freight and also passengers, causing potentially heavy disruption and costs. Comparing a derailment and toxic spill to the costs of a strike is necessarily not easy, as it's comparing very different things. But it's very reasonable to suppose that a series of strikes are potentially a lot more problematic overall than a toxic chemical spill (at least by the measures that governments use to decide action).

Secondly, if a strike is announced, it's a known event. An accident is however an unknowable. So it makes a great deal of sense to try to avert a known risk, where attempting to guess an unknown risk and how to stop it is much harder.

I was attempting to answer why a strike is a personal priority of the president. Your argument for why one over the other makes sense, but I was approaching it from the "why is the president directly involved in any of this" angle.

 

[tippy2k2]

If the president of the united states has "factually more pressing issues" than a working railroad system then why did Joe Biden stick his nose into the railway strike in the first place?

Clearly it's not above his purview if he already directly involved himself, so why shouldn't we expect a safe and working railway system to be a priority?

Because sometimes The Workers get a little bit too uppity and need to be put back into their place.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Yes, thank you for demonstrating exactly what happens to bills without political capital: they die unfulfilled.

Now it's the bill that doesn't have political capital? Before you were saying it was the Democratic Party that had limited political capital that couldn't possibly be spent on rail safety. Which is it?

 

[Ag3ma]

Now it's the bill that doesn't have political capital? Before you were saying it was the Democratic Party that had limited political capital that couldn't possibly be spent on rail safety. Which is it?

A bill is "paid for" with the political capital of the people backing it.

 

[Seanchaidh]

Pete Buttigieg Is Pretending He’s Powerless to Change Railroad Safety Procedures

In the wake of a disastrous rail accident in Ohio, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg says he doesn’t have the power to compel the rail industry to upgrade its safety equipment and procedures. But he does.

jacobin.com

A bill is "paid for" with the political capital of the people backing it.

so then if we're talking about the culpability of the Democratic Party, the bill "not having political capital" is the fault of the Democratic Party. Especially so when it also has Republican support.

 

[Ag3ma]

so then if we're talking about the culpability of the Democratic Party, the bill "not having political capital" is the fault of the Democratic Party. Especially so when it also has Republican support.

Do you also think then that being poor is the fault of poor people?

Although that's the handy thing about this rail crash: it provides a lot of political capital. From the perspective of politics, I would be considerably more critical of the Democrats for failing to use it as a wedge to improve safety standards than I am about the crash happening in the first place. Although, admittedly, I do not hold the Democratic Party in high esteem, and I thoroughly expect this to peter out into nothing.

 

[Eacaraxe]

No, because the railroads are critical infrastructure where strikes risk hampering the movement of a vast amount of national freight and also passengers, causing potentially heavy disruption and costs. Comparing a derailment and toxic spill to the costs of a strike is necessarily not easy, as it's comparing very different things. But it's very reasonable to suppose that a series of strikes are potentially a lot more problematic overall than a toxic chemical spill (at least by the measures that governments use to decide action).

Secondly, if a strike is announced, it's a known event. An accident is however an unknowable. So it makes a great deal of sense to try to avert a known risk, where attempting to guess an unknown risk and how to stop it is much harder.

Lot of words to say "the ramifications of a toxic chemical spill that could endanger the entire Ohio river valley is a lot easier to cover up, than a national railway strike over the specific working conditions that allowed the toxic chemical spill to happen in the first place".

 

[Ag3ma]

Lot of words to say "the ramifications of a toxic chemical spill that could endanger the entire Ohio river valley is a lot easier to cover up, than a national railway strike over the specific working conditions that allowed the toxic chemical spill to happen in the first place".

 

[Phoenixmgs]

I think you mean that the train did not meet the criteria for high hazard flammable under the Obama-era law. "Exempted" implies that it did meet the criteria, but was for some reason excused normal standards.

It no longer met the criteria after it got lobbied to change said criteria (aka exempted).

 

[Eacaraxe]

What, did Obama miraculously fix everything single-handedly, by going to east Palestine and pretending to drink a glass of water while I wasn't paying attention?

 

[Godzillarich(aka tf2godz)]

https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/22/business/norfolk-southern-sick-days-deal/index.html

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! OH MY GOD!

Because of the recent tragedy, Norfolk has given into the demands of the union for full sick days.

What's even better is that Congress could have passed a compromise giving them sick days but less than the Union's demanded, but the companies pushed for no sick days. Now the company has to give into the Union full demands.

The Ohio chemical spill is a tragedy, but I can't help but feel joy at the railroad companies eating shit right now.

 

[Ag3ma]

What, did Obama miraculously fix everything single-handedly, by going to east Palestine and pretending to drink a glass of water while I wasn't paying attention?

I think more, perhaps, the obviously dubious leap of claiming that better working conditions would necessarily have prevented this accident.

 

[Ag3ma]

The Ohio chemical spill is a tragedy, but I can't help but feel joy at the railroad companies eating shit right now.

Well, yes. But isn't this the way it normally works? Exploit as hard as possible, and then when the shit hits the fan, suddenly make a sizeable concession.

 

[Eacaraxe]

I think more, perhaps, the obviously dubious leap of claiming that better working conditions would necessarily have prevented this accident.

Yes, it absolutely would have. The bigger underlying issue in the rail industry right now is staffing reduction in the name of "optimization" and "efficiency" (read, higher profits), which as one would expect leads to overworked safety inspectors, less time for safety inspections on a per-car and per-component basis, less and hastier maintenance, reduced supervision, and lower standards for certification. All, of course, with the full approval of the DoT and NTSB, and a deregulation-happy Congress. Not to mention wage stagnation and reduced benefits, leading to high turnover, critical staffing shortages, and lack of qualified and interested applicants.

The kind of circumstances that might cause, say, a faulty wheel bearing to have gone unnoticed by time- and resource-strapped safety inspectors. But what would I know, that's clearly just obviously dubious leaps and speculation.

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Documents/RRD23MR005%20East%20Palestine%20OH%20Prelim.pdf

But it's not like this hasn't been known and decried for years, by the same people who were threatening to strike.

US rail industry defends safety record amid staffing cuts

OMAHA, Neb. (AP) — Even as railroads are operating longer and longer freight trains that sometimes stretch for miles, the companies have drastically reduced staffing levels, prompting unions to warn that moves meant to increase profits could endanger safety and even result in disasters.

apnews.com

‘Completely demoralized’: US railroad workers pushed to the brink

Workers are under intense strain amid grueling schedules, union contract negotiations and an arcane attendance policy system

www.theguardian.com

Workers Say Railroads’ Efficiency Push Became Too Much

Employees say the inflexibility of scheduling upended their personal lives. The companies say they maintained service while using fewer resources.

www.nytimes.com

https://www.congress.gov/116/meeting/house/109644/witnesses/HHRG-116-PW14-Wstate-SandbergA-20190620.pdf

Now I ask again, did I miss Obama pretending to drink a glass of East Palestine tap water in the meantime? I'm real interested to know, because as far as I know, I'm the only person on this forum who gets his drinking water from Ohio river and lives in the region potentially impacted by this fuckup.

 

[Gordon_4]

I know Japan isn’t a shining beacon in all ways, but if the YouTube I saw about them doing a maintenance check on a Shinkansen is accurate, we should probably import a bunch of those boys to give American and Australian rail a boot up it’s arse.

 

[Ag3ma]

Yes, it absolutely would have.

Even with a better staffed and resourced workforce, human error occurs. Secondly, at this point, we cannot be sure it was due to inadequate maintenance, or that an improved maintenance regime would have caught and prevented it. I think a more accurate statement would be that better staffing and working conditions would reduce the probability of such events occurring.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

I think a more accurate statement would be that better staffing and working conditions would reduce the probability of such events occurring.

Yeah but OTOH, many businesses would read that as "nothing could have prevented this so we are justified".