Rail workers work under a completely different set of labor laws than virtually every other industry. They do not have the same protections, workers compensation or union rules than other industries do.
I’m not an expert on the intricacies of it, but the way a guy explained to me is to he union cannot or will not protect members for safety work stoppages.
the legislation last year forcing an end to the labor dispute meant that rail workers stopping work had no legal protection. the railway labor act makes it illegal to stop work before exhausting a lengthy dispute process
Thanks for the article, I’m not American nor do I live there so I’m not so well versed on US labour law and unions. From reading the article however it seems this issue was particular to rail union workers?
> Unlike the National Labor Relations Act, he said, which leaves both labor and management with "economic weapons" they can threaten to use (strikes for unions, and lockouts for management), the Railway Labor Act has a provision allowing the government to block a strike from taking place.
The union's members could agree to set appropriate boundaries, e.g. not defending staff who break the law.
There are two unions representing metro train drivers in London, and I have little respect for RMT since they've gone on strike to defend a driver who was sacked for turning up drunk to work[1]. The other union (ASLEF) seems more reasonable.
When an issue is important to both unions (e.g. pay for nighttime services) they wield considerable power. If only RMT strike, there's significant disruption but trains still run.
This is the idea of have of unions. NYC MTA is all union workers and when I hear stories (from a relative that works) of the kinds of things people get away with before being fired along with their ridiculous compensation, I can't easily shake my opinion of unions.
Just a note: it's illegal to fire someone for trying to organize a union. Not that it doesn't happen, but you often hear about how those people get their jobs reinstated, etc.
That's not how it works in countries with stronger protections. Unions don't have the power to fire anyone, nor do they have veto power. There are rules (e.g. no firing without a cause from a whitelist of acceptable causes that typically come with additional requirements), and courts to decide cases where there are disagreements over the rules.
I used to work in interstate freight (barge, not train). They make it crystal clear any employee has the right to stop work and are protected. The rail workers could have stopped working under their dangerous conditions, they just negligently kept going. The big bad railroad is to blame, but so are the employees.
Yeah, it’s not like non-unionized enterprises make it easy to fire workers. There’s evidence collection, meetings with HR, PIPs even when it’s at will.
I mean I personally know three family friends in unions who are incompetent and protected by union rules so they will never be fired. (One in immigration, one a court officer, one a public school teacher).
>There is nothing to stop you and your colleagues from simply declining to log in until the company's attitude improves. They can threaten to fire you, but they were already playing that card
the idea behind a Union is that they can't retaliate agaisnt you once you formally announce a legal strike. It's a term written in a contract that the company agrees to. Breaking it is the same as any other contract breech, which should have enough sanctions to make it the worst option.
That's how congress ruled those railroad strikes as "illegal". When they do that you can still "technically" strike, but you're no longer being paid and/or are at risk of being fired. Maybe that still is an avenue to look into, but many cannot take that risk.
For example, in the UK, the tube lines were brought to a screeching halt because TFL wanted to take disciplinary action against a driver that failed a breatherliser test. (https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-31372269)
Unions can sometimes prevent an employer from firing a bad employee. Other times, they can get in the way of getting work done by saying "It's not their job", even when the employee was perfectly willing to do it.
reply