The rail story is a useful test case because the follow-through got nearly zero coverage, while lots of people, me included, had filed the original event away as a betrayal by Biden. So you get the surprising new facts and you reevaluate your conclusions, or else you do the other thing.
Way too many people think strikes are the point of being in a union. Reporting on behind-the-scenes negotiations that may drag out for months/years is not getting anyone's attention unless you're actually in the union.
I was thinking "strikes are the battles of the workers" and then I thought "maybe this fixation on strikes as a good in themselves is coming from a similar place as the celebration of battle in itself"
yeah, kinda my point as well - the internet doesn't care about diplomacy, only direct observable conflict where you can pick a side (which is more about choosing who the villain is)
yeah I think people who aren't involved in labor representation miss the point that despite the adversarial nature of the system, strikes and worse are a failure state of negotiation and unions generally don't actually want to soak their workplaces because that's also still where their workers work.
hm, that doesn't sound emotionally gratifying at all. Sounds like we need to get in there and change the leadership's attitude. How do we get into labor unions again?
certainly a high percentage of terminally on-line coffee shop marxists think strikes are the point of being in a union.
it's just another affectation to punish their high income suburban parents
I mean, nobody's NLRB is going to help rail unions or carriers with anything because the NLRB doesn't have jurisdiction over railroads, they're covered by the Railway Labor Act which is a completely different statute that works very differently.
