Recently, I wrote an op-ed highlighting my concerns with the continuing threat of a rail strike and the devastating impact it could have on the U.S. and global economy. And why are we in this predicament? Because the Class 1 freight railroads are unwilling to provide sick leave for their rail labor work force. Sadly, since the publishing of this op-ed little has changed. As many predicted, the agreement reached in September under the leadership of Labor Secretary Marty Walsh was voted down by the memberships of four out of the 12 rail unions. Here we are once again staring straight in the face of another rail strike that could commence on December 9, or thereabouts.
The underlying theme I struggle to understand is that critical segments of our nation’s supply chain are supposed to continue to support rail providers that are unwilling to cough up four or five sick days to their work force; and if we don’t, the system comes to a screeching halt. The solution that many are now pushing for is a Congress bailout. If it gets down to the wire and no agreement has been reached, or if we do enter a strike, Congress must intervene. Even this go-around, Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle are saying they will only step in if the unions and rail providers fail to reach an agreement. This issue becomes further complicated by relying on Republicans and Democrats to agree on the same legislative solution. Frankly, this is not a partisan issue. This is a matter of right versus wrong.
Now, before you get the idea that I am disparaging the railroads, rest assured that I am not. The railroads did come to the table with a strong compensation package, including decent wage increases and bonuses. However, when it came to the quality-of-life concerns, such as sick leave that all union members seem to be echoing in unison on, the rail providers have failed. As I previously highlighted, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, private sector workers receive seven to eight days of sick leave per year. Rail union employees receive ZERO. In the words of ESPN’s Keyshawn Johnson, “C’mon Man!” Providing rail workers sick days would lead to a more content, productive workforce. One union claims that additional sick leave would cost the railroads a penny on every dollar of profit. While I can’t confirm the validity of that statistic, the premise is spot on – what little cost would be incurred by the railroads to satisfy worker wishes for additional sick leave would likely result in all 12 unions ratifying the agreement and a securing of the supply chain. The fact that the railroads are so unwilling to budge on this commonsense approach once again leads me to believe that many additional reforms are needed by the U.S. Surface Transportation Board to rein in the railroads and their current practices.
The fact of the matter is the global supply chain can ill-afford a strike. In the words of the American Trucking Associations, “Hospitals, businesses, and households depend on freight rail and trucking for their daily needs, and the trucking industry has neither the equipment nor the manpower to replace a single day of lost freight rail service.” The railroads know this and in many ways are holding every entity within the supply chain hostage with their hardnosed tactics of not offering additional sick leave. This is egregious. Railroads need to acquiesce to ensure we have a stable marketplace and supply chain.
You must be logged in to post a comment.