American Railroad Conflict Approaches Climax

The bourgeoisie loudly proclaims its victory: a national rail strike has been averted. Overnight talks between representatives of the unions and the carriers, with officials of the federal government acting as mediators, leading right up to the publicly announced strike deadline, have resulted in a last-minute deal. Depending on whether this tentative agreement is ratified by the rank-and-file, a strike may still occur, but the emergency round of negotiations has at least postponed it.

The latest events are the culmination of years of collective bargaining which has stalled on several occasions over various issues including wages, healthcare, and scheduling. Most recently, the government intervened by appointing a Presidential Emergency Board. After hearing both the unions and the carriers make cases for their own proposals, the board released its recommendations. Indicative of their bias in favor of the carriers was the latter’s unqualified support from day one, while the unions hesitated to even put them to a vote; where they did so, based on the scant publicly available information, the rank-and-file overwhelmingly rejected the recommendations.

Further intervention by the state was necessary to resolve the crisis. President Biden met and spoke with both sides to ensure that the conflict remained within the bounds of order, preventing any extension or intensification of the struggle, while one of his highly-touted “pro-labor” appointees, Secretary of Labor Marty Walsh, himself a former union official, acted as the mediator in the overnight talks.

With the expiration of the thirty-day cooling period following the release of the board’s proposals, which would have allowed the unions to strike, only hours away, the carriers agreed to concede a few minor changes to the board’s proposals, such as employee healthcare contribution caps and the right to request in advance (but not necessarily be granted) one additional day off per year.

The current government is a quintessential example of the “collaborationist” strategy of the bourgeoisie against the proletariat. Its “progressive” mask serves the propagandistic and ideological function of making the state appear as a neutral mediator between labor and capital, or even as the benevolent, protective father of the working class, while also perpetuating the illusion that capital can be peacefully and legally made to actually improve the living and working conditions of the working class. In reality, however, as we can see in the terms of the tentative agreement, capital need not make any serious concessions even under the pressure of a “left-wing” regime, so workers see few substantial changes in their everyday lives.

Although the “pro-labor” government does indeed support unions, which return the favor by calling upon their membership to support said political leaders at the ballot box rather than striking, its support is conditional on the unions’ “good behavior”. Conservative, collaborationist unions receive favorable treatment, while militancy continues to be repressed and independence is sabotaged at every opportunity. Moreover, the benefits offered by the state mostly accrue to opportunists in the upper echelons of the union bureaucracy, who may, for example, be offered a lucrative, cushy job in the federal government in exchange for cooperation.

Existing unions have largely embraced the role of the parasitic middleman between labor and capital, extracting dues from members and bribes from the company; at the same time, they blackmail the state with the fact that, as the representatives of the workers, they’re the only ones capable of containing class struggles and thereby ensuring social peace – a threat that’s especially persuasive in the face of the potential outbreak of war between great powers.

The degeneration of the unions is a sign of the present weakness of the working class, which the corrupt seek to perpetuate. However, at the same time, the machinations of opportunists in the unions as well as political leaders in the government are signs that they are haunted by the potential resurgence of the labor movement, following a militant, independent class line. A revived working class could easily stop the fragile schemes of internal and external enemies.

Arrayed on all sides are forces – corporations, union officials, and the government – trying to stop a mass strike on the railroads at all costs. Let’s examine some of their arguments:

Conditions aren’t that bad

There are issues with wages, healthcare, and more as well, but let’s just take a look at scheduling for now. Railroad workers are on call 24/7. While a typical worker in the United States gets two days off per week plus two weeks vacation per year, adding up to 118 days, railroad workers usually get 30 days off per year. They are so overworked that, despite extensive applications of science and technology, as well as the regulations put in place to prevent accidents which are very costly to the companies, train derailments due to operator fatigue are remarkably common. In addition, there have been multiple instances of “Positive Train Control”, a system that automates some aspects of train operation and which has been used by employers to justify cutting the transportation workforce, “working” as intended and still derailing trains.

If the job really is that bad, why don’t you just quit and find a new job?

The challenges of changing jobs hardly need to be mentioned here. But quitting also means giving up on the struggle, implicitly acknowledging defeat. It means leaving your coworkers behind in a situation that you couldn’t stand. In any case, the job needs to be done by someone, so your future replacement would suffer just as you did. Lastly, quitting means forfeiting the retirement that is arguably the number one reason long-time workers (i.e., those employed over ten years) remain in the industry. Individual action cannot address a social problem; collective action is necessary.

What of the dangers of escalation, retaliation

A valid concern. Certainly, more organization, more preparation, and leadership that is more ready to take the struggle to the very end, even to a revolutionary conclusion, would be good. However, if a critical mass of workers decides to strike, we must not refuse to take action in solidarity with them, let alone sabotage their movement as some false friends of labor do. Neither should we prioritize the survival of union institutions over the purpose of their existence: to facilitate the struggles of the working class.

The public would oppose a strike

Perhaps, but not necessarily. Public support for unions is at a high-point compared to previous decades. Further, there are measures the unions can take to win support for the strike from broader sections of the working class. For instance, they can advance universal demands that would meet the needs of the entire working class, such as wage raises for all categories of workers, not just railroad workers, or a law for more rigorous limitation of the working day. The collective actions of a particular industry underscore the need for generalized industrial action across all sectors of the economy.

Striking will damage the national economy

What’s the point of a strike if not to damage the economy? That’s workers using their only leverage: namely, the obvious truth that if nobody worked, then society would collapse in a matter of days. Unless failing to meet the workers’ demands would result in even greater harm, why would their opponents even listen to them?

Profits belong to capital, not labor

According to the Presidential Emergency Board’s report, the carriers insist that profits are due to investment and risk, not labor; hence, workers do not deserve raises simply because profits have increased. Even if we leave aside the fact that the capital invested and put at risk by the companies is nothing more than the accumulated product of past labor appropriated by the owners of the means of production, the claim is patently nonsensical. If labor isn’t responsible for making profits for the company, then why don’t they fire their entire workforce and save all the unnecessary expenditures on the wage bill? By striking, the workers would practically be doing their employers a favor; so why oppose the strike?

* * *

The steering committee of Railroad Workers United, a rank-and-file organization promoting combativeness and association of workers within and between the rail unions, adopted the following resolutions on the potential national rail strike. We reproduce it here:

Whereas, the major freight rail carriers continue to refuse to bargain in good faith, leaving national negotiations with the unions at a standstill; and

Whereas, these same carriers – represented by the National Carriers Conference Committee (NCCC) – have been making record profits for years, including all through the pandemic; and

Whereas, Precision Scheduled Railroading, firings and furloughs; increased discipline and harassment; massive job cuts, short-staffing, and chronic fatigue; together with unpaid claims and wholesale abrogation of the union contract has left railroad workers frustrated, angry, and ready to fight back; and

Whereas, countless workers in an array of industries nationwide are fighting back, organizing, striking, and winning; and

Whereas, current conditions appear to be ripe for railroad workers to mount a successful national strike, including but not limited to:

• A general labor shortage where the rail carriers are unable to recruit and retain employees in the various crafts, including train and engine service.
• Supply chains in crisis, as goods in transit are hampered at every turn.
• Public opinion that has sided with striking workers throughout 2021.
• The record profits generated by the carriers, together with their alienation of shippers, passengers and communities, which suggest that railroad strikers would enjoy vast public support.
• Rail unions of late that have been largely standing together.
• The fact that the carriers have attacked ALL rail workers, solidifying workers from all crafts, unions, and carriers.
• The existence of a sitting President who claims to be “the most pro-labor President you have ever had”.

Whereas, such favorable conditions for rail workers outlined above have not existed for decades – if ever – and will not continue indefinitely;

Therefore, Be it Resolved that RWU urges all railroad workers to consider the strike option, and to prepare for such a strike; and

Be it further Resolved that RWU urge the rail unions to educate their respective memberships on:

• the Railway Labor Act (RLA) under which our actions are governed;
• the history of rail strikes;
• the benefits and risks of taking such action with webinars, printed materials, presentations at local union meetings, and other means of communication; and

Be it further Resolved that RWU urge the rail unions to poll their respective members for a strike vote so as to ascertain the willingness of the respective memberships to take such action; and

Be it Further Resolved that RWU urge the rail unions to undertake informational picketing, “practice” strikes, and other high-profile activities to mobilize the membership, put the carriers on notice that we mean business; to educate the public as to our cause; and to mobilize our allies; and

Be it Finally Resolved, that the rail craft unions put aside their petty differences and take this opportunity to consummate a single bargaining coalition of all rail labor in order to achieve the greatest possible solidarity, unity, and power.