NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #18/NN_1992_18.iso/spool/misc/activism/progress/5922

Text File | 1992-08-19 | 11.3 KB | 219 lines

Newsgroups: misc.activism.progressive
Path: sparky!uunet!gumby!wupost!mont!pencil.cs.missouri.edu!daemon
From: [e-mail] (Harel Barzilai)
Subject: LABOR: Congress Joins Bush to Crush Rail Strike
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Followup-To: alt.activism.d
Originator: [e-mail]
Sender: [e-mail]
Nntp-Posting-Host: pencil.cs.missouri.edu
Organization: ?
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 03:17:01 GMT
Approved: [e-mail]
Lines: 204

[Via misc.activism.progressive from PeaceNet's labor.newsline]

    By forcing the rail workers to strike, and then shutting down the
    entire rail system, the rail bosses could go to Congress to get
    binding arbitration, with the Bush administration picking the
    settlement.
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    "yet that is exactly what these union-supported Democrats did.
    Instead of ordering the railroads to end the lockout, they helped
    push legislation through Congress that ordered an end to the
    strike and passed a law requiring binding arbitration, with Bush
    having the choice of picking the final proposal submitted by the
    arbitrator.  If Bush accepts the offer, it becomes law. If he
    disapproves, the unions are free to strike again, and the bosses
    can again lock out the union members.
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
    Many Conrail workers have had no pay increase for five years, ...
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
     'When it looks like workers can lose a strike, President Bush
    supports the right to strike. When it looks like workers can win a
    strike, President Bush opposes the right to strike.'

 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Topic 258       Railworkers vs. Democrats
dwalters        Labor News & Notes       5:00 pm  Aug 16, 1992
 - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Rail Workers Fightback
By JOSEPH TREPPER

In another open assault on U.S. workers' right to strike, the
Democratic-controlled Congress, at the urging of President Bush and
the rail companies, ordered railroad workers back to work under
binding arbitration.

The vote of 248 to 140 in the House of Representatives and 87 to 6 in
the Senate continued the union-busting role of the politicians of both
parties and followed up the role of Congress last August when they
ordered striking workers back to work and forced a concession
settlement on them that was proposed by rail bosses.  Unlike last
year, though, railroad workers were not out on a national strike.
After 1500 striking IAM machinists set up picket lines at the CSX rail
yards on June 25, 38 railroad companies locked out hundreds of
thousands of rail workers across the country and demanded that
Congress end the 'impasse.'

Since many other lines use the same rail tracks as CSX, the union
leadership pointed out that this was a company lockout. 'They have
locked out every freight employee in the country and are holding the
American people hostage by creating a severe economic emergency,' said
Joel Myron, a negotiator for the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way
Employees. 'They're playing Congress for a sucker.'

But Congress was not a 'sucker.' It was a co-conspirator with the rail
companies.  Rail bosses' strategy Over a year ago, Robert Schmiege,
the CEO of the Chicago and North Western line proposed in a letter to
other railroad bosses a united strategy to defeat the unions.
'Railroads need a legal framework which makes it difficult for unions
to create economic tests of strength. Railroads need a framework that
permits us to tactically manage the sequencing of the bargaining and
mediation phases.'

This letter was released to the rank and file in the June 1992 issue
of a rail magazine called Straight Track. [Editor's Note:
Subscriptions to Straight Track can be ordered by writing to 3948
Central Ave., N.E., Minneapolis, MN 55421.]  The management plan
worked out over the last year was to create a 'national transportation
crisis' by refusing to seriously negotiate with the unions. By forcing
the rail workers to strike, and then shutting down the entire rail
system, the rail bosses could go to Congress to get binding
arbitration, with the Bush administration picking the settlement.
John F. Peterpaul, the IAM vice president representing rail workers,
declared in a statement, 'There is no reason that one passenger or one
ounce of freight cannot be carried on the nation's railroads, except
for the irresponsible behavior of the freight carriers.'  Conditions
in rail

Many Conrail workers have had no pay increase for five years, and the
rail bosses wanted to change seniority rules that would increase the
number of workers who must travel long distances to work.
Additionally, wages have fallen significantly for Conrail workers.
Since deregulation, the average salary of a 15-year Conrail
Maintenance of Way employee is $26,000 a year. The pay of a first-year
trackperson on Amtrak with a spouse and three children is so low that
he or she can qualify for food stamps and housing assistance.

Every week Kevin Bellinski, one of the Conrail workers working at a
job site in New York, drives from his home in Canton, Ohio, to join
what the laborers call a 'tie gang,' a group of itinerant laborers who
work four 10-hour days plus overtime before returning home.
Bellinski's wife and co-workers, most of whom also said they commute
long distances, live in cramped boxcars austerely outfitted with bunk
beds, bathrooms and kitchens. The cars periodically move along the
rails providing a base from which the workers are deployed each
morning.

One of Conrail's demands was a change of the seniority rules in a way
that would force many workers to travel even farther from their homes
than they already do.  Union-busting Congress and Bush When rail
machinists struck at the CSX corporation, the rail bosses' plan went
into effect, as they proceeded to shut down the entire rail system.

Congress immediately called hearings, and management, along with
Bush's transportation secretary, Andrew H. Card Jr., called for
legislation immediately to end the strike.  Jed Dodd, chief negotiator
for Conrail and Amtrak Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way workers,
warned Congress to stay out: 'Congress has a choice of either being a
union-buster or of respecting the rights of American railway workers.'
Dodd continued, 'When it looks like workers can lose a strike,
President Bush supports the right to strike. When it looks like
workers can win a strike, President Bush opposes the right to strike.'
UAW-supported Representative John D. Dingell (D-Mich.), as well as
IAM-supported Representative Al Swift (D-Wash.) both held hearings in
Congress to put the rail workers back to work with binding
arbitration.

Dingell is chair of the House Energy and Commerce Committee and Swift
is chair of the House Commerce Subcommittee on Transportation and
Hazardous Materials.  'Congress is very uncomfortable in the role of
picking winners and losers in labor disputes,' said Rep. Al Swift Q
yet that is exactly what these union-supported Democrats did.  Instead
of ordering the railroads to end the lockout, they helped push
legislation through Congress that ordered an end to the strike and
passed a law requiring binding arbitration, with Bush having the
choice of picking the final proposal submitted by the arbitrator.  If
Bush accepts the offer, it becomes law. If he disapproves, the unions
are free to strike again, and the bosses can again lock out the union
members.

Representative Dingell was quite proud of the action, proclaiming that
the House had 'established that the Congress can and does move
speedily when the public interest requires.'  Bankruptcy of
misleadership George Kourpias, international president of the IAM,
said after this proposal was passed: 'We're getting hundreds of
members who are upset that their collective-bargaining rights were
being taken away from them even when we decided not to create a
national crisis, and then the carriers went ahead and shut down the
country.'

It should have been no surprise, however, to Kourpias and others in
the union leadership that Congress would not allow rail workers to
strike against the railroads.

Last August, after a strike of two days, Congress ordered 235,000
railroad workers back to work in a 400-to-5 vote that outlawed the
strike and imposed a management-designed concession settlement.  This
has led to the loss of tens of thousands of jobs as well as worsening
health and safety conditions on the track. Virtually the entire
leadership of the rail unions has refused to expose the responsibility
of Congress in allowing rail management to destroy the safety of the
railroad industry as well.

Aware of the collaboration between the railroad bosses, the Congress
and the Bush administration, Kourpias and most of the leadership of
the rail unions did nothing to mobilize the rest of the labor movement
to back the right to strike.  They refused to organize labor
demonstrations aimed at Congress to defend the right to strike and
protest the attacks on health and safety conditions. They did not even
prepare their own membership to understand what they were facing.

This did not stop some locals from organizing solidarity rallies to
back the right to strike. In the San Francisco Bay Area, UTU Local
1730, representing Union Pacific brakemen and switchers, called a
support rally at the Oakland yard and demanded that Congress stay out
of their fight with management.  War against rail labor

The war against rail labor must be answered by a new strategy when the
major rail contracts expire in 1995. Rail workers should begin to
prepare now for a real national rail strike that will have the backing
of the entire working class.  Rail workers should begin to have joint
solidarity conferences with Teamsters and longshoreworkers on both
coasts to prepare for 1995. The support of rail workers for
longshoreworkers could be an important question in the upcoming West
Coast ILWU-PMA contract negotiations in 1993.

Planning real solidarity in the transportation industry is critical.
Preparation is also going ahead to establish a labor computer
electronic conference that would link up all railroad workers in the
United States, Canada and Mexico.  This would provide an immediate
vehicle to get information and discussion going on among all union
members in rail.  For information on this electronic conference you
should write to Labornet at 18 De Boom St., San Francisco, CA 94107,
or phone [phone].

At the same time, rail labor Q as well as the rest of the trade unions
Q must draw the political lessons of the political attack on their
basic rights by the so-called Democratic Party 'friends of labor.'
Rail workers must begin the campaign in their unions for support to
the formation of a labor party. The UTU, BMWE, IBEW, IAM and TCU can
take a lead in the formation of a labor party by using their resources
for independent labor candidates who will defend their right to
strike.

This summer, the IAM will be holding its national convention. IAM
Local 565 in Sunnyvale, Calif., has submitted a resolution for a labor
party that will be taken up. It is important that all IAM members give
backing to this action and begin the campaign throughout the country.

Reprinted with permission from:
The Organizer
4017 24th St.#19
San Francisco, CA 94114
1 Year, 12 issues, $12.