Keystone Worker's Agenda - a state worker rights proposal

Submitted by GraffitiTavern t3_122ah9m in Pennsylvania

Idea I'm bouncing around a compact set of common economic goals to organize around in PA, both via lobbying elected officials and direct action. Thoughts? Would you be interested in these and possibly sending them to your state officials, local civic groups, and/or union?

  1. Worker Safety(no more rail incidents and dangerous understaffing)
  2. Living Wage(raising the minimum wage and allowing local higher min wage, as well as cracking down on wage theft by employers)
  3. Protecting Right to Organize(both labor and tenant)
  4. Equality In the Workplace(leave equity and countering misogynist anti-worker policy)
  5. Onshoring and Sustainable Industry(prioritizing bringing green industry back to PA, we have lagged behind both NY and OH with onshoring)
12

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Logan_Holmes t1_jdpj8yq wrote

Isn’t this the PA Democratic Party platform? What’s the point of this?

15

GraffitiTavern OP t1_jdrumm9 wrote

The platforms often don't get implemented or are dropped quite quickly, I have just been trying to think of a few core economic demands which could be coordinated, and specifically counter a lot of the troubling national trends(deregulation, etc). I think I have communicated it badly, this wasn't a proposal for some new org or anything. Wages are still rock bottom where I live in Erie, and even if the Dems back min wage, they don't control the state senate, and popular organization would help ensure that we actually get some of this stuff implemented.

−2

Basileas t1_jdqjuub wrote

I think it's a lukewarm set of abstractions.

you need to repeal right to work laws, punish corporations engaging in price gouging and wage theft by multitudes of what they benefit, and you need severe punishments for corner cutting. being in construction, I am very concerned by what's standard practice here. in every instance the consumer and the worker bears the brunt

5

GraffitiTavern OP t1_jdrvwbq wrote

I agree, was floating general principles before specifics but I went too vague. The amount that corporations have been fucking with us recently is horrible. Dems have been either unwilling or unable to actually fix it, even if they support the stuff on paper or in a speech. I was just trying to consider some basic coordinated demands for people and groups throughout the state, to try and make a dent in actually getting us out of this hole. I think I communicated it badly in the original post.

1

Basileas t1_jdrwn33 wrote

i'd propose the death penalty be sentenced for wage theft... that'd clean things up real fuckin fast.. people here are getting bent over to no end..

1

SeptasLate t1_jdr9a4v wrote

I like the ideas but there's a few issues. These are all kind of general platitudes and I'm not sure what the practical applications are. What does legislation look like that ends "misogynist anti-worker policy" or dangerous staffing across industries? What does direct action look like? Need more specifics.

The other question is why is this platform more effective than joining one of the many groups that are already engaged in promoting these ideas?

2

ronreadingpa t1_jdt2zsb wrote

I'd add some more that are also important, but rarely mentioned.

Mandatory meal and rest breaks. PA does not require employers to offer any to employees over age 18. Many workers assume they have more rights than they really do. This is a prime example. Even many HR people don't know this. Most businesses provide some breaks, but varies with hospitality, restaurants, and convenience stores tending to be the worst.

Another one is requiring employers to pay out accrued vacation and personal time upon termination of employment. California and some other states require that, but not PA (unless a company has voluntarily stated otherwise in their employee handbook).

While on the topic of vacation, all employers should be required to provide 1 hour of paid vacation time per X number of hours worked. For example, 1 hour per 25 worked equaling 2 weeks paid or, less ideally, 1 hour per 50 worked equaling 1 week worth of paid vacation.

Points 4 and 5 will be distractions. Not saying they're not important, but are very difficult to define let alone getting buy-in even by other workers let alone businesses and the public-at large (voters). Best to focus on points 1-3.

1

Antique_Total_5473 t1_jdq8a89 wrote

No rail incidents? Maybe we should also legislate no more car accidents?

−3

thenewtbaron t1_jdqg5c5 wrote

So, when you crash your car, they set it on fire to "burn the bad chemicals away"?

So, when a normal two lane goes through a town, you are fine with going 100 miles per hour?

There is a fucking world of difference between rail and cars. Rails go one way and there should be no unknowns. Yeah, you can legislate that. Like if people were wanting to make roller coasters safer, you'd be whining about "well, we should make the swimming pool safer'

6

Antique_Total_5473 t1_jdqgqu5 wrote

My point was, you cannot legislate accidents. “No more rail accidents”.

You can regulate industries to reduce accident potential but no legislation can mandate “no more accidents”.

0

zorionek0 t1_jdqdhxm wrote

We should nationalize the railways

4

Antique_Total_5473 t1_jdqer1l wrote

How much more in taxes annually are you willing to pay for that? $50? $100? 1000? 10000?

−8

thenewtbaron t1_jdqgd11 wrote

Well but, who do you think is paying for their accidents now?

You already love socializing when things go wrong. Hell, you love socializing building it through eminent domain...

On top of that, if these companies are making a profit, why would nationalizing require paying g taxes?

8

Antique_Total_5473 t1_jdqgvwc wrote

You mean socialism not socializing. I’m not really a fan of either. Especially with dumb people that don’t understand the difference between socialism and socializing.

−2

thenewtbaron t1_jdqhlea wrote

Oh, I'm sorry, using a keyboard that auto correct... So you can ignore the whole argument for one mistake..

Good job, you successfully didn't have to actually have a good point or discuss in good faith!

5

zorionek0 t1_jdqfktz wrote

  1. About as much as I’m willing to pay for our bloated national defense budget.
  2. About as much as I’m willing to pay for the interstate highway system
  3. About as much as I’m willing to pay for the post office.

Some things are worth doing, cost isn’t even a factor.

5

Antique_Total_5473 t1_jdqg3rp wrote

Cost is always a factor. The food we eat, the amount of gas you pump, the style of shoes you wear. Our system is unsustainable and will implode at some point. The really old people who lived through the Great Depression understand this. We don’t, we think spending trillions more than we have is sustainable.

0

thenewtbaron t1_jdqhehs wrote

We had a balanced federal budget until bush decided to commit war crimes and start a decades long war in two countries that blew money we didn't have.... Did you whine about that as much?

Don't bring them into this the youngest one would be over 100 now and under 20 then... They wouldn't "know"

, the reason the great depression stayed around for as long was the lack of government intervention... In cascading problems. But hey, they needed to spend billions of dollars to help companies take over countries, they needed to whip up fake wars to spend billions on.... They knew the value of the dollar back then.

7

Antique_Total_5473 t1_jdqhkzd wrote

You sound so misinformed. You can’t be this misinformed. I think your adhd drugs have rotted your ability to think outside the box.

0

zorionek0 t1_jdqg9n7 wrote

Part of that unsustainability is runaway corporate profits. Compare the price of sending mail via a public good like the post office to that of UPS or FedEx.

Imagine if instead of free roadways you had to pay a toll every time you left your driveway. 75 years ago we invested in car infrastructure. Today we should invest in train infrastructure.

5

Antique_Total_5473 t1_jdqhc8c wrote

Find out the forces behind what keeps us from expanding our rail network. The political contributors and lobbyists, the nimby do gooders, the competitors of rail, the regulators, etc.

Find out why commuters prefer not to use it.

Look into the rail corporations and unions.

I don’t think you have done all your homework. It’s much more complex than you seem to think.

3

zorionek0 t1_jdqhoqa wrote

  1. Do really believe that having an oligopoly of 4 class-I railroads operating for profit compared to if we nationalized it and ran it as a public good would mean LESS service and expansion? The rail companies happily take record profits for declining service. The less they spend on crews and actual improvements to rail the happier their shareholders are.

  2. Because the railroads declined to install required safety infra to go above 79 mph for huge swaths of the rail network making rail uncompetitive with early regional airlines.

  3. A concerted government and business campaign to get people into cars rather than onto trains. It’s as much a policy choice as a consumer choice.

  4. Again- CORPORATIONS. I am proposing a national freight carrier (call it Amfreight) that would be responsible for doing all this without concern for profit. Unions are a good thing- the only reason they’ve been demonized is because the ownership hates having to share the fruits of labor’s labor with the actual workers.

6

GTholla t1_jdqtjbr wrote

reminds me of those 'only country on earth with crippling gun violence says nothing can be done about it' memes

3

throwawayamd14 t1_jdq669j wrote

Outside of protecting right to organize or going after wage theft this is kinda an inflationary agenda so I don’t think I’d be interested in the rest

−4