this post was submitted on 07 Mar 2025
328 points (100.0% liked)
Work Reform
11298 readers
44 users here now
A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.
Our Philosophies:
- All workers must be paid a living wage for their labor.
- Income inequality is the main cause of lower living standards.
- Workers must join together and fight back for what is rightfully theirs.
- We must not be divided and conquered. Workers gain the most when they focus on unifying issues.
Our Goals
- Higher wages for underpaid workers.
- Better worker representation, including but not limited to unions.
- Better and fewer working hours.
- Stimulating a massive wave of worker organizing in the United States and beyond.
- Organizing and supporting political causes and campaigns that put workers first.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Does the president actually have the power to union-bust, or is he just continuing to do what he wants...? I realize it's largely an academic question, since no one will resist this guy's illegal actions...
The implication of the summary text is that the protections were granted by executive mandate, not through legislation, so presumably they could be revoked the same way.
I'm largely uninformed on the specifics, but it's insane that he can use EOs to give himself the authority to do a thing, then go do the thing he previously wasn't allowed to do. What the fuck, America!?
It's a little bit confusing, but from what I've read, the collective bargaining rights that they previously enjoyed were granted from the beginning by the agency's administrator, so it follows that they can be revoked by the agency's administrator in turn.
Here's a 2011 NPR article covering when they were initially granted those rights.
As always, this is the danger in allowing such rules to be set by the executive branch instead of codified into law — when the next guy is in office, they can always easily undo it.
Yes. Reagan did it.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Professional_Air_Traffic_Controllers_Organization_(1968)
Quite a deal at the time.
No, he doesn’t. This is Trump just hurling executive orders at things he doesn’t like.
Biden did it with the potential rail industry strikes, so yes.
That’s incorrect, and these situations aren’t close to comparable.
When Biden was in power, eight out of twelve unions had already ratified the contract, and the senate passed a bill to force the final four to accept it. It passed 80-15, so Biden couldn’t have vetoed it if he wanted to.
Trump is attempting to ban unions altogether, by executive order.
OP's point stands though, whether it’s right or not, it seems to be within the President's power.
I clarified further. In the rail strike case, it was a senate bill, not an executive action. And the bill passed 80-15. Biden signed the bill, but that isn’t the same thing at all.
He literally could have vetoed it if he wanted to and put it back in the hands of the Senate but OK.
With such a high majority it would have just been overturned immediately, so no, he couldn’t have vetoed the bill. An attempt to do so wouldn’t have helped at all and might have undermined future cooperation.
Yes. He could have. Actions have meaning. He chose not to.
I’ve already addressed that point.