3 ms·
> The trade off seemed to come down to "sick days for workers" vs. "lower costs for consumers" It doesn't have to raise prices. The costs imposed by the sick d
by fineIllregister 4y ago
> The trade off seemed to come down to "sick days for workers" vs. "lower costs for consumers"
It doesn't have to raise prices. The costs imposed by the sick days (millions) are absolutely dwarfed by annual profits (billions).
- Workaccount2 4y agoI think the issue is that the railroads are running thin crews and extremely tight schedules. So Jim the engineer calling in 3 hours before he is due to commandeer 2,500 tons of freight for 500 miles creates a dire situation that not only delays that train, but throws off the schedule of dozens of other trains. I'm just hypothesizing here, and I feel like I am missing something since it doesn't seem like having/adding on-call employees was an option.
- fineIllregister 4y agoI'm not sure what you're talking about. The railway companies estimate the costs of the sick time to be in the millions. See their official submission to the President here: https://ble-t.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/PEB_250_Recommendation_2022.pdf https://ble-t.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/08/PEB_250_Recomme... They would have considered everything you mentioned in their cost estimate.