US Politics Mega-thread - Page 1035

At 7 a.m. on August 3, 1981, the union declared a strike, seeking better working conditions, better pay, and a 32-hour workweek (a four-day week and an eight-hour day combined). In addition, PATCO wanted to be excluded from the civil service clauses that it had long disliked. In striking, the union violated 5 U.S.C. (Supp. III 1956) 118p (now 5 U.S.C. § 7311), which prohibits strikes by federal government employees. After supporting PATCO's effort in his 1980 campaign, Ronald Reagan declared the PATCO strike a "peril to national safety" and ordered them back to work under the terms of the Taft–Hartley Act. Only 1,300 of the nearly 13,000 controllers returned to work. Subsequently, at 10:55 a.m., Reagan included the following in a statement to the media from the Rose Garden of the White House: "Let me read the solemn oath taken by each of these employees, a sworn affidavit, when they accepted their jobs: 'I am not participating in any strike against the Government of the United States or any agency thereof, and I will not so participate while an employee of the Government of the United States or any agency thereof.'" He then demanded those remaining on strike return to work within 48 hours, otherwise their jobs would be forfeited. At the same time, Transportation Secretary Drew Lewis organized for replacements and started contingency plans. By prioritizing and cutting flights severely, and even adopting methods of air traffic management that PATCO had previously lobbied for, the government was initially able to have 50% of flights available.

On August 5, following the PATCO workers' refusal to return to work, Reagan fired the 11,345 striking air traffic controllers who had ignored the order, and banned them from federal service for life. In the wake of the strike and mass firings, the FAA was faced with the task of hiring and training enough controllers to replace those that had been fired, a hard problem to fix as, at the time, it took three years in normal conditions to train a new controller. They were replaced initially with non-participating controllers, supervisors, staff personnel, some non-rated personnel, and in some cases by controllers transferred temporarily from other facilities. Some military controllers were also used until replacements could be trained. The FAA had initially claimed that staffing levels would be restored within two years; however, it took closer to ten years before the overall staffing levels returned to normal. PATCO was decertified by the Federal Labor Relations Authority on October 22, 1981. The decision was appealed.

Some former striking controllers were allowed to reapply after 1986 and were rehired; they and their replacements are now represented by the National Air Traffic Controllers Association, which was organized in 1987 and had no connection with PATCO. The civil service ban on the remaining strike participants was lifted by President Bill Clinton in 1993.

We’ve already received an email that our leave usage is under review and is being tracked for any sign of an organized strike or anything similar. If they find reason to believe there’s been an organized work stop we could be fired with legal action taken against us.

If a large number of air traffic controllers strike, Trump will immediately fire them all and say “Reagan did it too.”

On January 12 2019 00:42 Velr wrote:
How is it a strike if you don't show up because you are not getting paid? I mean, employment contracts have two sides? How is it fair for one side to break it while making it impossible for the other to retaliate?

On January 12 2019 00:15 Gorsameth wrote:
A full on national strike might be problematic. In the EU I would expect the courts to deny it.
A better approach would be forced delays, still massive economic damage as a pressure tool without the complete disruption of no flights at all.

On January 12 2019 00:46 Gorsameth wrote:
Because I assume the contract for 'critical personal' includes a part about being required to work during a government shutdown or some law existing to that effect?

On January 12 2019 00:38 Plansix wrote:
Interesting. I had not bothered to look it up and didn’t know this entire situation had already played out. Though I would posit that the situation in this case might have a different result because they are not being compensated for their labor at all. That changes the dynamic of the strike quite a bit.

So how does "thou shalt work for no pay during a government shutdown" not get ruled as unconstitutional?

On January 12 2019 00:57 m4ini wrote:


That's.. Debatable. The only reason why i've even picked up on this was an AMA by an employment attorney on reddit. There was a lawsuit in 2013, where it was argued that under the Fair Labor Standards Act it's unlawful to require anyone to work without pay. There's apparently currently an on-going lawsuit for this one as well.

It's a very grey zone, because it can be argued that they in fact are compensated for their work - just not on time.



Because that's not what's happening. At least, technically.

On January 12 2019 01:00 IyMoon wrote:



I know they have always been backpaid in the past, but there is no requirement that they are. It is just political suicide to not back pay them..... sooooo I am not 100% sure trump will do it if I am being honest

On January 12 2019 01:00 IyMoon wrote:



I know they have always been backpaid in the past, but there is no requirement that they are. It is just political suicide to not back pay them..... sooooo I am not 100% sure trump will do it if I am being honest

On January 12 2019 01:15 ticklishmusic wrote:
he's not trying to win in a court of law, he's trying to win in the court of public opinion

On January 12 2019 01:15 ticklishmusic wrote:
he's not trying to win in a court of law, he's trying to win in the court of public opinion

On January 12 2019 01:34 Plansix wrote:

I am going to say that he is a failure in both courts. Public opinion has not been swayed by his arguments that the investigation a fraud while people are getting dunked by the court left and right. This isn't the White Water investigation where they spent years digging and only found a perjury charge. The criminal evidence is falling from the trees.