A lot of people work on America's railroads. Some of them are ready to go on strike. This could, as early as this weekend, cause major disruptions in the supply chains of just about everything. And we all remember last year's holiday shopping season, when supply chain problems were so acute. So President Joe Biden and Congress are about to step into the fray and derail the possibility of a strike (so to speak). They could do so in a variety of ways, but whatever happens is likely to happen quite quickly (given the deadlines involved).

There are 12 Unions involved in negotiations with the major rail carriers. The railroad barons have been making money hand over fist of late, but still are being chintzy with their workers. They made one offer earlier this year that was rejected by the Unions. Negotiations were then undertaken and a compromise was worked out in September, with the help of President Biden's administration. The compromise is fairly decent in terms of pay raises, but it still lacks a very basic workers' right: guaranteed paid sick leave and paid time off for family emergencies. The compromise moved a baby step towards what most workers (and virtually all unionized workers) get as part of their employment, but only incrementally. Workers will still be left without the same consideration workers get in virtually every other industry: the ability to go to their boss and say: "I need a day off to go to the doctor," and not have their paycheck or their status with the company adversely affected as a direct result.

As mentioned, there are 12 Unions that had to either accept or reject the compromise. Four of them rejected it, while most voted to accept it. Now, the railroads have a long and tortured history with their Unions, and because of this historical fact, Congress and the president can step in and have the ultimate say. Railroads have always been crucial for the nation's economy, although not so much in the "private travel" sector in modern times (most people fly or drive, these days). But a lot of freight still moves by rail. As the New York Times pointed out:

The American Trucking Associations, an industry group, recently estimated that relying on trucks to work around a rail stoppage would require more than 450,000 additional vehicles -- a practical impossibility given the shortage of equipment and drivers.

That's a lot of freight that won't get moved if a strike happens. Right during the holiday shopping season, and right when inflation might actually be ebbing in a major way. The disruptions to the American economy would be severe. Which is why Congress has the right to get involved in the first place, and just impose a new contract on both the railroads and the workers.

The strike deadline is December 9th, but anything that moves by rail that is in any way perishable or volatile (such as chemicals, fertilizer) will halt shipments beginning this weekend. So the clock is ticking in a big way. The deadline was created with the unveiling of the proposal in September, to allow all the Unions time to discuss and vote on it. If all 12 had accepted it, we wouldn't now be talking about a strike. But only eight of them did.

Which brings us to where we stand. This morning, Biden made his move (from that previous Times article):

Democratic and Republican leaders in Congress vowed on Tuesday to pass legislation averting a nationwide rail strike, saying they agree with President Biden that a work stoppage just days before Christmas would disrupt shipping and deal a devastating blow to the nation's economy.

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the Democratic leader, said after a meeting at the White House with Mr. Biden and their Republican counterparts that they would act quickly to move legislation through the chambers.

"Tomorrow morning we will have a bill on the floor," Ms. Pelosi said. "I don't like going against the ability of unions to strike, but weighing the equities, we must avoid a strike. Jobs will be lost. Even union jobs will be lost."

Senator Mitch McConnell of Kentucky, the minority leader, told reporters after the meeting that "we're going to need to pass a bill" to avert a railway strike, suggesting that Republicans did not intend to try to block such a move.

This all puts Biden in a political bind, it is worth pointing out. Joe Biden is the most pro-Union president in a very long time -- it has been a strong political base of support for him over the course of his entire political career. In 1992, the last time Congress had to impose a contract on the railroads, Biden was one of only six senators to vote "no" on the deal. So his sympathies obviously lie with the Unions. But now he is president and has to take full responsibility if a strike were to occur. So he reluctantly told the congressional leaders to act, and to act fast.

The House probably will pass the measure. Over in the Senate, however, while the measure may have enough support to pass it may also get gummed up in time-consuming procedural problems, since only one senator's objections can slow the process down to a crawl. As you might expect, there is already one senator pushing to make the deal better. Here what Senator Bernie Sanders had to say about it all today:

If your question is will I demand a vote to make sure that workers in the rail industry have what tens of millions of Americans have... guaranteed paid sick leave? The answer is yes.

I appreciate the work the president and the secretary of Labor have done but at the end of the day you're looking at a terrible example of outrageous corporate greed with a railroad industry that's making record-breaking profits, $21 billion in the last nine months alone. I'm going to do everything I can to see that these workers are treated by these railroads with respect and dignity.

What's more surprising is that another senator is staking out a similar position -- Senator Marco Rubio, who tweeted [note: all grammatical errors and sloppiness left in...]:

The railways & workers should go back & negotiate a deal that the workers,not just the union bosses, will accept

But if Congress is forced to do it,I will not vote to impose a deal that doesn't have the support of the rail workers

That's some surprising solidarity, from his side of the aisle. So perhaps an amendment will be voted on in the Senate which would give the workers a much better deal. If Chuck Schumer agreed to hold a vote on such an amendment, it might preclude all the other parliamentary delays. There's no guarantee an amendment like that would pass, and if it did the deal would have to go back to the House and get a second vote. And of course, any other senator could also gum up the works, so we'll have to see how it all plays out.

The Unions may have to accept the compromise as it stands, but then again, eight of them already did. The rest of the deal is pretty generous, including a 24-percent raise over five years (from 2020 through 2024) and an $11,000 payout for workers when the deal is adopted. Biden may get some heat from the Unions, but that's a smaller political price to pay than having such a catastrophic strike in early December.

It is worth noting, too, that the Unions would be a lot better off if the compromise is forced upon them now than they would if this was happening in January. A Republican House might not be as interested in fending off economic disaster under a Democratic president, and even if they did pass a bill, they could easily pass the railroad industry's original offer (instead of the more-generous compromise). Which the workers would really hate.

The outcome is not going to please everybody, that much seems almost guaranteed. But Biden and Congress have to act to prevent this looming disaster. The trains have to run on time, especially in December. Hopefully the parliamentary delays won't be too drawn out and the workers won't actually strike at the end of next week. America needs its railroad workers to stay on the job... all the live-long day.

-- Chris Weigant

Follow Chris on Twitter: @ChrisWeigant