BEGIN:VCALENDAR VERSION:2.0 X-WR-CALNAME:www.indybay.org PRODID:-//indybay/ical// v1.0//EN BEGIN:VEVENT UID:Indybay-18854782 SEQUENCE:19018877 CREATED:20230308T054800Z DESCRIPTION:From Hunters Point To East Palestine, Ohio\n\nProsecute & Jail Tetra Tech & Norfolk Southern CEOs\n\nSTOP The Cover-up\n\nImmediate Evacuation of The People & Workers Of East Palestine & Full Compensation By Norfolk Southern\n\nNationalize The Railroads Under Workers Control To Protect Communities, Workers & The Public\n\nPress Conference/Rally\nMonday March 13, 2023 4:00 PM\nUS Federal Building 450 Golden Gate St\nSan Francisco, CA\n\n\nThe criminal cover-up of the Hunters Point supposed clean-up and remediation by Tetra Tech which cost over $1 billion is now directly connected to the man made catastrophe and poisoning by the Norfolk Southern railroad wreck in East Palestine, Ohio.\n\nDespite the fact the the Department of Justice DOJ has joined a lawsuit against Tetra Tech for falsifying records at Hunters Point shipyard and retaliation against over 10 whistleblowers, the Region 5 EPA in Ohio has allowed Norfolk Southern railroad company to hire Tetra Tech for air testing in East Palestine. \n\nNot surprisingly all the tests came back negative and the railroad and EPA are saying that it is safe. This criminal cover-up by the railroad and Tetra Tech is being allowed by not only EPA officials including EPA administrator Michael Regan but by Biden’s Department of Transportation led by Pete Buttigieg. Why are they protecting these environmental criminals who are poisoning the community and workers?\n\nThey have also allowed the Norfolk Southern police to take over the control of East Palestine. They are deciding who goes where to protect their liability and profits.\n\nThis press conference will connect the dots between the Hunters Point catastrophe and what the people and workers are going through now in East Palestine. Why has this company with a criminal record of managers going to prison for crimes being allowed to do testing in East Palestine? Also, we will discuss the deadly record of the deregulated railroad industry and how the need now is for the nationalization of the industry to protect communities, workers and the public. Every day we face another wreck because of this deregulation and capture of OSHA, EPA and other agencies that should be protecting the public.\n\n\nSpeakers from Hunters Point/Bay View and trade unionists\n\nNo More Poisoning At Hunters Point & East Palestine\n\nImmediate Evacuation of All Residents of East Palestine & Compensation for Their Homes, Businesses & Relocation To Safe Area Paid For By Norfolk Southern Railroad\n\nAn Injury To One Is An Injury For All\n\nSponsored by United Front Committee For A Labor Party\nwww.ufclp.org info@ufclp.org\n\nTetra Tech Air Testing Results In East Palestine Ohio\nhttps://www.epa.gov/system/files/documents/2023-02/Continuous%20Monitoring%20Summary%20Table_20230217_rev01_0.pdf\n\nDemanding Transparency in East Palestine, Ohio\nThe EPA Cover-up and Fraud At Hunters Point Shipyard & Treasure Island\n\nhttps://www.counterpunch.org/2023/02/24/demanding-transparency-in-east-palestine-ohio/\n\nFEBRUARY 24, 2023\nBY GREG M. SCHWARTZFacebookTwitterRedditEmail\n\nDrone footage shows the freight train derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, U.S., February 6, 2023 in this screengrab obtained from a handout video released by the NTSB.\n\nNorfolk Southern’s toxic train wreck disaster in East Palestine, Ohio is one of America’s worst environmental catastrophes in memory. The Trump regime’s slash-and-burn approach to government regulation is a clear culprit for the railroad safety issues that paved the way for the crash, yet the Biden administration’s hands aren’t clean either since President Biden busted a potential railroad worker strike by forcing their union to take a deal the majority didn’t like.\n\nThe situation highlights a disturbing level of regulatory capture in America by corporations that always prioritize profits over people and safety, regardless of which party occupies the White House. Then there are the citizens of East Palestine and the surrounding region who are left to pick up the pieces, with grave concern about whether the air, water, and soil in their town are still safe.\n\nMost Americans have little choice in such situations but to look to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for answers. EPA chief Michael Regan went to East Palestine and told residents to “Trust the science”, but longtime watchdogs of the beleaguered agency don’t find comfort in Regan’s assurances.\n\n“As a former EPA employee in the Office of Enforcement, I am always wary when a political appointee tells the public to ‘Trust the science’,” says Dr. Mike Ketterer, a former Ohio resident who worked in the EPA’s Office of Enforcement from 1987-93 and is a professor emeritus of chemistry and biochemistry at Northern Arizona University.\n\n“In my experience at EPA, the fraud that took place was always in two areas – it was how and where you took the sample, and the second was what you did not test for, or how low did you strive to achieve for detection limits?” Ketterer added in a recent interview with this reporter. “It’s easy to prove something is clean if you don’t want to find it.”\n\nI first interviewed Ketterer in 2006, when I was a graduate journalism student at Kent State University investigating a story in which local citizens and activists alleged the EPA had engaged in a vast coverup of secretive military dumping of radioactive Cold War weapons waste at the Industrial Excess Landfill (IEL) in Uniontown, Ohio in the late ‘60s/early ’70s. The landfill just north of Canton became an EPA Superfund site in the ‘80s and has been engulfed in controversy for at least four decades.\n\nKetterer was among a handful of expert scientific consultants retained by the local group Concerned Citizens of Lake Township to advise on issues surrounding EPA’s testing and remediation at the landfill. He also more recently took the initiative to advise Ohio citizens regarding contamination from the Department of Energy’s (DOE) Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion site in Pike County.\n\n“This is not just garden-variety technical incompetence on EPA’s part, it is scientific and regulatory fraud,” Ketterer told me in 2006, regarding mental gymnastics that Ohio EPA had cited to discount the potential presence of nuclear isotopes at the IEL. He maintained that stance when he wrote to the EPA in 2021 concerning their most recent “Five-Year Review” of the IEL, stating that “EPA has never adequately investigated or explained why either tritium or 99Tc would even be present at the IEL.” He further stated that even if readings of tritium and/or Technetium-99 were well below Maximum Contaminant Levels allowable, “their presence alone points to a problematic source of DOE waste at the IEL.”\n\n”With regulatory capture, it doesn’t matter who’s in charge of the executive branch of government. There’s always a wink-wink between EPA’s political leadership and the regulating community,” Ketterer explained. He added that the “tentacles” go down to the regional levels, where some EPA employees will have an eye on the private sector where they can potentially earn twice as much.\nThen there’s the issue with EPA and the polluters outsourcing sampling and testing to a phalanx of environmental services contractors looking to please their employers, so as to win more contracts. A potentially troubling case in point has already popped up in East Palestine, where Norfolk Southern contracted with AECOM for preliminary water testing. The Huff Post reported last week that samples weren’t handled in compliance with federal EPA standards and were in fact deemed “sloppy” and “amateur” by other experts. The Ohio EPA acknowledged how samples weren’t properly preserved or acidified, yet were deemed “acceptable due to the next-day processing at the laboratory.”\n\nTaking water samples that aren’t properly preserved and/or acidified in the field can compromise the integrity of the samples and lead to undercounting of contaminants. This strategy takes a page right out of the playbook utilized by EPA contractors in multiple rounds of water sampling at the IEL, as I reported in my “Buried Secrets” story for the Cleveland Free Times in 2006.\nGroundwater samples taken in 2000 by Sharp & Associates in a plan overseen by radiation expert John Frazier from Auxier & Associates – contractors hired by the Akron area rubber companies that had contributed most of the waste at the IEL – were not acidified for preservation, yet revealed samples with “potential” hits for plutonium. DOE radiochemist Dave Sill told me that “analyzing unacidified water samples for plutonium is not scientifically defensible” when I interviewed him in 2006. But that’s what commercial lab Thermoretec in Oak Ridge, Tennessee did (perhaps on the instructions of Frazier, a nebulous rabbit hole.)\n\nDave Sill sadly passed on in 2021, though this means I can now reveal that he was my DOE source who didn’t want to be identified in 2019-20 when I interviewed him again for my deep dive series, “2020 Hindsight on Corrupted Radiation Testing at the EPA”, published in the San Francisco Bay View. (Sill told me in 2019 that he feared being “squashed like a bug” by the Trump DOE if he spoke out to a reporter about regulatory corruption at EPA or DOE.)\n\n“It’s all crooked as shit! They’ll say ‘So what, it’s just global fallout,” a disgusted Sill told me after he analyzed a 2001 lab report on the Sharp samples, which revealed to his eyes how a particularly notable sample with potential plutonium had been discounted due to how the lab stopped the count time prematurely. Stopping the count when they did avoid what Sill said would become a statistically positive hit for plutonium if they had counted to DOE lab standards.\nAnother one of the contractors accused of sampling mistakes at the IEL was the Planning Research Corporation (PRC), which was later acquired by a growing government contracting behemoth named Tetra Tech Inc., in 1995. PRC was then renamed Tetra Tech EM by 1998. Tetra Tech Inc., recently popped up in Ohio again as the EPA contractor that was preparing the air monitoring reports in East Palestine.\n\nTetra Tech Inc., is also the parent company of Tetra Tech EC, a subsidiary that’s being sued by the Department of Justice for what’s been called “the biggest case of eco-fraud in U.S. history”, for their role in the botched Navy cleanup at the former Hunters Point Naval Shipyard site in San Francisco. Two supervisors from Tetra Tech EC were fired, convicted and jailed for falsifying soil sample surveys in the radiological remediation work being performed. Tetra Tech deemed the guilty duo to be “rogue employees” acting on their own.\n\nTetra Tech’s lawyers don’t like how I’ve previously pointed out that Tetra Tech EC’s eco-fraud at Hunters Point in San Francisco was in fact preceded by Tetra Tech EM’s (nee PRC) involvement in radiological sampling controversy years earlier at the IEL in Ohio. This inconvenient truth came to light in 2018, when Ohio activist Chris Borello dug up a 1998 press releasefrom the Project on Government Oversight (POGO) in D.C. questioning why the EPA was rehiring a contractor at the IEL named then as “PRC/Tetra Tech” when the contractor had been found to have made numerous mistakes in sampling procedures at the site.\n\n“The EPA’s continued use of the firm PRC/Tetra Tech, which has compromised earlier rounds of testing, goes against all logic and common sense,” POGO lamented. “The question then needs to be asked as to why the EPA is turning to PRC once again to conduct critical field tests that may be used in court to justify an inadequate cleanup plan?”\n\nThe list of mistakes was similar to what whistleblowers had reported about Tetra Tech EC at Hunters Point, including one item that was exactly the same – “numerous mistakes in the chain-of-custody forms” that created reasonable uncertainty about the samples in question.\nPOGO also noted how PRC’s 1992-93 samples yielded “possible plutonium detections” but that the samples were field filtered, a process experts said could remove some of the particles. \nFurther digging in the EPA’s IEL files revealed that Tetra Tech EM was involved in another questionable groundwater sampling in 1998, then was questionably tasked by EPA in 2001 with preparing the “Community Involvement Plan” (which POGO again objected to.)\n\nMaybe Tetra Tech is using the best available science in East Palestine. But the controversies at the IEL & Hunters Point illustrate why transparency from the EPA is badly needed now to alleviate current skepticism. If Michael Regan wants the public to trust the science, why won’t the EPA release the technical field plans that Tetra Tech and the EPA’s 15 other contractors are using in East Palestine?\n\nRenowned environmental attorney Steven Donziger – famed for his highly contentious legal battles with Chevron over their pollution in Ecuador – is also calling out for such transparency from the EPA and Norfolk Southern this week.\n\n“After battling an oil company over the discharge of toxic waste in the Amazon, I can say with some assurance that Norfolk’s response to this crisis so far comes from a time-tested corporate strategy: manage the situation as a public relations challenge and not the humanitarian and ecological catastrophe that it is,” Donziger noted. He called for President Biden to establish an independent task force outside of the EPA to manage the toxic crisis, since “industry does not respect the power of government to regulate it.”\nDonziger also pointed out how corporate capture of the EPA deepened during the Trump era, with further corporate lobbying for regulatory cuts that created a mass exodus, which left the EPA severely understaffed and corrupted by the chemical industry.\nCongressional investigators should also look at the troubling financial circumstances that connect Norfolk Southern and Tetra Tech Inc. The top two shareholders of Norfolk Southern are The Vanguard Group Inc., and Black Rock Institutional Trust Company. The top two shareholders of Tetra Tech Inc. are The Vanguard Group Inc., and Black Rock Fund Advisors. This suggests that while Norfolk Southern is taking a financial hit from the disaster in East Palestine, Tetra Tech is banking off that very same disaster as one of the EPA’s contractors for environmental monitoring and perhaps the cleanup. These circumstances would seem to encourage a company like Norfolk Southern to take risks with safety, since they know their biggest investors can make up such losses on the back end.\nOf course, it’s not just Tetra Tech and AECOM that warrant such scrutiny, but all of the private contractors being employed by EPA and Norfolk Southern in East Palestine, Ohio. The only way for EPA and these contractors to win trust is to be 100 percent transparent about what they’re doing and how they’re doing it. Holding back on full transparency only makes it look like they may well have something to hide.\n\nPoison and private police: Norfolk Southern destroys East Palestine\n\nhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZWy7y3pxSwk\n \nFeb 28, 2023 #TheGrayzone\nReporter Jeremy Loffredo reports for The Grayzone from East Palestine, Ohio, where Norfolk Southern's detonation of a train filled with vinyl \nchloride has poisoned the town's waterways and left residents wondering if they have to permanently relocate. While there, Loffredo learns \nof private police and environmental consultants paid by Norfolk Southern to enforce the corporation's narrative of a successful clean-up.\n\nEast Palestine EPA Cover-up & SF Hunters Point/Treasure Island Connection with Greg Schwartz\nhttps://youtu.be/DrMN3JEn0ZQ\nOne of the contractors testing air quality at the air in East Palestine railroad catastrophe is contractor \nTetra Tech Inc. This company is being sued by the US Department of Justice along with Tetra Tech \nhealth and safety whistleblowers in San Francisco for retaliation after exposing massive fraud. After \nthe Federal government spent $1 billion they found that Tetra Tech had manipulated and falsified the \ntesting on the radioactive dump site. Now the EPA has allowed this company to be involved in testing \nat East Palestine. Investigative journalist Greg Schwartz talks about the cover-up by the EPA and \nRegion 5 in Ohio and how this is connected to the actions of Tetra Tech the San Francisco Bay Area.\nHe also reports that BlackRock has interests both in Norfolk Southern railway and Tetra Tech Inc.\nAdditional Media:\nDemanding Transparency in East Palestine, Ohio\nhttps://www.counterpunch.org/2023/02/24/demanding-transparency-in-east-palestine-ohio/\nOhio & EPA officials say East Palestine's water is safe. But where's the full data?\nhttps://www.cincinnati.com/story/news/2023/02/24/east-palestine-water-declared-safe-but-more-testing-underway/69923447007/\nThe NTSB, East Palestine Railroad Catastrophe, Rail Safety & Nationalization With RWU's Hugh Sawyer\nhttps://youtu.be/auXlY-Vt1gA\n"Nuking A Town With Chemicals To Get A Railroad Open" & Railroad Labor With SMART's Jerad Cassity\nhttps://youtu.be/j6hawlR02KE\nPalestine Ohio Train Wreck, Greed & The Systemic Crisis In US Rail System With RWU Gabe Christenson\nhttps://youtu.be/cEm1x6zezaA\n"Cleaning The Swamp" Hunters Point Tetra Tech Workers Blow Whistle On Criminal Cover-up & Corruption\nhttps://youtu.be/ky5QFa-q1UU\nSF Hunters Point Tetra Tech Whistleblowers Speak Out About Criminal Cover-up & Bullying\nhttps://youtu.be/2GGHz9duZz8\nhttp://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/Hunters-Point-Whistleblowers-Expose-More-Alleged-Fraud-of-Shipyard-Cleanup--431638053.html\nhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J_YVou0kmQI&feature=youtu.be\nCorruption Galore! SF Hunters Point TI Radioactive Cover-up For Profits With Dr. Ahimsa Sumchai\nhttps://youtu.be/TL0dv4Jhdl8\nThe UCSF LARC AFSCME 3299/UPTE Workers Sickness & Dr. Ahimsa Sumchai\nhttps://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio/ww-4-30-20-the-ucsf-larc-afscme-3299upte-workers-sickness-dr-ahimsa-sumchai\nContractor Submitted False Radiation Data at Hunters Point\nhttps://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/local/contractor-submitted-false-radiation-data-at-hunters-point/79399/\nOSHA Corruption, Cover-up & US Inspector Generals With OHSA Whistleblower & Lawyer Darrell Whitman\nhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YDPQpqmUq2k\nThe Struggle for Justice At SF Hunters Point Naval Shipyard & Dr. Ahimsa Porter Sumchai\nhttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZMm51Cm_Nao&t=48s\nCourage & Murder For Profit At Hunters Point Shipyard:The Life of Tetra Tech Whistleblower Carpenter\nhttps://www..youtube.com/watch?v=DEBmV9_qJ9k\nWorkWeek\nhttps://soundcloud.com/workweek-radio\nLabor Video Project\nwww.labormedia.net\n\nPlan to incinerate soil from Ohio train derailment is ‘horrifying’, says expert\nSoil is being sent to a nearby incinerator with a history of clean air violations, raising fears the chemicals will be redistributed\n \nhttps://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/04/east-ohio-train-derailment-soil\n \nTom Perkins. March 4 2023.\nContaminated soil from the site around the East Palestine train wreck in Ohio is being sent to a nearby incinerator with a history of clean air violations, raising fears that the chemicals being removed from the ground will be redistributed across the region.\n\nThe new plan is “horrifying”, said Kyla Bennett, a former Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) official now with the Public Employees for Environmental Responsibility non-profit. She is one among a number of public health advocates and local residents who have slammed Norfolk Southern and state and federal officials over the decision.\n\n“Why on earth would you take this already dramatically overburdened community and ship this stuff a few miles away only to have it deposited right back where it came from?” Bennett asked.\n\nIncinerating the soil is especially risky because some of the contaminants that residents and independent chemical experts fear is in the waste, like dioxins and PFAS, haven’t been tested for by the EPA, and they do not incinerate easily, or cannot be incinerated.\n\nA Norfolk Southern train carrying vinyl chloride used to produce PVC plastic derailed on 3 February in the small industrial town of 4,700 people, located at the edge of the Appalachian hills in Ohio.\n\nAs the fire threatened to ignite tankers full of the chemical days later, emergency responders, fearing a major explosion, conducted a controlled burn of the substance.\n\nEnvironmental researchers say the combustion of vinyl chloride almost certainly created dioxins, a highly toxic chemical that can remain in the environment for years. However, the EPA has resisted calls to test for it, and the agency removed from its website the results of its in-depth soil analyses, so it’s unclear which chemicals are in the soil.\n\nChemicals like dioxins must be incinerated at extremely high temperatures, and the combustion of some substances can be difficult or unpredictable during incineration, said Carsten Prasse, an environmental health professor at Johns Hopkins University who focuses on risk science. Those issues are generating uncertainty about the plan’s safety.\n\n“My concern is basically do we just translate the issue that’s right now in the soil into another medium by blowing it into the air?” he asked. “That is not necessarily the case, but I’m not sure that we can exclude this at this point, so it is an issue.”\n\nThe ground also likely contains PFAS, informally called “forever chemicals” because they do not naturally break down, and no human-made method to destroy the compounds has been fully developed.\n\n“The effectiveness of incineration to destroy PFAS compounds and the tendency for formation of fluorinated or mixed halogenated organic byproducts is not well understood,” the EPA has written.\n\nStill, it is putting residents’ health at risk by sending potentially PFAS-contaminated soil to the incinerator, Bennett said.\n\n“The most important thing in my mind is the human health and health of the environment, so right now that should be priority number one, and things like this fly in the face of basic human decency and science,” she added.\n\nThe incinerator, owned by Heritage Thermal Services, is already burning PFAS waste from the Department of Defense, which prompted a federal lawsuit from a coalition of local environmental groups. Heritage also faced an investigation and enforcement action from the EPA in 2015 after officials determined the facility had violated the Clean Air Act nearly 200 times between 2010 and 2014.\n\nAmong the chemicals that had been released at dangerous levels was dioxin, and among the issues cited by the EPA were a failure by Heritage to maintain a required minimum temperature, raising questions about whether the facility can handle more dioxin and PFAS waste.\n\nThe facility has also recorded air quality violations in eight of the last 12 quarters, EPA records show.\n\nLocal environmental groups have been fighting with Heritage over its emissions since the incinerator was built in the 1990s, said Amanda Kiger, director of River Valley Organizing. She has been assisting residents in East Palestine about 15 miles north, but lives near the incinerator in East Liverpool, both of which are in Columbiana county.\n\n“[Environmental officials] are just dumping more shit on Columbiana county,” Kiger said. “They say, ‘We already poisoned them so it doesn’t matter if we poison them more.’”\n\nIn a statement to news outlets, Heritage said it is “providing support at the site in accordance with the cleanup plan approved by government agencies with jurisdiction over the response to the event”.\n\nEast Palestine’s waste disposal has raised fresh questions about the disposal of toxic substances. Some of the waste is being sent to incinerators around Ohio, while about 1.5m gallons of wastewater is being injected into wells deep into the Earth’s crust near Houston. Deep wells can leak waste into groundwater, and are thought to cause earthquakes.\n\nMeanwhile, some contaminated soil was shipped to a Michigan landfill with a history of discharging PFAS into a public sewer system. A state-of-the-art incinerator in Arkansas is likely equipped to more safely handle the East Palestine waste, Kiger said.\n\n“But how do you say, ‘Not in my backyard – give it to someone else’?” she asked. “They got us fighting each other.”\n\nThe Case for Nationalizing the Railroads Workers say now is the time to do the impossible. \nhttps://inthesetimes.com/article/nationalize-the-railroads-workers-on-strike-biden-wages\n\n\nKARI LYDERSEN \nFEBRUARY 16, 2023\nRailroad workers packed themselves into hotel conference rooms near Chicago’s O’Hare International Airport in June 2022 to talk fervently about a momentous event potentially on the horizon: the first industry-wide rail strike in three decades. \n“All 12 railroad unions have proclaimed themselves united,” said Ron Kaminkow, Railroad Workers United (RWU) general secretary, during a conference session about chokepoints in the supply chain. ​“There could actually be a national railroad strike for the first time in almost 30 years.” \nContract negotiations between those 12 unions and the country’s major freight railroad companies had ground to a halt by the conference, which was organized by RWU and the pro-union group Labor Notes. \nIn July, 99.5% of the membership of the union representing railroad engineers — the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen — voted to authorize a strike if legal hurdles were cleared.\nThe possibility presented a challenge for the Biden administration. President Joe Biden had become known as the most labor-friendly president in recent history, while a walkout threatened to paralyze the economy with a potential cost of $2 billion per day. The administration eventually negotiated a dealwith union leaders and company leaders, announced Sept. 15, 2022, requiring a significant pay raise for workers without meaningfully addressing their primary concerns: short-staffing and a lack of paid sick days.\nMany elected officials and pundits lauded the deal, but it still needed to be ratified by each union’s rank and file.\nThree unions representing railroad workers voted down the proposed contract, while others voted for it. Then, in November, the country’s largest rail union — the SMART Transportation Division, which represents conductors and brakemen — rejected the deal, and a national rail strike was firmly on the table. Even unions that approved of the deal pledged to honor any picket lines.\nOn December 1, 2022, at Biden’s urging, Congress intervened, passing a lawto force the unions to agree to the deal. Many railroad workers were furious — and felt betrayed.\n“It was very frustrating, from the ​‘most pro-labor president America’s ever had,’” says Matt Weaver, legislative director for the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees, the nation’s third-largest railroad union. ​“When [railroads] have record profits and profit margins, and yet this deal is imposed, we’ve seen that our labor is expendable.”\nOn Oct. 5, 2022, RWU adopted a resolution calling for public ownership of railroad infrastructure, which is operated for the public benefit.\nThe ordeal has also led many railroad workers and industry watchers to consider a vastly increased role for government in freight railroads: nationalization.\nOn Oct. 5, 2022, RWU adopted a resolution calling for public ownership of railroad infrastructure, which is operated for the public benefit. The grassroots organization brings together members from all 12 rail unions but has no official power to negotiate with employers or the government. Its members were prominently featured in national media around the possible strike, and the group says its resolution reflects a growing demand for change among railroad workers. The resolution outlines how the rail industry has downsized one-third of its workforce, ​“outraged shippers” by ​“jacking up prices,” ​“failed to solicit nor accept new but ​‘less profitable’ freight,” opposed safety measures and took a ​“hostile stance” toward unions, among other failings.\nMeanwhile, the United Electrical, Radio and Machine Workers of America(UE) recently also issued a strident call for public ownership of railroads to protect the economy, workers, frontline communities and the environment.\n“We demand that Congress immediately begin a process of bringing our nation’s railroads under public ownership,” reads the statement from the UE general executive board. The union, which represents electrical workers and other sectors, argues that the major railroad companies — like electric utilities — are ​“natural monopolies,” and have an ​“endless thirst for profit.”\nThe union argues that nationalization is necessary both to protect workers and to fight climate change and railroad-related pollution that disproportionately impacts communities of color and low-income communities. The statement notes that in 2021, UE launched a Green Locomotive Project to promote zero-emissions electric locomotives in rail yards and cleaner diesel locomotives on the tracks. ​“Although the legislation our allies introduced in Congress would have provided generous financial incentives for the railroads to adopt this green technology, they opposed us every step of the way,” the statement read.\nLocal rail workers, union members and the Boston chapter of the Democratic Socialists of America rally in support of a strike on Dec. 2, 2022, during President Joe Biden’s visit to Boston. \nSUZANNE KREITER/THE BOSTON GLOBE VIA GETTY IMAGES\nPublic Equity\nThe threatened railroad strike underscores how much the U.S. economy depends on freight railroads. It also exposes the fragility of a system owned and run in large part by four massively profitable carrier companies that act as de facto monopolies.\nBNSF and Union Pacific run the vast majority of freight west of the Mississippi River, while Norfolk Southern and CSX run most of the freight to the east. \nIn 2021, BNSF and Union Pacific reported record profits of $6.5 billion and $6billion, respectively, while Norfolk Southern reported a record $4.45 billion, and CSX notched $3.8 billion. The profit is doled out to highly paid executives and shareholders with too little invested back into operations and infrastructure, as many workers and some industry experts see it. The imbalance has helped make the case for more decision-making power for railroad workers and a greater oversight role for the public. Railroad workers who support nationalization would like to see workers in direct leadership positions, and think removing the profit motive would translate to better working conditions.\n“The idea of nationalizing the rails — that strikes fear into the [tenth of 1%] of billionaires who own most of the wealth in this country,” says Marilee Taylor, a recently retired BNSF locomotive engineer from Chicago. ​“It has to be under the control of those who actually know the railroads, which is not the suits. It’s not the CEOs. It’s those who work it.”\nIn April 2022, hearings were held before the federal Surface Transportation Board — the body charged with overseeing America’s rail system. Officials from major industries (including agriculture and chemicals) lamented the increasing unreliability and unaffordability of freight rail. They blamed the large carriers’ increasing reliance on ​“Precision Scheduled Railroading,” wherein employees and routes are slashed to the bare minimum to maximize profits. They also testified that the national supply chain crisis was caused not just by the pandemic, but by railroad understaffing, price gouging and the failure to invest in infrastructure. Union leaders and workers said the railroad companies are neglecting safety and maintenance in pursuit of more profit, with longer trains and fewer people.\n“The idea of nationalizing the rails—that strikes fear into the [tenth of 1%] of billionaires who own most of the wealth in this country,” says Marilee Taylor, a recently retired BNSF locomotive engineer from Chicago. “It has to be under the control of those who actually know the railroads, which is not the suits. It’s not the CEOs. It’s those who work it.”\nMatt Hollis, a second-generation railroad worker and national vice president of the Transportation Communications Union, testified he’s seen the ​“complete and utter degradation of our nation’s Class I railroads over the past six to seven years.” He went on: ​“I’ve watched as private equity firms have acquired controlling stakes in railroads only to use their power to deploy business models that extract as much wealth as possible, to the detriment of the railroads’ workers, their customers and ultimately the public interest.”\nRank-and-file railroad workers tell In These Times they have similar experiences.\nNick Wurst, a Massachusetts-based conductor for one of the major freight railroads, says he sees firsthand how ​“railroads have, through corporate decision-making, put themselves in a situation where they are in perpetual crisis because they operate on the narrowest possible margins in terms of staffing and maintenance. There’s nothing there in order to try to deal with any kind of hiccups, whether that hiccup comes in the form of six feet of snow or a global pandemic. The movement of people, goods, raw materials is too important — too many people rely on it — for decision-making to be limited to profitability.\n“The goal should not be making profit,” Wurst adds. ​“The goal should be getting everything where it needs to go as efficiently as possible.”\nHugh Sawyer, an engineer for Norfolk Southern in Georgia, was previously opposed to the idea of nationalization. ​“I’m a capitalist; I live in America,” he laughs. But after seeing the railroad companies shut down their less-profitable lines, slash their workforces and run workers into the ground with little resistance from union leadership, as many workers see it, he thinks change is necessary. Now, Sawyer wants regulation and ​“nationalization and rationalization,” with all railroad employees represented by one union, working for the federal government.\nAt an ​“investor day” in December 2022, Norfolk Southern CEO Alan Shaw acknowledged many of the problems and promised the company would no longer prioritize ​“operating ratios” — achieved by slashing costs to boost profits — as Wall Street investors have desired. Among other things, Shaw said, the company would keep higher staffing levels and stop furloughing workers during periodic downturns.\n“When the time came to rebuild our ranks as freight transportation demand returned, we were unable to rehire quickly enough to operate fluidly,” Shaw told investors. ​“In the long term, these disruptions have eroded the confidence customers need to have if they are going to structurally rely on rail instead of highways.”\nRELATED STORIES\nTo Prevent Future Rail Tragedies, We Need to Nationalize the Rail System\nA worker at a Union Pacific Intermodal Terminal rail yard.\nWhere Do Railroad Workers Go from Here?\nIn These Times reached out to all four major carriers to comment on many of the claims in this article, including concerns about the use of Precision Scheduled Railroading and its effects on rail workers, and complaints about a lack of infrastructure and operations investment while profits soar. The companies deferred to the Association of American Railroads, an industry group, which said in a statement that ​“each year, the privately-owned freight rail industry reinvests about $20 billion in maintenance and capital improvements that enhance safety and provide the most efficient rail network in the world— with little to no expense to the taxpayer.”\nThe statement continues: ​“At a time when public infrastructure has faced chronic underfunding and delayed necessary maintenance, rolling back the policies that allow those investments — or worse, full-blown nationalization — would have vast, negative impacts to the U.S. supply chain, rail customers and communities served by rail.”\nRailroad monopolist William Henry Vanderbilt stands as “The Modern Colossus of (Rail) Roads” in this 1879 caricature. The sign notes that all passing freight must ”pay any tolls we demand.” \nTracking the Infrastructure\nAfter the Biden administration effectively forced through what many workers felt was an inadequate contract, it may seem questionable to put more power in the hands of the federal government. But, advocates say, under a publicly owned system, profit-seeking owners would no longer be able to hold the economy hostage by enforcing a model premised on short-staffing and maximum profitability. Instead, the public could have a say without the threat of a corporate veto. Looking back at history, the idea that the public could control a multi-billion-dollar private enterprise with immense political power may not be as far-fetched as it seems.\nThe freight rail industry stands as one of the nation’s most profitable sectors. To the delight of hedge fund investors, the average profit margins of the top five U.S. railroads have roughly doubled in the past 15 years, according to Bloomberg. On a basic level, public ownership could mean investing revenue back into infrastructure and operations, rather than paying out shareholders. It could also mean the ability to centralize planning and operations to serve shippers, producers and passengers, rather than only the most profitable sectors and places. A nationalized industry could also prioritize long-term investments in safety and sustainability while protecting the rights and well-being of more than 100,000 of the nation’s most essential workers.\nThis would be a welcome change for many rail employees who feel abandoned, especially after enduring a grueling pandemic. As Matt Weaver, from the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees, says: ​“We’ve gone from essential to expendable.”\nThe government already owns and maintains most highways and waterways in the country, so public ownership of railroad tracks and freight yards isn’t a conceptual stretch. The national passenger railroad, Amtrak, is already quasi-publicly owned, though it operates as a for-profit entity rather than a public authority. It has more than 500 stations, and, on an average day, riders made more than 33,000 trips, according to its 2021 annual report. That year, Amtrak brought in $2.1 billion in revenue but saw $5.2 billion in expenses, with the inefficiencies caused in part by its subservience to the freight railroads that actually own most of the tracks Amtrak runs on. The 2021 bipartisan infrastructure law promises to invest $66 billion in Amtrak to upgrade stations and expand service. Nationalization proponents say that government ownership of railroad tracks, or the freight industry as a whole, would allow better coordination of passenger and freight train schedules, and would fuel the expansion of passenger lines.\nLooking back at history, the idea that the public could control a multi-billion-dollar private enterprise with immense political power may not be as far-fetched as it seems.\nOwnership of the different components of the rail sector is often described along ​“vertical” or ​“horizontal” lines. ​“Vertical separation” means that one entity — perhaps the government — owns the tracks, and different railroad companies compete and pay to ship freight on them.\n“Horizontal separation” means a single entity owns the tracks and runs trains on them. Nationalization could more easily happen in a vertical separation model, in which the government owned the tracks and infrastructure, while nationalization in a horizontal separation model would be more complicated, with the government presumably both owning the tracks and shipping freight. If the U.S. government did own rail infrastructure, either private freight railroad companies could either pay to use it or the government could offer concessions and contracts for privately run services. This form of nationalization would not require taking over or dissolving the railroad companies, since they would still be running the trains — just on publicly owned tracks subject to government planning and regulation.\nWhile easier to execute, the vertical separation model raises the question of how much control the government would have over labor conditions for workers. Workers wouldn’t become public employees — they’d still have corporate bosses — though government contracts could stipulate working conditions.\nMeanwhile, industry experts say better labor conditions are crucial to the railroad industry’s sustainability and functionality, and some workers argue that nationalization may be the only way to achieve it. At the Surface Transportation Board hearings in April 2022, speakers noted turnover in the railroad industry is exceptionally high — despite lucrative salaries — and shipper after shipper testified that trains seem unable to provide reliable service due to a lack of employees. The major railroad companies currently employ 45,000 fewer people than six years ago, a 29% drop, according to Martin Oberman, chair of the Surface Transportation Board. Not only have railroad companies slashed the workforce, but workers often leave the profession because of the grueling demands on their time and health. If they refuse a summons to work, even if sick, they sometimes accrue negative points that lead to termination.\n“It’s this form of power, of controlling the body, an almost pre-modern bondedness [to the company] in the way we used to talk about indentured servants in the 19th century,” explains Robert Bruno, professor of labor and employment relations at the University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign. ​“This is what capitalism is in its worst practitioners. If the government were doing this to you, you’d say it was fascist.”\nBruno says public ownership is ​“not a guarantee” workers would be treated well and cites the working conditions that led to the largest wildcat strike in history, the 1970 postal workers strike during the Nixon administration. Another example of the fallibility of public enterprises is the publicly owned Tennessee Valley Authority — a power plant operator with a record of harming the environment and communities, including the devastating 2008 Kingston, Tenn., coal ash spill and botched cleanup blamed for killing and sickening workers.\n“This is what capitalism is in its worst practitioners. If the government were doing this to you, you’d say it was fascist.”\nRailroad workers say these examples drive home why workers and regular Americans need a voice in successful nationalization.\n“When we’re talking about nationalization, people might think we’re talking about taking control of an industry out of the hands of this wealthy corporate class and giving it to the same government that makes all kinds of decisions based on profitability,” says Nick Wurst, the Class I freight railroad conductor. ​“What I’m fighting for is democratic public ownership.”\nA Climate for Change\nClimate change is another emergency that nationalization could potentially help address. Some experts have called for nationalization of the fossil fuel industry as a way to stem climate change. Public ownership of railroads could further that goal while also mitigating air pollution from railyards that disproportionately affects low-income people and people of color. Since railroads emit much less pollution per ton of freight carried than trucks, increasing rail’s share of transportation would be inherently more environmentally friendly. According to data cited by the industry’s own Association of American Railroads, shifting freight from truck to rail reduces greenhouse gas emissions by about 75%.\nThe major carriers, however, are moving in the opposite direction, eschewing lower-profit loads and forcing shippers to rely more on trucks, critics say, and the government isn’t doing enough to intervene.\n“We subsidize trucking heavily through highway construction and maintenance,” says Kevin Brubaker, deputy director of the Environmental Law & Policy Center. ​“Railroads are really stuck competing against trucks with one hand tied behind their backs.”\nMeanwhile, investing profits back into infrastructure (rather than doling it out to shareholders) could speed the electrification of railroads and railyards, slashing diesel emissions further.\n“I’m not a ​‘Mr. Environmentalist,’ ” says Hugh Sawyer, the Norfolk Southern engineer. ​“But I know we’ve got to do something about [climate change], and railroads are much more environmentally friendly than trucks, much more efficient.”\nRobber Barons and Regulators\nBetween 1850 and 1871, the U.S. government gifted about 175 million acres of land to railroads to ​“settle the West” and fuel the Industrial Revolution. Among the many casualties of the industry’s rapacious development were Native Americans, Chinese immigrants, and ranchers, along with fragile prairie ecosystems. Wealthy railroad investors and owners, meanwhile, populated the ranks of the now notorious 19th-century ​“robber barons.”\nThe railroads’ treatment of farmers in particular fomented a period of ​“farm unrest,” as Reed College economist James I. Stewart chronicled for the Economic History Association. Farmers formed organizations to demand politicians address the high and unfair prices railroads were charging to ship goods. \nRailroads soon became the first federally regulated industry, which included the establishment of the Interstate Commerce Commission in 1887. By the early 1900s, railroad companies struggled to remain profitable and some went bankrupt, in part because of restrictions imposed by federal regulators, says Anthony M. Pagano, director of the Center for Supply Chain Management and Logistics at the University of Illinois at Chicago. \nBy World War I, the rail system for freight and passengers was not up to the challenge of transporting munitions-related goods and troops. So in 1917, President Woodrow Wilson temporarily nationalized the railroads by creating the U.S. Railroad Administration, essentially renting the system from its owners with the promise to give it back within 21 months after the war. \nIn 1918, upward of 99% of more than 300,000 railroad workers voted to keep the industry nationalized. Glenn E. Plumb, a prominent lawyer for the rail workers, drafted the Plumb Plan to do so. Under the plan, the government would sell bonds to purchase and transform the rail system into a publicly owned corporation, and decisions would be made by a stakeholder board to include workers and the general public. The Plumb Plan League, an organization that included railroad unions and civic leaders, advocated for nationalization and also inspired coal miners, whose powerful union voted in 1919 to nationalize the coal industry.\nBut business leaders were stridently opposed to the Plumb Plan, which failed in Congress in 1919. Control of the railroads was ceded back to industry through an act of Congress in 1920. \nIn 1917, President Woodrow Wilson temporarily nationalized the railroads by creating the U.S. Railroad Administration. In 1918, upward of 99% of more than 300,000 railroad workers voted to keep the industry nationalized.\nWilson also nationalized the telecommunications and telegraph industries in 1918, but the effort was unsuccessful in part because the sector was run by an anti-labor, pro-segregation postmaster general, according to ​“A History of Nationalization in the United States” by Thomas Hanna, Democracy Collaborative research director. During World War II, a slew of industries — including ironworks, cotton mills, factories, oil companies and chemical producers — were briefly nationalized, according to Hanna, and President Franklin Roosevelt nationalized more than 3,000 coal mines in the midst of labor disputes that threatened to stall the crucial coal industry. Railroads were also nationalized for 19 days in 1944 to avoid a strike, during which the Roosevelt administration worked to improve conditions and efficiency.\nThe federal government played an important role in regulating railroad prices and operations in the following decades, but Congress passed (and President Jimmy Carter signed) the Staggers Rail Act in 1980, which gutted government oversight. The Surface Transportation Board was founded in 1996. Railroad mergers, line abandonment and other practices must gain its approval before moving forward, but the board typically grants companies’ wishes. The ​“surf board,” as some in the industry call it, ​“has yet to find a merger that they didn’t like,” Pagano says.\nA BNSF engine pulls a Metra commuter train car in Chicago on Sept. 13, 2022. Some 50,000 daily passengers depend on Metra for their commutes (200,000 on average prior to the pandemic). \nSCOTT OLSTON/GETTY IMAGES\nPayback Time?\nRailroad workers tell In These Times that, since public land was awarded to the railroads in the first place, it shouldn’t be inconceivable for the public to take it back. ​“The American public should finally get a return on their investment,” Hugh Sawyer says. ​“The railroads were given quite a bit. We should get something in return.”\nThe government does have the power of eminent domain to seize property in the public interest, and that power is often invoked for the benefit of private companies — in building pipelines, for example. But even if successful, eminent domain would typically only apply to the land under the rails. By taking that land, the government would also be taking the tracks and other infrastructure, and the Constitution is clear that private property can’t be seized without compensation. If railroad companies were denied the right to keep profiting off their infrastructure, the rail assets would likely be deemed ​“stranded,” and the companies could demand compensation.\nAnd the national rail system is so vast that the payment would almost certainly be astronomical.\nThis situation has played out in the electric utility sector, for example, when municipalities have tried to take public ownership of local electric systems. Such an endeavor failed in Boulder, Colo., when the utility Xcel Energy argued the town would owe it $200 million for its ​“stranded assets.” Advocates tried for a decade to take over their electrical infrastructure, but a 2020 legal settlement reestablished Xcel’s franchise.\nThe temporary seizure of private assets during emergency situations does have some precedent, including the nationalization periods during the world wars. Even then, it faces legal hurdles. President Harry Truman, for example, essentially took federal control of private infrastructure and operations when he briefly nationalized the steel industry in 1952 to avoid a steelworkers strike during the Korean War. The Wage Stabilization Board had already ordered a wage increase for steelworkers, but the steel companies refused to comply unless they were allowed to significantly raise prices, a demand Truman denied. The day before 600,000 steelworkers were set to strike, Truman invoked emergency powers to seize the industry and keep the mills running. The union supported the move, but the companies were outraged.\nThe case went to the U.S. Supreme Court, where the justices — including liberals appointed by Truman and Roosevelt — decided 6 – 3 in the 1952Youngstown Sheet & Tube Co. v. Sawyer case that Truman’s takeover was illegal. The current conservative Supreme Court could rule similarly if nationalization of the rail industry were to face legal challenges.\nThere’s another way nationalization could move forward: the government could buy enough company stock to acquire a controlling interest.\nDuring the 2007 – 2009 recession, the Obama administration dumped $80billion into the auto industry to take a controlling interest in General Motors and Chrysler while ordering bankruptcy proceedings to restructure the companies. It also bailed out (and temporarily took control of) insurance giant American International Group (AIG) to the tune of $170 billion, which was also described as ​“nationalization,” though the administration garnered criticism for doing too little to rein in the industry. Outrage ensued when AIG then paid out hundreds of millions of dollars in management bonuses.\nWhether it’s paying for stranded assets or buying up shares, any form of railroad nationalization would likely cost billions. But advocates note the federal government is able to find vast sums in emergencies, such as the pandemic or aid to Ukraine, not to mention a nearly $1 trillion military budget. Buying up railroad infrastructure may be the type of radical change that seems impossible — until it isn’t.\nAdvocates note the federal government is able to find vast sums in emergencies, such as the pandemic or aid to Ukraine, not to mention a nearly $1 trillion military budget. Buying up railroad infrastructure may be the type of radical change that seems impossible—until it isn’t.\nGlobal Examples\nNationalization is the norm for railroads in much of Europe, Asia and Latin America, though some countries have pushed for privatization. \nThe Canadian National Railway (CN) was publicly owned for almost 80 years before its privatization in 1995. Starting in the late 1990s, CN claimed substantial business in the United States by buying up smaller U.S. railroads. Its privatization was followed by its ​“Americanization,” including cost-cutting and harsher treatment of workers, as labor magazine Canadian Dimension describes.\nIn 1993, Britain’s national rail system was privatized with a vertical separation model. Safety appeared to suffer as multiple operators competed to ship on tracks owned by a separate company. Between 1997 and 2002, five horrific accidents left more than 50 people dead, with media coverage implying that privatization played a role. The company that owned the tracks went bankrupt and its infrastructure was renationalized, with most operations now run by private companies through government contracts. The U.K. continues to grapple with problems caused by the privatization effort, and a 2022 Survation poll found 68% of the public favors public ownership.\nGermany began its railway privatization process in the early 1990s, cutting staff and routes for efficiency. But full privatization plans were scuttled by massive worker and public opposition and the effects of the 2007-2008economic crisis. A government owned corporation still controls the system.\nChina, Russia, Ukraine and India similarly run their railroads through state-owned corporations, which are meant to be funded by their own revenue but not driven by the profit motive of a private company. China, however, is among multiple countries that have sought private investment in nationally run rail systems in recent years.\nIn Mexico in 1908, President Porfirio Díaz began nationalizing railroads owned by foreign investors. Perhaps ironically, the railroads played a key role in the Mexican Revolution that overthrew him, as campesinos and workers moved cheaply and easily around the country by rail, fueling popular struggle. The famous photograph of ​“Adelita,” a woman soldadera leaning from a train, became one of the revolution’s iconic symbols. Following the revolution, private and foreign investors regained ownership. Leftist President Lázaro Cárdenas renationalized the railroads in 1937, but in later decades they suffered disinvestment and mismanagement. In the 1990s, the railroads were again privatized and passenger service gutted.\nToday, leftist Mexican President Andrés Manuel López Obrador is building a new, nationalized freight and passenger railroad across southern Mexico to spur economic development, but the multi-billion-dollar, nearly 1,000-mile Tren Maya has been criticized for building across fragile ecosystems, sacred Indigenous lands and ancient ruins.\nSupporters of labor group Railway Workers United demonstrate for paid sick leave, among other demands, on Dec. 7, 2022, in New York City. \nLEONARDO MUNOZ/VIEWPRESS VIA GETTY IMAGES\nRegulating and Reckoning\nAnother approach to nationalization might come through incremental railroad regulation. It could start by reviving (and augmenting) the regulatory powers held by the public in the early days of rail.\nThe 1876 Supreme Court case Munn v. Illinois upholds the government’s right to regulate private industry. The case involved allegations that a Chicago grain elevator company wasn’t fairly paying farmers for their harvests, and the Supreme Court affirmed the Illinois Constitution’s stipulation that the government could regulate railroads, warehouses and other entities for the common good, enshrining the concept of public utilities.\nThe 1854 Vermont Supreme Court case Thorpe v. Rutland & Burlington Railroad, regarding a sheep killed by a locomotive, determined the government could order private companies to do things for the public good that affect profit. Namely, the government could force railroads to install cattle guards at their crossings.\nRailroad workers and experts alike say the four major carriers are failing to uphold one of the regulatory mandates that does still bind them: the ​“common carrier obligation” to provide ​“transportation or service on reasonable request.” Shippers argue that the major rail companies are effectively denying service to customers through their limited options for shipping, line abandonment and the railroads’ use of ​“embargoes” on certain shipments caused in part by worker shortages. Unlike electric utility and power companies (which go through lengthy regulatory proceedings to close power plants or develop transmission lines), railroads have few checks on such decisions.\n“The fact that Biden was willing to break with the unions” shows that — as the Supreme Court found in Munn—the railroads are among industries ​“so critical we shouldn’t just leave them to the market,” says UCLA law professor William Boyd, who has written extensively on the challenges of regulating utilities and railroads. ​“The basic common carrier model should apply, to make sure you can’t discriminate against certain types of customers. It becomes a platform for everybody to compete with each other.”\nBoyd says the current situation evokes ​“the same story we’ve heard since the beginning: ​‘We [railroad companies] are standing here at the gateway of commerce and we should be able to charge any price we can.’”\n“The fact that Biden was willing to break with the unions” shows that—as the Supreme Court found in Munn—the railroads are among industries “so critical we shouldn’t just leave them to the market,” says UCLA law professor William Boyd,\nGeorgia College and State University adjunct professor Peter Moore formerly represented a dozen companies that owned 1,500 railroad cars carrying chemicals and other specialty products for freight railroads. He notes those companies, and the industry at large, have suffered as the major carriers restructure the pricing system to their own advantage, including eliminating a per diem paid to the owners of specialty cars.\n“I use the term ​‘oligarchy’ because there’s just a few [railroad companies] and they’re very powerful,” says Moore, who explored the concept of nationalizing railroads in a 2021 piece for the trade publication Supply Chain 24/7. ​“With a very limited number of competitors, a natural consequence is labor gets squeezed, customers get squeezed, governments get squeezed. There’s a natural tendency, when you have fewer and fewer companies — they get aggressive in the ways they handle the market.”\nMoore doubts railroad nationalization is likely any time soon, but he thinks increased government regulation is crucial, including forcing the major railroads to allow more access to their tracks for competing railroad companies.\nSome railroad workers are likewise skeptical that nationalization could work. ​“More stringent regulation is where we begin in my mind,” Matt Weaver says. ​“Public ownership is such a big thing and hard for the public to fathom.”\nRon Kaminkow is among the workers who prefer wholesale change — and now. ​“If the only choices are the status quo versus some form of regulation and restriction to rein the Class I carriers in, then I suppose I would support the latter,” Kaminkow says. ​“However, just like regulating the health insurance industry — providing Obamacare or what have you — these are not real solutions.\n“We need a national healthcare system. I think the same thing holds true for the railroads.”\nWhile there’s been little talk of outright nationalization among politicians, there is clearly recognition of just how desperately change is needed. At the Surface Transportation Board hearings in April 2022, Secretary of Transportation Pete Buttigieg said the board will require improvement plans from the railroad companies that include an examination of the impact on workers and the need for a larger workforce.\n“Railroad workers finally see the game for what it is, and that their wages, benefits, working conditions and numbers of employment are going to continue to suffer as long as the railroads are held privately. There is no alternative but to consider nationalization and public ownership.”\n“When we overburden rail workers, it only furthers turnover, worsens service and presents serious safety issues,” Buttigieg said.\nThe major rail unions are currently organizing ahead of the next round of contract negotiations, which are set to start in under two years. Some, like the SMART Transportation Division, are calling on Biden to issue an executive order guaranteeing sick leave in the industry.\nKaminkow and others have vowed to keep building up the power and unity they’ve amassed this past year, and they hope nationalization will become central to the discussion. Railroad Workers United is planning to expand its campaign around nationalization, though the labor organization still only counts a small percentage of the total railroad workforce among its members.\n“The discontent and the anger of the rank and file of all the crafts in freight service” are stronger than they’ve been in recent years, Kaminkow says. ​“Railroad workers finally see the game for what it is, and that their wages, benefits, working conditions and numbers of employment are going to continue to suffer as long as the railroads are held privately. There is no alternative but to consider nationalization and public ownership.”\n https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2023/03/07/18854782.php SUMMARY:From Hunters Point To E. Palestine Prosecute & Jail Tetra Tech & Norfolk Southern CEOs LOCATION:San Francisco Federal Building\n450 Golden Gate\nSan Francisco, CA URL:https://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2023/03/07/18854782.php DTSTART:20230313T230000Z DTEND:20230314T000000Z END:VEVENT END:VCALENDAR