WASHINGTON - President Joe Biden will travel to Michigan on Tuesday to join United Auto Workers on the picket line in one of the most extraordinary displays of support a president has ever taken in the middle of a labor dispute.

Biden’s trip comes after United Auto Workers President Shawn Fain invited Biden to the picket line in remarks Friday as the UAW ratchets up its strike against the nation’s three largest automakers.

“Tuesday, I’ll go to Michigan to join the picket line and stand in solidarity with the men and women of UAW as they fight for a fair share of the value they helped create,” Biden said in a statement. “It’s time for a win-win agreement that keeps American auto manufacturing thriving with well-paid UAW jobs.”

Further details about Biden’s trip, including which striking site he will visit, remain unclear.

Former President Donald Trump, the frontrunner to capture the 2024 Republican nomination, has said he plans to meet with striking auto workers in the Detroit area Wednesday in a push to court rank-and-file union members and other blue-collar workers for his 2024 run.

Biden faced pressure from progressives to join UAW workers on the picket line after Sen. John Fetterman, D-Pa., House Democratic Leader Hakeem Jeffries, Sen. Bernie Sanders and others each traveled to striking sites this week.

For the first time Friday, Fain publicly invited Biden to the picket line.

“We invite and encourage everyone who supports our cause to join us on the picket line − from our friends and families, all the way up to the president of the United States,” Fain said.

Biden faces a political tightrope with the UAW strike. He has decades of close ties with organized labor and said he wants to be known as the “most pro-union president” in U.S history. But Biden also wants to avoid national economic repercussions that could result from a prolonged strike.

Biden has endorsed UAW’s demands for higher pay, saying last week that “record corporate profits, which they have, should be shared by record contracts for the UAW.” But at the request of the UAW, Biden has stayed out of negotiations with Ford Motor Co., General Motors and Stellantis.

Fain extended the invitation after announcing plans to expand UAW’s strike to 38 new sites across 20 states. He said the union has made good progress with Ford Motor Co. this week, but General Motors and Stellantis “will need some pushing.”

White House press secretary Jean-Pierre said the White House “will do everything that we possibly can to help in any way that the parties would like us to.”

A White House team led by Acting Labor Secretary Julie Su and White House adviser Gene Sperling was originally scheduled to visit Detroit this week. But the trip was scrapped after UAW’s leadership made it clear they did not want help at the negotiating table.

    • Silverseren@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      133
      arrow-down
      23
      ·
      1 year ago

      You mean when he in the three months afterwards helped the workers and the union to make sure they got their demands, while also not causing an actual rail shutdown that would cause massive harm to multiple areas?

      • gibmiser@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        94
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        See if that’s true that’s sad because that is the best possible outcome and I haven’t heard a damn thing about it.

        • takeda@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          96
          arrow-down
          4
          ·
          1 year ago

          Here’s about rail: https://www.ibew.org/media-center/Articles/23Daily/2306/230620_IBEWandPaid

          Biden seems to do a lot of things that don’t get much attention or unfairly get bad attention. For example he drastically reduced number of drone strikes (trump actually increased them after Obama, but blocked reporting).

          When he lifted sanctions on NS2 he got a lot of bad flak, some even from democrats. Only months later we learned that Russia was planning attack on Ukraine and he was doing it to repair our relationship with Germany. He managed to persuade them to drop it themselves which is how we supposed to deal with allies.

          • gibmiser@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            53
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            “Without making a big show of it, Joe Biden and members of his administration in the Transportation and Labor departments have been working continuously to get guaranteed paid sick days for all railroad workers."

            I’m glad yo hear that not everything has to be a show, but this would be a great message to get out to the progressive democrats

            • assassin_aragorn@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m a bit torn on it. Yes it would be good to publicize, but I really like that he prioritized getting shit done over publicizing it. That’s what good leaders should do.

              Arguably, this is something that progressive Democrats should be aware of if they truly care about the issue, and aren’t just looking for talking points.

      • bdonvr@thelemmy.club
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        41
        arrow-down
        16
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Wow he ended Precision Scheduled Railroading? Didn’t hear that /s

        He got them some sick days, but definitely not the whole of their demands.

        • LiberalSoCalist@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          24
          arrow-down
          12
          ·
          1 year ago

          Plus the original demand was 15 days of sick leave, and then a tepid 7-day sick leave proposal was sent to die in congress. It’s not a miracle that Biden was able to get 5 days. Breaking the strike with state power and then casting crumbs in our direction was a flex on the working class saying “nah you’ll only get what we allow you to have. You don’t deserve to demand shit.”

          I’m not holding out any hope that this is anything more than a PR campaign like kneeling cops and kente scarves.

      • Soulg@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s a complete failure of his administration that he said absolutely nothing about this and just allowed everyone to believe that he was against those workers for months.

        I found this out a week or so ago and it baffled me that he just said nothing.

        • Silverseren@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s been a general thing that his administration has just done the positive things without hyping them up or crowing about them on the news.

      • 768@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        1 year ago

        Maybe I’m uninformed, but how are rail strikes, which are common in my country, massive harm that a government of half a continent feels the need to step in?

        • Cethin@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          15
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          It was going to be a massive rail strike in a situation where logistics were already strained. The US is run by rail, despite how little we invest into it. It’s an absolutely massive amount of land area, and the only reasonable way to transport things across it is rail. It would have crippled almost every business.

          That said, if the workers are that important they should get everything they demand. The Biden administration did get them some of their demands, which is better than I expected, they should get more.

        • Silverseren@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          13
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          They aren’t as common here and this was a rail strike that could prevent the transportation of any number of important things, enough to impact multiple states and millions of people.

        • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 year ago

          Some people like strikebreaking for its own sake and will make up any excuse to do it.

          Watch the news for whining about high car prices from people who were fine with high car prices a few weeks ago.

    • GBU_28@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep, I’ll remember this too.

      People are measured by the sum of their actions.

      I’m happy this is happening, and was unhappy that went down how it did.

        • TallonMetroid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          10
          ·
          1 year ago

          Not doubting you, but got any links? Like you said, there wasn’t any real coverage to speak of, so I was completely unaware of this.

        • SquishyPandaDev@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          arrow-down
          46
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          That’s still not great. The point of strikes is to be disruptive. This undermines the power of unions. Sure the union got what they wanted, but next time they might not. This whole thing is just the usual Dems playing both sides

          • HeartyBeast@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            52
            arrow-down
            7
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point of strikes is to be disruptive.

            The point of strikes is to get employers to meet the demands of the workers

            Sure the union got what they wanted, but

            But nothing.

            • Ech@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              11
              ·
              1 year ago

              The struggle for workers’ rights is not one battle, and enforcing a precedent that the government can and will back corps during a strike diminishes the power of the strike, arguably the most powerful tools for workers’ rights, at is core. Biden essentially declared strikes aren’t acceptable, but they’ll deign to help groups when they see fit, and when this happens under a republican government, we all know there’ll be no work done afterwards to satisfy the workers, who now have a diminished position to work with.

              The foundation of workers’ rights that’s been built up over the last hundred+ years was very much damaged by Biden, and he shouldn’t get a pass for that. At best it was a stupid blunder he worked to fix, at worst it was a manipulative effort to weaken the effectiveness of these groups while also establishing a reliance on “sympathetic” governmental powers as necessary to get anything done. Neither is particularly great.

              • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                5
                ·
                1 year ago

                Alternatively, you could look at it as the Biden administration declared that strikes above a certain level of disruption to critical infrastructure warrant the government stepping in, even if the demands are valid.
                Something about the administration unambiguously endorsing a large but not critical infrastructure strike, like they are with the UAW, implies that maybe the point isn’t to signal that strikes are unacceptable.

                It’s almost like the executive branch has to balance a myriad of competing interests, all of which are important.

                • Ech@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  7
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  The government could’ve stepped in in support of the striking workers, but they didn’t. Now that the strike isn’t causing “problems”, they’re all for it!

                  • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    6
                    arrow-down
                    4
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Yes, that’s almost precisely it. The administration wants to avoid problems with critical infrastructure, but supports strikes that aren’t threatening critical infrastructure.

                    It’s why you see the administration negotiate to prevent a strike, block the strike, and then help negotiate for what the strike was aiming to get, and then go on to support workers who are on strike.

                    That’s not hypocrisy, that’s nuance.

          • takeda@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            27
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            The point of strike is to get what is demanded. Much better outcome for everyone involved (including the very people who are striking) is to get demands satisfied without having to strike. Do you think people strike, because they love doing that? No one does.

            • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              11
              arrow-down
              20
              ·
              1 year ago

              He forced them back to work before their demands could be met. That is a fail. He may have gotten something after the fact, but that doesn’t change that he forced workers back to work instead of striking. What if he wasn’t able to get that done?

              FWIW, rail workers were asking for 7 sick days a year. 7. And Biden got them 5 with the ability to convert 2 personal days to sick days. As a note, even 7 is a ridiculously low number.

              He should have sided with unions then, too. The only reason he’s doing this is because Republicans are saying that the UAW is being damaged by Biden’s policies.

                • audiomodder@lemmy.blahaj.zone
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  8
                  arrow-down
                  14
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  My point is, it shouldn’t be Biden inserting himself into what should have been a conversation between the union and the railroad. He forced the union’s hand and then said “trust me”. I want you to imagine a world where a politician forced a company to accept a union’s offer and then told the company to “trust them”.

                  As if an American politician would ever force a company to accept a union’s (very reasonable, FWIW) offer.

                  • Nalivai@discuss.tchncs.de
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    Between “Biden doesn’t do anything” and “Biden shouldn’t be involved in anything” there is very little rhyme or reason to what y’all actually think he should be doing. So the only thing that’s left is to look at the overall outcome, and so far it was in the realm of “things are going to the right direction, although not quickly and not far enough”, which is frankly way better than anyone could hope for in this environment

                • Ensign_Crab@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  9
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If our infrastructure is so brittle that one strike can disrupt the economy as severely as pro-strikebreaking centrist Democrats say, the current rail companies cannot be trusted to continue operating it.

            • SquishyPandaDev@yiffit.net
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              8
              arrow-down
              15
              ·
              1 year ago

              I’m sorry what fucking planet do you live on. Biden didn’t get involved on the side of unions. He told them they could not legally strike because of national security. But luckily our of the kindness of his heart, Biden still had the railroad give workers paid sick days. That’s not wholesome, that’s not cool, that’s fucked. Any President can now just shut down rail strikes and they don’t have to give jack fucking shit. The unions won this time, but next time the won’t.

              • ricecake@sh.itjust.works
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                9
                arrow-down
                4
                ·
                1 year ago

                Have you read the history of organized labor? The legal framework for forcibly terminating a strike has been around since the 1920s.
                This isn’t a new thing.
                Like, a hundred years ago people came up with a system for having a board review rail strikes, the severity of the dispute and the impact of the strike, and issue recommendations for if the strike should be allowed, or if Congress should prevent it.
                This isn’t Biden treading new anti labor ground.