Hey, I'm seeing lots of your replies here and they all center around 1 assumption that you aren't even addressing because you're just taking it as true without need to even question it.
You're assumption is that a strike would not have resulted in the railroads giving the strikers their demands in a timely manner.
Every single one of your complaints centers around railroads being shut down for weeks and for the entire blame to be on the strikers, and not on the greedy fucks who caused the need for a strike in the first place.
They can just pay the workers more. They can just give them the time off they need. They can just hire more workers to fill in the gaps. They can do all those things easily by cutting into a tiny fraction of the massive profits they keep to themselves.
So why is it you want the blame to fall entirely on the workers and not their bosses who are creating these conditions? If the workers can't strike, but also can't live in the conditions created, the natural recourse will be that workers will just quit and find other work.
Let me say that again. The natural outcome to not allowing a strike is for the workers to quit and there to be NO workers. No workers would also have all the same exact problems you're trying to point out. All of the supply chain issues would be exactly the same under a strike or under massive quitting.
So if both outcomes are the same and both outcomes relied on the management causing the problem... Maybe, just MAYBE... it's not the workers fault? Maybe them striking isn't a cause but rather a symptom of the greater wrong here?
This is why you're getting flamed here. Your taking your arguments halfway through and stopping just short of where the blame should actually lie, and in the process, you are protecting those who do not need any protection at the cost of those who need the most protection.
And whether you did this intentionally, or accidentally through some form of ignorance or lack of empathy, truly a sincere fuck you to you and your entire way of thinking.