Trade Groups Urge Congress to Help Avoid Major Rail Strike
Congress needs to act to help prevent a looming major rail strike that could disrupt freight movement and back up supply chains, more than 400 trade associations said in a Nov. 28 letter to congressional leadership. The letter, signed by the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Customs Brokers & Forwarders Association of America, the Agriculture Transportation Coalition and others, said the “uncertainty” surrounding a potential rail disruption “has created enormous anxiety” in the industry.
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Export Compliance Daily combines U.S. export control news, foreign border import regulation and policy developments into a single daily information service that reliably informs its trade professional readers about important current issues affecting their operations.
“A stoppage of rail service for any duration would be extremely damaging to American families and our economy, costing $2 billion dollars per day,” the groups told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.; House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif.; Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer, D-N.Y.; and Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky. The trade groups said Congress “must be prepared to intervene” before the December deadline.
The letter comes a little more than two months after U.S. rail companies and union negotiators agreed to avoid a labor strike that might have caused a rail stoppage (see 2209150012). But the current “status quo” period ends Dec. 9, the trade associations said, and if a deal isn’t reached, disagreements between the major freight railroads and 12 labor unions could lead to a strike, which “would assuredly result in a stoppage of national rail service.”
The “mere possibility of a rail service stoppage” during the last negotiations “created significant disruptions to the timely delivery of critical goods and products,” the letter said, partly because railroads had to “safely reduce operations and secure their customers’ goods days in advance of a potential strike.” If this happens again, the trade groups warned, many companies “will see the impacts of a national rail strike well before December 9,” predicting service disruptions will begin as early as Dec. 5. “The sooner this labor impasse ends,” the groups said, “the better for our communities and our national economy.”
Even if the strike were short, it would still have “enormous impacts” on the U.S. economy, the letter said. The agricultural industry could face disruptions to its daily transport of 6,300 carloads of food and farm products carried by rail, while shipments of important chemicals, such as chlorine needed for wastewater treatment, could be affected. “In many cases, businesses and communities rely on regular rail service and may not have significant reserves, even in the event of a short-term strike.”
A “voluntary agreement” between the labor unions and the rail companies would be the best outcome, the groups said. But “absent a voluntary agreement," Congress should "take immediate steps to prevent a national rail strike and the certain economic destruction that would follow.”