45 min video from higher ups / more bad news?

MAKAVELI

Banned
I wouldn't say that. They are growth focused. Look at the buying of planees as maintaining market share for the next 30 years. The fleet was getting old. Future growth in Ground can now be aggressively persued.
They are stock focused and it doesn't take a genius to decipher that. It has even been the mantra of executive management at Express for years they don't try to hide it. Everything they do is to please investors.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
Ground management is well aware of their shortfalls as well and it isn't in the profit generating realm.
 

DRAisawesome

Well-Known Member
bbsam...why can't you pay better wages to your guys? If ground is growing FedEx should be compensating you better. It's the republican trickle down effect. The ground model is never give a raise and then people will walk and you can hire at the same salary or cheaper. That's the reality of ground and the contractors and FedEx love it.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
bbsam...why can't you pay better wages to your guys? If ground is growing FedEx should be compensating you better. It's the republican trickle down effect. The ground model is never give a raise and then people will walk and you can hire at the same salary or cheaper. That's the reality of ground and the contractors and FedEx love it.
Because the increase in profits at the contractor level are minimal. Vehicles have to be replaced, older vehicles cost more to maintain, increased business requires more trucks and more drivers.

But you miss alot of the model. Your cynicism about the trickle down economics is partially true but it has to be sustainable. The company spent alot of time and money bringing in temps for peak and largely came up failing to attract the kind of drivers they want. They are realizing high turnover and a small pool of applicants. Nick used to talk about it extensively but he missed the same thing you miss, the sustainability. They have reached the point of either accepting less qualified and worse drivers or rethinking the financials of the model. From an insurance liability side, worse drivers is not really an option and that too comes with a potentially devastating dollar amount.
 

DRAisawesome

Well-Known Member
They have been shotty at best. Splitting the company in two models kills our efficiency. If Express goes too a all overnight service I don't think that is sustainable either. We would have to charge more due to declining volume. How many people would be willing to work part time with the benefits that we receive? UPS would just undercut us because they are way more efficient.
 

MrFedEx

Engorged Member
Because the increase in profits at the contractor level are minimal. Vehicles have to be replaced, older vehicles cost more to maintain, increased business requires more trucks and more drivers.

But you miss alot of the model. Your cynicism about the trickle down economics is partially true but it has to be sustainable. The company spent alot of time and money bringing in temps for peak and largely came up failing to attract the kind of drivers they want. They are realizing high turnover and a small pool of applicants. Nick used to talk about it extensively but he missed the same thing you miss, the sustainability. They have reached the point of either accepting less qualified and worse drivers or rethinking the financials of the model. From an insurance liability side, worse drivers is not really an option and that too comes with a potentially devastating dollar amount.
o


Translation of above: I need to perpetuate and justify the Ground scam so I can continue to make a comfortable six-figure income. Paying the Ground driver more lowers my percentage of the action and does the same for Mr. Smith. Therefore, I will continue to make excuses that sound legitimate but that are, in reality. total BS.

Love and Kisses,
bbsam
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
o


Translation of above: I need to perpetuate and justify the Ground scam so I can continue to make a comfortable six-figure income. Paying the Ground driver more lowers my percentage of the action and does the same for Mr. Smith. Therefore, I will continue to make excuses that sound legitimate but that are, in reality. total BS.

Love and Kisses,
bbsam
If you don't understand business, just say so.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
And do you underrstand long term sustainability or just cashing out? Which do you think Fred has in mind?
 

Goldilocks

Well-Known Member
Once upon a time I was the station's Lead On coordinator, and it was comical how ludicrously removed from reality the district folk were. We had a conference call during peak, and I mentioned how busy the drivers were, and that I doubted they would have time to get sales leads. The district coordinator said that I should just tell the drivers that peak represented "a golden opportunity" to increase package volume. I told her that sounded like a good idea, but I was thinking are you :censored2:ing crazy? I'm going to wind up in the station's dumpster if I say some stupid :censored2: like that during stretch and flex. It's funny that they always wondered why our station's participation was the lowest in the region when there was an instance of a driver turning in a lead that generated hundreds of thousands in revenue, and wound up getting $100. What was the rumored amount that the sales rep got? 50 :censored2:ing thousand! UNBELIEVABLE!


Yes, while our sales reps drive up to our stations in their Mercedes, BMW and try to give us a donut, telling us to get them leads!!! You gotta be kidding.
 
Top