FedEX buying back Ground Routes

[FedExer267]

Could that be because you pay a salary. It doesn't really matter when your guys show up and go home as long as they do not go over 14 hours. Now if you paid by the hour would you sing a diffrent tune.
I have had my Contractor tell me that my day does not start until I roll out of the building, I tell him thats BS my day starts as soon as I step foot on my truck. I am not going to go threw my load and map it out off the clock or finish loading it off the clock.

 

[Cactus]

No offense cactus, but MFE himself has been on this very site saying that Express management (and UPS as well) make a habit of instructing drivers to falsify times and such. Personally, I don't because contrary to popular belief, Ground management doesn't instill alot of fear with me.

Read it again Sam.

I said that Ground falsifies customers signatures. Several drivers have told me that and like it was no big deal. You're talking about time card falsification which yes some managers have instructed their drivers to do so. But signatures? I don't think so. Too much legality involved.

 

[bbsam]

Read it again Sam.

I said that Ground falsifies customers signatures. Several drivers have told me that and like it was no big deal. You're talking about time card falsification which yes some managers have instructed their drivers to do so. But signatures? I don't think so. Too much legality involved.

No. I am talking about delivery falsification. Like the time a NDA package is delivered. As in sheeted before it is delivered to make it appear on time. As in falsifying a legal document. And no. It is not any more tolerated at Ground than anywhere else.

 

[FedEx2000]

So it is easily seen that Express generates a huge amount of revenue. Also Ground's "return on investment" is quite amazing. Is it any wonder why Fred pours the money into expanding Ground? In a sense, it is more profitable because for every dollar Fred "invests" in Ground, Fred gets about 14% return on investment and less than 5% on Express.

To clarify....those aren't ROI numbers, they represent the amount of each dollar in revenue that is profit. So 4.4 cents of every dollar in revenue is profit at Express and thus 14.3 cents of every dollar is profit at Ground.

 

[MrFedEx]

To clarify....those aren't ROI numbers, they represent the amount of each dollar in revenue that is profit. So 4.4 cents of every dollar in revenue is profit at Express and thus 14.3 cents of every dollar is profit at Ground.

Is it any wonder that you'd get an amazing "return on investment" when you don't pay your labor force a living wage or provide benefits? In the famous words of Gomer Pyle..."SURPRISE, SURPRISE...SURPRISE!!". You'd have to be a "Gomer" to not be able to figure out that the Ground scam is very profitable for reasons that a third-grader could comprehend.

 

[bbsam]

Is it any wonder that you'd get an amazing "return on investment" when you don't pay your labor force a living wage or provide benefits? In the famous words of Gomer Pyle..."SURPRISE, SURPRISE...SURPRISE!!". You'd have to be a "Gomer" to not be able to figure out that the Ground scam is very profitable for reasons that a third-grader could comprehend.

Ok smart guy. Convince the courts that it's a scam. I'm waiting. Or are the courts all Gomers? No, they must all just be paid off. American Juris Prudence awaits your wisdom.

 

[MrFedEx]

Ok smart guy. Convince the courts that it's a scam. I'm waiting. Or are the courts all Gomers? No, they must all just be paid off. American Juris Prudence awaits your wisdom.

Like I said...wait for it.

 

[bbsam]

Like I said. It's been in the courts many times.

 

[MrFedEx]

Like I said. It's been in the courts many times.

OK, Goober, whatever you say. I think Gomer is calling for you to come down to the filling station and gas-up Aunt Bea's car.

 

[bbsam]

Maybe the Estrada case rings a bell? Lynn Farris of Fedex Watch? Wow. Talk about out of touch. One starts to wonder what if anything you know about FDX at all.

 

[MrFedEx]

Maybe the Estrada case rings a bell? Lynn Farris of Fedex Watch? Wow. Talk about out of touch. One starts to wonder what if anything you know about FDX at all.

I know that the efforts to derail the ISP aren't a done deal. You and I both agree that Fred has bigger plans for Ground, and for them to happen, the ISP has to be iron-clad. IMO, it isn't completely there, and ever-escalating FedEx control efforts will make the employee/non-employee issue a bigger deal than you think in the near future.

 

[FedExer267]

I have said this before but it doesn't matter what they call it. If Fedex management continues to run Ground there are bigger problems ahead.
We recently had a driver fired/disallowed by FedEx. No warnings no write ups it was basically your gone. The Contractor had no say because FedEx had already done it. The Contractor should of been the one to do this not FedEx. I believe Judge Miller stated we are Independent which means FedEx has no say in the way we do our job and no say in the means we use to do our job. So how can they just fire someone who does not work for them. I see another lawsuit.

 

[bbsam]

I have said this before but it doesn't matter what they call it. If Fedex management continues to run Ground there are bigger problems ahead.
We recently had a driver fired/disallowed by FedEx. No warnings no write ups it was basically your gone. The Contractor had no say because FedEx had already done it. The Contractor should of been the one to do this not FedEx. I believe Judge Miller stated we are Independent which means FedEx has no say in the way we do our job and no say in the means we use to do our job. So how can they just fire someone who does not work for them. I see another lawsuit.

Thought you were in California. I don't think Judge Miller's ruling has any effect on you there. His ruling had to do with a certain jurisdiction.

 

[FedExer267]

Its a point bbsam if a judge finds one to be one way than shouldn't we all be ran that way after all we are all considered Independent right.

 

[bbsam]

No. The contractors should be considered and treated as indepentent because of the contract they have. The judge in the Estrada case in Illinois had no immediate bearing on Illinois.

 

[FedExer267]

So that means FedEx management should not be calling the shots. It should be the ones we are employed by which is not FEDEX.
If any firing is going to be done it should be by your employer correct. So how would this be legal and if the guy decides to take it to court I am pretty sure he may have a case.

 

[bbsam]

So that means FedEx management should not be calling the shots. It should be the ones we are employed by which is not FEDEX.
If any firing is going to be done it should be by your employer correct. So how would this be legal and if the guy decides to take it to court I am pretty sure he may have a case.

No. If everything you have said is correct, and Fedex is the one who "fired" him and that "firing" violated the contractural agreement between the contractor and the company, then the contractor would be the one with the case. Remember, it is the independence of the contractor, not the driver that is supported by the contract. I have seen contractors use Fedex requirements (i.e. driving record, etc.) as reasons to fire a driver, but that is a separate matter and a stipulation that the contractor has agreed to. And before you jump to the conclusion that any control by Fedex nullifies an Independent Contractor status, I would point out that the IRS and the courts do not maintain that the principal (Fedex) cannot have any control over the actions of the agent (contractor), rather it is a matter of scope and degree of that control. Defintely a grey area.

 

[FedEx2000]

I have said this before but it doesn't matter what they call it. If Fedex management continues to run Ground there are bigger problems ahead.
We recently had a driver fired/disallowed by FedEx. No warnings no write ups it was basically your gone. The Contractor had no say because FedEx had already done it. The Contractor should of been the one to do this not FedEx. I believe Judge Miller stated we are Independent which means FedEx has no say in the way we do our job and no say in the means we use to do our job. So how can they just fire someone who does not work for them. I see another lawsuit.

My guess is that it was a theft issue, there are no warnings/write-ups for that...just dismissal. At least at Express that's how it works. Might be something in the Ground contracts that allows it if they are caught on camera stealing??

 

[MrFedEx]

My guess is that it was a theft issue, there are no warnings/write-ups for that...just dismissal. At least at Express that's how it works. Might be something in the Ground contracts that allows it if they are caught on camera stealing??

My experience with this is that Express always builds a case before terminating someone. It's usually not an immediate termination, especially if the employee is a minority, because FedEx Legal doesn't want any more lawsuits, do they?

I noticed that you sidestepped the issue. How does FedEx fire a driver who is a non-employee? That's the contractor's problem. This is just another example of where the line was probably crossed by FedEx management. They run the show, and they know it, so who can blame them for acting like they're in command, because, after all, they are in command.

 

[FedEx2000]

My experience with this is that Express always builds a case before terminating someone. It's usually not an immediate termination, especially if the employee is a minority, because FedEx Legal doesn't want any more lawsuits, do they?

I noticed that you sidestepped the issue. How does FedEx fire a driver who is a non-employee? That's the contractor's problem. This is just another example of where the line was probably crossed by FedEx management. They run the show, and they know it, so who can blame them for acting like they're in command, because, after all, they are in command.

Yes, with most issues a case is built...but with theft it's pretty black and white, especially if it is caught on camera. There are no 2nd chances or Warning Letters for that, it's one of the Golden Rules you don't break.

I hardly sidestepped it, in fact I offered up an explanation that there may be some verbiage in the contract that if any issue of theft arises, FedEx has the right to disallow/terminate without the IC's permission. Just a possible explanation, but more than I have seen you offer up other than to assume the driver was terminated without cause/illegally.....when in reality neither you or I have any idea what the contract says.