FedEx Home wins round in Unionization efforts

Discussion in 'UPS Discussions' started by Hoaxster, Apr 23, 2009.

  1. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt You can call me Chappy Staff Member

    The New York Times April 23, 2009
    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/23/business/23fedex.html
    Drivers May Not Join Union At FedEx Home, Court Rules
    Thousands of drivers for the home-delivery subsidiary of the FedEx Corporation do not have the right to join a union because they are independent contractors and not employees, a divided federal appeals court in Washington ruled on Tuesday. The ruling was FedEx Home's biggest victory in a series of disputes with the Teamsters union, class-action lawyers and state officials over whether it had misclassified its drivers as contractors rather than employees to deny them various benefits and the right to unionize

    That sucks!
     
  2. Livin the Dream?

    Livin the Dream? Disillusioned UPSer

    I've said it before, I'll say it again (and no disrespect meant to you Hoax, you know I love ya):

    Nobody ever exceeds by beating others down. Excel on your own, the end will take care of itself.

    Wish you were here
     
  3. H_E_Pennypacker

    H_E_Pennypacker Large Member

    Unionizing FedEx employees is considered "beating them down?"
     
  4. some1else

    some1else Active Member

    there not employees ;)

    im not sure i understand if your not an employee shouldnt it be easier to unionize? alot of contractors are (heating, electrical etc.) there only problem would be scabs but even with the lower volume this year fed-ex would probably need 150 scabs for every 100 striking fedexers to make up for the reduced productivity. and there just arent that many trucks!!!
     
  5. sano

    sano New Member

    I don't think that is what he meant. On a company level (in this case) UPS is trying to put extra baggage on a competitor, not trying to better themselves.

    Even as union members it is a hard sell to say that it is better for the company to be unionized.

    I agree with LTD, why not spend the millions we are spending on lobbying and lawyers to make ourselves better instead of making it more difficult for our competitor to due business.

    At the end of the day it is the consumer who decides who succeeds, and UPS's efforts in this case are doing nothing for the consumer.
     
  6. some1else

    some1else Active Member

    this same battle was waged in grocery when i worked there. about 10 years ago i was making 17+ an hour with similar bennies to ours (double time sundays!!!) as a clerk in a union store. after the big boxes started grocery with their employees making 8$ with no benefits the unions/stores didnt know what to do.

    they realized there was no way they could compete paying over 2.5x as much and we (the union) sold out and cut pay and benefits to all new hires; i believe they top out at 13 or 14 now with a long progression from around 8$.

    the comparison is remarkably apt in my experience. giant/safeway are ups; better service, history, quality, etc. and walmart is fed-ex -- cheap.

    if we allow them to continue to pay their employees much less then us we may be headed toward a similar situation the SEIU had to face...

    this isnt an issue of needing to better ourselves. we do provide great service the issue is fed-ex won special exemptions so they can underpay their employees. anytime a customer asks me about price differences (which are small anyway) i tell them thats why, with some people that can be a decent selling point. "if you want to use fedex you have to wear sweatpants and take five toothless kids to walmart at 130 everyday."
     
  7. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    I'm guessing this will eventually make it to the Supreme Court. The Reuters story that Cheryl posted in the FedEx Forums yesterday said it also applied to Ground. This does suck, because not only can they not organize under the NLRB, but it could allow Smith to shift Express pkgs over to Ground to avoid the Teamsters. That way he could screw the Express employees over if they do vote-in the IBT and/or threaten to do it to discourage interest in unionizing.

    The Teamsters had better get with it pronto or they're going to lose the whole shootin' match.
     
  8. Livin the Dream?

    Livin the Dream? Disillusioned UPSer

    How refreshing - someone understood what I said/meant!

    Can we have a civil argument for a moment? One where questions are asked & opinions given? That would be enjoyable, maybe informative. Can we try? I'll start;

    What is the general belief as to why it is good for UPS AS A COMPANY that FedEx be unionized?
     
  9. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt You can call me Chappy Staff Member

    Their cost to operate will go up 30-40% and that will allow UPS to operate more profitably and concentrate on quality and customer service rather than cost.

    You nitwit! :funny:
     
    Last edited: Apr 23, 2009
  10. some1else

    some1else Active Member

    read my post above. safeway, giant, kroger etc. went through this vs. walmart and target. the end result of a non-union competitor paying 8$ an hour was the union stores now pay 8$ an hour.

    our industry is somewhat different (pay is not AS large a proportion of operating costs) however it is difficult to compete with the pay differences.

    i dont know about express employees but most of the fed-ex ground drivers ive talk to claim they bring home about 750$ after expenses... vs 1000+ for ups its 25%+ difference...
     
  11. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt You can call me Chappy Staff Member

    So, so you think you can tell Heaven from Hell,
    blue skies from pain.
    Can you tell a green field from a cold steel rail?
    A smile from a veil?
    Do you think you can tell?
    And did they get you to trade your heroes for ghosts?
    Hot ashes for trees?
    Hot air for a cool breeze?
    Cold comfort for change?
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage?
    How I wish, how I wish you were here.
    We're just two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl, year after year,
    Running over the same old ground.
    What have you found? The same old fears.
    Wish you were here.
     
  12. Livin the Dream?

    Livin the Dream? Disillusioned UPSer

    From an album co-authored by God himself - The Wall. This was God's second album, after Quadrophenia
     
  13. Livin the Dream?

    Livin the Dream? Disillusioned UPSer


    Isn't that capitalism?


    So FedEx, AS A COMPANY, has been operating in a manner less expensive that UPS, legally. What is wrong with that?


    (If you don't understand the concept of devil's advocate, please look it up before flaming me, ok?)
     
  14. pretzel_man

    pretzel_man Well-Known Member

    And this is where the illogic of the original poster's argument lies.

    No one ever said it was an either / or issue. Of course UPS has to work on improving service, reducing cost, providing superior products and therefore growing the business. Its NOT one or the other.

    But, UPS should ALSO lobby lawmakers so they understand our side of the story.

    If you follow that logic, UPS should have not lobbied for intrastate shipping rights 30 years ago. We should have not lobbied for landing rights in China.

    Should the Teamsters not lobby for the Employee Free Choice Act?

    The question was raised why this was important. Here is a quote from Business Week:

    "For FedEx, the contractor model may be one reason why it has taken market share from archrival United Parcel Service Inc. (UPS ), whose drivers are largely full-time employees, says Satish Jindel, president of SJ Consulting Group Inc., a transportation consultancy. He estimates that the use of lower-cost contract drivers enables FedEx Ground to deliver packages for an average cost of $5.82 apiece, vs. the $7.17 average Jindel believes it costs UPS to deliver both air and ground packages over its integrated network. FedEx won't discuss Jindel's estimates but says its contract drivers ``are more productive because they get paid by results, not by the hour.''

    Here are the IRS rules on employee vs. contractor:

    1. Behavioral: Does the company control or have the right to control what the worker does and how the worker does his or her job?
    2. Financial: Are the business aspects of the worker’s job controlled by the payer? (these include things like how worker is paid, whether expenses are reimbursed, who provides tools/supplies, etc.)
    3. Type of Relationship: Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation pay, etc.)? Will the relationship continue and is the work performed a key aspect of the business?

    I think UPS has a right and responsibility to challenge the model. Whether UPS ultimately wins is less optimistic today.

    P-Man
     
  15. Livin the Dream?

    Livin the Dream? Disillusioned UPSer

     
  16. brownmonster

    brownmonster Man of Great Wisdom

    I keep hearing we can't compete yet our profit as a percentage of revenue is always much higher than FDX.
     
  17. pretzel_man

    pretzel_man Well-Known Member

    See the questions below:

    Sorry, that does not jive - those were lobbies FOR UPS's benefit, not AGAINST a competitor.

    - Not a true statement. When UPS lobbied for intra state rights, we were going to take business away from competitors that served that territory. When we lobbied for China rights, we were in competition against other airlines for that limited asset.

    WHY? Regardless of if you agree with it or not, it is a perfectly legal, ethical way of doing business!!

    - UPS is arguing that FedEx was NOT following the law in the case of sub contractors. Of course we have that right. Do you think the employee / contractors that brought the suit didn't have the right? Did your read the IRS regulations? Its not clear that FedEx is following the law. They drive a FedEx signed vehicle don't they? Do they use a FedEx scanner? Don't they have to wear a FedEx uniform? From that perspective, sounds like an employee per the legal definition.

    Let me ask this rhetorically - do you think a day goes by where the powers that be at UPS don't kick themselves in the ass & say "Damn - I wish we thought of that!"

    - I don't know. I do know that UPS uses contractors internationally. I think we do the same in Alaska. UPS argues that we use contractors differently than how FedEx does, and therefore follows the law.

    So, in a sentence, what is our side of the story?

    - I think its relatively straight forward. UPS says that businesses that we compete with that do exactly the same thing as us should have the same rules. We also say that a monopoly (like USPS) cannot subsidize the portion of the business where they compete with us with the business potion (like mail) that is a monopoly. As far as contractors go, we think that should be used legally. As far as EFCA goes, we think that there should be a secret ballot (among other things).

    So, let me turn it around and discuss FAA bill that impacts FedEx labor regulations. Should FedEX not lobby congress to fight that bill? Your logic is that they should not spend a penny telling the congress why its important to them.

    P-Man


    Quote:
    ...But, UPS should ALSO lobby lawmakers so they understand our side of the story.

    So, in a sentence, what is our side of the story?

    If you follow that logic, UPS should have not lobbied for intrastate shipping rights 30 years ago. We should have not lobbied for landing rights in China.

    Sorry, that does not jive - those were lobbies FOR UPS's benefit, not AGAINST a competitor.

    Should the Teamsters not lobby for the Employee Free Choice Act?

    The question was raised why this was important. Here is a quote from Business Week:

    "For FedEx, the contractor model may be one reason why it has taken market share from archrival United Parcel Serv
    ice Inc. (UPS ), whose drivers are largely full-time employees, says Satish Jindel, president of SJ Consulting Group Inc., a transportation consultancy. He estimates that the use of lower-cost contract drivers enables FedEx Ground to deliver packages for an average cost of $5.82 apiece, vs. the $7.17 average Jindel believes it costs UPS to deliver both air and ground packages over its integrated network. FedEx won't discuss Jindel's estimates but says its contract drivers ``are more productive because they get paid by results, not by the hour.''

    Here are the IRS rules on employee vs. contractor:

      • Behavioral
      • : Does the company control or have the right to control what the worker does and how the worker does his or her job?
      • Financial
      • : Are the business aspects of the worker’s job controlled by the payer? (these include things like how worker is paid, whether expenses are reimbursed, who provides tools/supplies, etc.)
        • Type of Relationship: Are there written contracts or employee type benefits (i.e. pension plan, insurance, vacation pay, etc.)? Will the relationship continue and is the work performed a key aspect of the business?
    I think UPS has a right and responsibility to challenge the model. ...

    WHY? Regardless of if you agree with it or not, it is a perfectly legal, ethical way of doing business!!

    Let me ask this rhetorically - do you think a day goes by where the powers that be at UPS don't kick themselves in the ass & say "Damn - I wish we thought of that!"
     
  18. Monkey Butt

    Monkey Butt You can call me Chappy Staff Member

    Could be even higher?

    Also, you have to look towards the future. UPS has squeezed technology and productivity. Cutback on overhead employee cost, outsourced, etc. At some point there is noting left except employee cost.

    That's where FedEx unionization comes into play.
     
  19. Livin the Dream?

    Livin the Dream? Disillusioned UPSer

    So you are saying that we should use their less costly method i.e. independent contractor model?
     
  20. myback

    myback Member

    its from the album wishyouwerehere, not the wall but both are superb. they were john lennons favorite band.