http://www.presstelegram.com/busine...t-truckers-vote-to-unionize-at-carson-company
Looks like 111 and they were classified as IC's. None of my drivers are.
Looks like 111 and they were classified as IC's. None of my drivers are.
Glad I'm out of this Part2
- Thread starter bacha29
- Start date
Could have been the LA times. Some newspaper publisher. I'm thinking 50 drivers if I recall correctly.
Edit- I see that it was 111 drivers, and if you think that this is the only groups of drivers the teamsters have organized in the last 20 years, then you are incredibly slow.
Edit- I see that it was 111 drivers, and if you think that this is the only groups of drivers the teamsters have organized in the last 20 years, then you are incredibly slow.
Last edited:
The point is that you are classified as an IC by fedex, but may be an employee under the law. In Oregon, a driver with 3-4 drivers was found to be an employee of fedex in 2005(?) and all the drivers he hired were found to be fedex employees. It was no different than the current ISP model, except owning 5 routes wasn't a requirement back then. Fedex dropped that case at the State Court of Appeals because losing there would have set a legal precedent. The case had gone from the Tax division, or Unemployment judges all the way to the top. A legal precedent wasn't set because it never made it to that level.
Look, out my way we have small borough police departments with 2 or 3 guys who are in fact represented by the Teamsters. That's a fact. Now we have looked at numerous possibilities as to what the FXG model will look like in coming years and they all seem credible. It seems that what we can agree on is that the FXG model in it's current form is in no way shape or form it's final form. And what that final form is, is a matter of conjecture.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Not hard when all you do is straight-line deliveries and cherry pick the pickups.
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
We all can't just drop envelopes and milk the clock.
oldrps
Well-Known Member
Just because employee's go union is not a guarantee of more pay or anything. That has to be negotiated in the contract. Let's say a contractor's drivers unionize and demand something the contractor can't or won't do. The only power the drivers have is to go on strike. FedEx terminates the contractor for failing to service their area. FedEx does not have to honor the union's demands, they have a contract with the ISP.
Enter new contractor, new drivers, no union. Whoever the new contractor is will have to find new drivers. You know FedEx will not allow those "ex" union drivers back onto FedEx property after that.
Once other ISP drivers see they won't get much more or lose their jobs, the Teamsters don't have a chance of organizing other ISP's. Why would the Teamsters spend a lot of time and money for this to happen over and over at different terminals around the country? It may be one reason why the Teamsters have not approached the ISP drivers.
FedEx will take the contractor concept as far and as long as they can. They will only put on employee drivers when all contractor options are exhausted. So yes, the contract will always be changing, just like it has since the beginning.
Enter new contractor, new drivers, no union. Whoever the new contractor is will have to find new drivers. You know FedEx will not allow those "ex" union drivers back onto FedEx property after that.
Once other ISP drivers see they won't get much more or lose their jobs, the Teamsters don't have a chance of organizing other ISP's. Why would the Teamsters spend a lot of time and money for this to happen over and over at different terminals around the country? It may be one reason why the Teamsters have not approached the ISP drivers.
FedEx will take the contractor concept as far and as long as they can. They will only put on employee drivers when all contractor options are exhausted. So yes, the contract will always be changing, just like it has since the beginning.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Even though you would love to. Read more about this in the book, "Popular Misconceptions."
you are pretty naive. The union isn't going to ask for much at first. Just a few cents. Then they go to a lower paying ISPs drivers and say " Hey, we got them $14 an hour. We can do the same for you."
On;y when they have enough drivers do they make a bigger move. Right before peak, they go on strike. Fedex can't move packages without drivers, and I am sure the union won't just do this at one terminal at a time. If you think the union is going to kill the goose laying the golden eggs before s the right time, you need to learn to think.
CJinx
Well-Known Member
Depends on whether or not the contractor is able to rustle up temporary workers or help from contractors from neighboring routes to replace their striking employees. I haven't heard of PGH having to deal with such a scenario but they have been loath to approve a contract termination lately for anything less than capital murder. Contractor would obviously get an OTC but those packages would get in the road even if the entire management team had to shirt up and go put in some work.
You are thinking small. Did you miss my post saying that the union would not strike until they had at least 50% of the terminal under contract in multiple terminals????? How are you going to borrow drivers when over half of the terminal is on strike??? How is fedex going to cover multiple terminals where over half the drivers in each terminal are on strike??? Do you think temps can replace regular drivers instantly, especially during peak???
Problem with all you guys defending fedex is that you all think small, and don't see the big picture. The unions aren't going to be out to unionize one ISP, it will be a slow, national rollout over a period of time. Fedex made it easier by making all the drivers into employees where there will be no question before the NLRB of whether or not they have the right to form a union. And just because they form a union, it doesn't mean they will immediately ask for anything. They will bide their time, and then make the move.
It was after those drivers were reclassified as employees that they joined the union. Your drivers are already employees, and no court action is needed for them to be able to unionize.
You keep focusing on the wrong points. I wonder how you manage at all. So at least now you admit that the union IS still organizing drivers. That was the point, which you swore was not the case a few posts previous. So at least you do have the ability to learn. That's a plus for you long term. Maybe there's hope for you yet, grasshopper.
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
So the union will organize a group of drivers and not provide any large benefit? A few cents and hour you believe is enough to convince drivers to pay union dues? It would be pretty easy to convince the handful of drivers that would be exploring the union to negotiate directly with me over paying a union to do it for them. You may think big picture with this grand unionize scheme, but the average American worker only cares about what his check will be on Friday. They couldn't care less about some convoluted scam that will take years to bring to fruition.
The union organized 111 drivers. That's a far larger number than my 12. Old RPS explained perfectly. Fedex doesn't have to deal with an ISP'S union drivers. If the ISP can't or won't live up to its deal with the union, the ISP will fail and a new ISP will enter under a new corporate entity and may or may not hire those drivers. Or X could wait for the Agreement to expire and give it to a different entity or spread those areas around to already existing ISPs if they want it.
Yes. My drivers could be organized. It's been that way all along. But what you fail to understand is that X isn't going to roll over because of it.
Now what MAY be possible and I have pointed out before only came to light recently.
If all drivers at a terminal are "Co-employees" per the McDonald's ruling, then the union could skip organizing each ISP and move on to building by building. If the Teamsters showed up and got 50+1 of the drivers in a building to sign, it wouldn't matter what contractor they worked for and I'm not sure how the company would respond to that. I wonder how much weight the NLRB ruling holds because I would have thought the union would have been "on scene, day one" when the ruling came down.
So you think once they get a few cent raise they would strike as a leverage move? Is that even legal? If the ISP is living up to the agreement with the union, how do they pull that off?
It all comes down to one final conclusion. When the pay isn't high enough, the job is too labor intensive and the hours too long the load will sit on the dock because no one will take it out and delivery it. And if the job of getting it from point A to point B is the responsiblility of a Fedex Ground contractor rest assured he will not be a Fedex Ground contractor the next day. And with the nation wide shortage of drivers growing every day, that day of reckoning for many contractors is drawing near.
I haven't seen it in over 20 years.
It will be fine
Well-Known Member
The driver shortage is for CDL-A drivers. Local drivers with experience delivering pizzas are not that hard to find.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Delivered by management? That's a laugh.
CJinx
Well-Known Member
Yes. Local management will do anything to make service and avoid being on the district manager's
list. If that means we rent a budget or several and deliver the freight ourselves when a contractor solution isn't an option, they will absolutely do it.
