i love my no union job at Fed_ex

[FedEx courier]

Do you read what you write before posting it? How can you say that something is guaranteed and then in the next sentence imply that it's not guaranteed? And good luck finding where it says that topped out employees are guaranteed any raise, let alone a 3% one.


On a number of occasions including this post, you tell me I'm wrong when in fact, you are the one that is wrong. I can only conclude that you aren't interested in the truth and would rather attack what I say, hence the blind hatred.

I'm not shooting down any ideas. As I've said, I would love to see the in-range raises go up a few percentage points. Yes I'm topped out and no, I'm not so worried about my future with a union as I am some very good people who maybe just aren't quite courier material and some who are at the bottom of the totem pole. I'm worried about how much harder I might have to work with a union but I can live with that. It's the possibility of job eliminations that concern me the most.

That's fine if you want to vote for a union. I absolutely respect everyone's right to choose what's best for them. All I'm saying is make sure you have accurate facts when making that decision. Also, let me ask you, if you get a paycheck that is higher than your average, say due to some extra OT worked last week, do you go and spend every extra penny you made that week or do you save some of it in case a future paycheck is a little lower than average? Perhaps you do spend every penny but many people will at least try to save some. It's no different for any business. Just because a profit is made in one quarter, you don't go out and spend every extra penny. It's just not wise and is very fiscally irresponsible.


I guess you'll have to wait and see. One thing though, if you only missed 1 day, make sure that your manager gives you any bonus points on attendance that you are entitled to.


Unfortunately, I think it is you who is missing the point. A review, by definition, reviews your performance so of course it punishes you if you make mistakes or are absent. What else would you have a review do? If you aren't absent and don't make mistakes, you get a higher score. That's how it's supposed to work.

Look, all of us have our crosses to bear and our beds to lay in and some of us are in a better position than others. That's the way life works. We make decisions and then have to live with the consequences. I chose to stay with FedEx from the day I started and you didn't. My situation seems to have worked out better for me than yours has. I don't mean that in a bad way, it's just what it is. I don't begrudge you the opportunity to better yourself and I understand your need to fight for it. Do I think you should have exactly what I have when I've been here longer than you and have committed myself to FedEx? No, you shouldn't as you chose a different path. But I do think you deserve more. Whether FedEx steps up to your plate or a union has to try and do it for you is the big question.

The fact that you've allowed managers to take advantage of you speaks to your attention to detail. I had it happen to me once and that was the last time it was ever going to happen to me. I made sure I knew the rules etc and exactly how things work to make sure I don't ever get taken advantage of. That's all I'm trying to do here. Make sure people know the correct information and facts. Then they can make an informed decision. In the big scheme of things, it doesn't matter to me what decision you make, just be completely informed when you make that decision.

Yeah quadro knows all the rules, but what he is failing to point out is that the rules are allowed to be changed. Am I correct on that quadro?

 

[vantexan]

Do you read what you write before posting it? How can you say that something is guaranteed and then in the next sentence imply that it's not guaranteed? And good luck finding where it says that topped out employees are guaranteed any raise, let alone a 3% one.


On a number of occasions including this post, you tell me I'm wrong when in fact, you are the one that is wrong. I can only conclude that you aren't interested in the truth and would rather attack what I say, hence the blind hatred.

I'm not shooting down any ideas. As I've said, I would love to see the in-range raises go up a few percentage points. Yes I'm topped out and no, I'm not so worried about my future with a union as I am some very good people who maybe just aren't quite courier material and some who are at the bottom of the totem pole. I'm worried about how much harder I might have to work with a union but I can live with that. It's the possibility of job eliminations that concern me the most.

That's fine if you want to vote for a union. I absolutely respect everyone's right to choose what's best for them. All I'm saying is make sure you have accurate facts when making that decision. Also, let me ask you, if you get a paycheck that is higher than your average, say due to some extra OT worked last week, do you go and spend every extra penny you made that week or do you save some of it in case a future paycheck is a little lower than average? Perhaps you do spend every penny but many people will at least try to save some. It's no different for any business. Just because a profit is made in one quarter, you don't go out and spend every extra penny. It's just not wise and is very fiscally irresponsible.


I guess you'll have to wait and see. One thing though, if you only missed 1 day, make sure that your manager gives you any bonus points on attendance that you are entitled to.


Unfortunately, I think it is you who is missing the point. A review, by definition, reviews your performance so of course it punishes you if you make mistakes or are absent. What else would you have a review do? If you aren't absent and don't make mistakes, you get a higher score. That's how it's supposed to work.

Look, all of us have our crosses to bear and our beds to lay in and some of us are in a better position than others. That's the way life works. We make decisions and then have to live with the consequences. I chose to stay with FedEx from the day I started and you didn't. My situation seems to have worked out better for me than yours has. I don't mean that in a bad way, it's just what it is. I don't begrudge you the opportunity to better yourself and I understand your need to fight for it. Do I think you should have exactly what I have when I've been here longer than you and have committed myself to FedEx? No, you shouldn't as you chose a different path. But I do think you deserve more. Whether FedEx steps up to your plate or a union has to try and do it for you is the big question.

The fact that you've allowed managers to take advantage of you speaks to your attention to detail. I had it happen to me once and that was the last time it was ever going to happen to me. I made sure I knew the rules etc and exactly how things work to make sure I don't ever get taken advantage of. That's all I'm trying to do here. Make sure people know the correct information and facts. Then they can make an informed decision. In the big scheme of things, it doesn't matter to me what decision you make, just be completely informed when you make that decision.

Yeah I read what I write. Apparently you missed the memo. FedEx did say in writing that topped out employees get 3% as long as as they get a 5 on their review. Apparently they reserved the right to not give a raise, or to reduce raises. But if they never said as much, why did they give topped out employees 3% annual raises until 2009? Are you saying that was just chance, or did they have a pay system in place?

Show me where I've been wrong in previous posts? It's not about blind hatred bub. It's about demanding a deal similar to the one you take for granted. And from your writings it appears if it takes 20, 25, 30 years to catch top pay that's fine by you. After all most of us screw around on the clock, really don't deserve any better.
You've said as much, sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly.

Thanks for the financial advice. I sock away what I can every week and want better pay so that I can save more to make up as much as possible with the termination of the traditional pension. Tell me something, if one starts at $10.85hr, gets fed a little bit more each year, some years no raise or a partial one, healthcare goes up each year, inflation goes up each year, some years significantly, how does one save as much as someone like you? Topped out employees on my lowest payscale grossed on 40 hrs a week at least $100k more than I have in the last 11.5 years. And once again, just using my situation as an example so stop with the blame game. Many thousands are in the same boat. And again I'm willing to work X amount of years to get to better pay but 20? 25? 30? So is it my personal failings that you seem to delight in suggesting or is the system rigged for those of us in mid-range?

And finally, since you have 25+ years in, you topped out in 2 years. Do I think I deserve as much as you after 11.5 years? Absolutely. And if I was consistently tops in productivity in most of the stations I worked in then I believe I should be fast tracked to much better pay. FedEx claims pay is based on performance. If you give a top performer a $2hr raise for working extra hard, wouldn't that be a better incentive to others to work harder or accept small raises if they don't? After all, if everyone is motivated to get much better raises, with a cap of course, wouldn't the increased productivity result in a smaller workforce, decreasing costs? From what I've seen FedEx is only interested in us working as hard as possible for as little pay as they can get away with paying us. Not hatred, not negativity, just reality.

 

[vantexan]

The fact that you've allowed managers to take advantage of you speaks to your attention to detail. I had it happen to me once and that was the last time it was ever going to happen to me. I made sure I knew the rules etc and exactly how things work to make sure I don't ever get taken advantage of.

Once again you absolve the company and say all those bad situations were my fault. I went to the company about the mgr who rehired me shortly after I transferred from his station. I was told by the regional V.P. that a week was 7 days, not 5, and that plenty of employees get their guaranteed 35 hrs on more than 5 days. As you recall the mgr would only let me take a FT swing job if I agreed to receive less than 35 hrs a week for that summer. Nothing in writing, he renegged on our deal, Personnel rep tried to cover for him, finally forced him to give me 40 hrs. He was so nasty about it afterwards I went to company shortly after transferring. I believed I was owed for all those weeks I didn't get full 35 on 5 days but since I volunteered for Saturdays the company would only pay for 2 weeks I didn't work Saturday. V.P. never talked to me, claimed I wasn't abused at all, just my opinion. Mgr had failed DOT physical several times, had hypertension, literally screamed in my face several times. And yet as a swing my onroad portion of review was 6.9 and several digits more. Pretty much perfect onroad. How's that for attention to detail? I did right by them, did the company do right by me? I followed the rules, got thrown under the bus because they didn't want to admit abuse and possibly open themselves up to litigation. And the next location was where they were mailing pkgs. I felt if I went to the company shortly after the last problem I would get no support, labeled a malcontent, possibly fired on something trumped up.

That was one situation where I went to the company. I was told something very different on the phone before coming to my current station than what they told me my first day regarding my work duties. I filed a GFT, was told by district director I was complaining about hours and thus not GFTable. I told him that, no, it was about being lied to. That at the very least if things had changed as Sr.Mgr claimed they should've told me before I came and allowed me to back out. Director said he didn't know what I was told and chose not to ask mgr sitting there what it was he had said to me when I requested he do so. They didn't allow me to go forward with GFT. Again, went to the company for help, again thrown under the bus. You seem to be so enamored with the company that you'll take their side, not believing mgmt would act unfairly or unprofessionally. I think you have limited experience with mgmt, just haven't seen what I have. I also believe that several times as a by myself domiciled courier I was treated differently than someone in a station where witnesses could back me up. No doubt you've experienced alot in 25+ years, but don't assume you know everything there is to know about what goes on. Many mgrs are just crooks, many more are desperate to either keep their job or advance their career, and the us vs them mentality of this company often means covering for bad mgrs at our expense. If you don't believe that you are naive.

 

[quadro]

Yeah quadro knows all the rules, but what he is failing to point out is that the rules are allowed to be changed. Am I correct on that quadro?

Correct that I know the rules or that rules are allowed to be changed? Wrong on the first, right on the second. If I have to point out to people that rules change then we've got bigger problems than any of us know.

I certainly don't know all the rules but I do know where to go to find the answers. Policies change all the time and sometimes the changes are good, sometimes they are bad, depending on your point of view. For example, did you know that male couriers are now allowed to wear earrings? Not that that has anything to do with anything but if your a male and have wanted to wear earrings, then your probably happy with that change. Same thing with tattoos.

 

[quadro]

Yeah I read what I write. Apparently you missed the memo. FedEx did say in writing that topped out employees get 3% as long as as they get a 5 on their review.

No, I got the memo. And I read the part that you seem to have missed that said that applied to that year only. That memo comes out pretty much every year if and when a range increase is announced.

Apparently they reserved the right to not give a raise, or to reduce raises. But if they never said as much, why did they give topped out employees 3% annual raises until 2009? Are you saying that was just chance, or did they have a pay system in place?

Neither. Top of range increases are something FedEx has done for the most part over, what, the last 10 years? Not sure if it's more or less. Anyway, it's been done as long as there was money to do it but nowhere is it in writing that it is guaranteed every year.

Show me where I've been wrong in previous posts?

Just go back a couple of posts in this thread where you admitted you made a mistake about productivity and performance. That's just one instance but there are others.

It's not about blind hatred bub. It's about demanding a deal similar to the one you take for granted. And from your writings it appears if it takes 20, 25, 30 years to catch top pay that's fine by you. After all most of us screw around on the clock, really don't deserve any better.
You've said as much, sometimes explicitly, sometimes implicitly.

I don't take anything for granted. I'm very thankful for what I have. I have never said that taking 20-30 years to top out is fine by me. Wrong again. I absolutely think that there should be bigger raises for in-range employees and I've said so on a number of occasions. My point has always been that I don't think that what might be given up under a union contract is worth risking to get those possible raises. There's no guarantee that a union will get you the raises you want and you might end up giving something else up that offsets whatever raise you do get. I respect and understand that you might disagree with that and I'll support you all the way to do what you think is best for you. Just get your facts right before you decide what is right for you.

Thanks for the financial advice. I sock away what I can every week and want better pay so that I can save more to make up as much as possible with the termination of the traditional pension. Tell me something, if one starts at $10.85hr, gets fed a little bit more each year, some years no raise or a partial one, healthcare goes up each year, inflation goes up each year, some years significantly, how does one save as much as someone like you? Topped out employees on my lowest payscale grossed on 40 hrs a week at least $100k more than I have in the last 11.5 years. And once again, just using my situation as an example so stop with the blame game. Many thousands are in the same boat. And again I'm willing to work X amount of years to get to better pay but 20? 25? 30? So is it my personal failings that you seem to delight in suggesting or is the system rigged for those of us in mid-range?

Union or no union, there just is no way to please 100% of the people 100% of the time in a company this large. Your situation, regardless of why you are where you are, is what it is and no matter what happens, you still might not be happy with the outcome. I would hope that you will be but as with most things in life, there are no guarantees. And the mid-range situation sucks. I've said as much before.

 

[quadro]

After everything I've seen here written by you I can only conclude that you are a mgr.

I think you have limited experience with mgmt, just haven't seen what I have.

And only a few posts between your two conclusions. So which is it? Am I a manager or an ill-informed courier?

 

[vantexan]

And only a few posts between your two conclusions. So which is it? Am I a manager or an ill-informed courier?

I think you are a mgr posing as an ill-informed courier. Either way you try to wiggle out of past statements. You have a bias against mid-range employees, anyone willing to go through past posts will see that. I believe one of my first responses to a post of yours was about you suggesting that you are superior to us, that you are a winner, us losers. Search for the word idiot, should pull up the post.

 

[quadro]

I think you are a mgr posing as an ill-informed courier. Either way you try to wiggle out of past statements. You have a bias against mid-range employees, anyone willing to go through past posts will see that. I believe one of my first responses to a post of yours was about you suggesting that you are superior to us, that you are a winner, us losers. Search for the word idiot, should pull up the post.

On several occasions I've pointed out where you have your facts wrong. If that makes me ill-informed, what does it make you? Show me where I've tried to wiggle out of any statement. If I state a fact and it ends up being wrong, I admit it. If I state an opinion then there's nothing to wiggle out of. At least twice in this thread I've stated mid-range employees need bigger raises so no bias there. Lastly, I've never said I was superior to anyone. You're the one who keeps telling us how hard you work and how good of a courier you are.

Once again, an ad hominem argument. Not sure why you feel the need to do that. All I ask is if you think my facts are wrong, please go check them out, and if I'm wrong, let me know. I'll gladly stand corrected. If I'm right, then at least you have one more piece of valid information to make an informed decision.

You have serious concerns about FedEx. I don't necessarily share those concerns. There's nothing wrong with that and we both need all the info we can get to make informed decisions.

 

[MrFedEx]

If I, or anyone else, post something negative about FedEx, we are virtually guaranteed a "company response" from quadro, the current chief apologist. What FedEx has "done for you" over the last 25 years? How about what they've done to you. You say you're a 25 year employee, so I'm guessing you remember profit sharing (gone), jumpseat (gone), the traditional retirement plan (gone), regular cost-of-living raises (gone), the opportunity for FT status if you want it (mostly gone), P-S-P, (long gone), good benefits (gone), and on and on. No matter what, you're OK with it, and then jump on here to defend the FedEx rationale for the takeaway. Why?

I'm also a 25+ year employee, and I am absolutely appalled by the way FedEx operates, and especially angry at the way they abuse employees almost at will with all of the policies and procedures designed to do two things; limit FedEx liability and reduce costs. Here's a policy I'd like you to defend, and perhaps you'd better call Scott Mugno or Maury before you answer, and that would be the FedEx policy regarding injuries. As it currently exists, the injury policy is that it is always the fault of the employee. Can you deny that based on what you've seen over your 25 years as an employee?If a box falls from an improperly loaded AMJ and lands on my head, it's my fault because I should have "anticipated the hazard". Let's say I enjoy softball, and play in a league, and during the season I injure my shoulder at work. Management is aware that I play softball, so they will declare the injury is due to participation in the softball league. Sound ridiculous? I overheard this actual conversation during a conference call while standing in the hallway waiting for an audience with my senior manager. Every manager in the district was on the phone trying to think of ways they could declare injuries "preventable" and to somehow absolve FedEx of any responsibility or liability. They did this for 5 separate employees before the senior realized the door was open and that I had heard every word....I only wish I had been able to tape it. What I did do was write down every bit of information, including dates, names, and all the details of the conversation I could remember. Just another page in my "insurance policy" if my senior ever gets a Jones to harass me.

 

[quadro]

If I, or anyone else, post something negative about FedEx, we are virtually guaranteed a "company response" from quadro, the current chief apologist.

I'm not apologizing for anything. If I see someone post what I believe to be incorrect facts, I'll point that out. Just because I might not agree with someone's opinion does not make me an apologist. Or are you suggesting that this forum should be a Heaven's Gate type thing?

What FedEx has "done for you" over the last 25 years? How about what they've done to you. You say you're a 25 year employee, so I'm guessing you remember profit sharing (gone)

Yes that sucks but we've had some other payouts. Doesn't necessarily make up for it but it's not a make or break for me.

jumpseat (gone)

Probably one of the biggest losses IMHO. However, hard to blame FedEx for that one. Can't really be a cost savings thing as the infrastructure still exists as does jumpseating. I hate to use 9/11 as the reason but maybe that really does fit here.

the traditional retirement plan (gone)

Sucks for some people not so much for others. Whether I agree with it or not, I understand why this was done. After all, it's not like you can go to too many other large companies and still find a defined benefit pension plan. I also doubt that even a union could bring one back to FedEx.

regular cost-of-living raises (gone)

According to vantexan these are guaranteed. While that's not correct, there have been regular top of range increases over the last several years.

the opportunity for FT status if you want it (mostly gone)

Depends on where you work and if you are willing to move. FedEx doesn't control the economy and the reduction in workload has resulted in a reduction of positions.

P-S-P, (long gone)

Probably one of the biggest concerns along with pay. Again, it comes down to each person's perspective. I see and understand why many feel this way and I agree there is more that can be done in this area. I do think, however, people confuse Person Service Profit with People Service Profit. It isn't necessarily about one individual as much as it is about employees as a whole.

good benefits (gone)

Are you referring back to profit sharing, jumpseat, and pension? If not, which benefits are gone?

No matter what, you're OK with it, and then jump on here to defend the FedEx rationale for the takeaway. Why?

As I've said before, I'm not OK with all of it but I understand that the world has changed over the last 25 years and business has had to change too. I'm not defending anything other than to say that often there are valid reasons and a failure to understand those reasons, whether you agree with them or not, could lead to potential problems down the road.

I'm also a 25+ year employee, and I am absolutely appalled by the way FedEx operates, and especially angry at the way they abuse employees almost at will with all of the policies and procedures designed to do two things; limit FedEx liability and reduce costs. Here's a policy I'd like you to defend, and perhaps you'd better call Scott Mugno or Maury before you answer, and that would be the FedEx policy regarding injuries. As it currently exists, the injury policy is that it is always the fault of the employee. Can you deny that based on what you've seen over your 25 years as an employee?

Yes I can. For one, that's not the policy. Just go read it and find where it says it is always the employee's fault. Secondly, I have had a couple of injuries and accidents and none of them were my fault and none of them were counted as preventable or avoidable. Lastly, I've been on my station's SCIT team and the team at my previous station. We reviewed all accidents and injuries and we, as hourly employees, often deemed an accident or injury as preventable or avoidable because that's what it was. We also had situations where the manager and sr. mgr said that it was not avoidable.

If a box falls from an improperly loaded AMJ and lands on my head, it's my fault because I should have "anticipated the hazard". Let's say I enjoy softball, and play in a league, and during the season I injure my shoulder at work. Management is aware that I play softball, so they will declare the injury is due to participation in the softball league. Sound ridiculous? I overheard this actual conversation during a conference call while standing in the hallway waiting for an audience with my senior manager. Every manager in the district was on the phone trying to think of ways they could declare injuries "preventable" and to somehow absolve FedEx of any responsibility or liability. They did this for 5 separate employees before the senior realized the door was open and that I had heard every word....I only wish I had been able to tape it. What I did do was write down every bit of information, including dates, names, and all the details of the conversation I could remember. Just another page in my "insurance policy" if my senior ever gets a Jones to harass me.

Obviously I cannot dispute what you heard so I'll gladly take what you said at face value and say that that management team is a sorry sack of @#$%. Fortunately there are ways to have these things reviewed so that someone outside that team can see what is going on.

 

[quadro]

i couldn't edit my post but out of curiosity I just checked last week's and this week's career ops and there were 124 FT postings last week and 163 this week. Those are just hourly positions and don't include any salaried FT positions. Seems like there is a fair amount of FT opportunity out there.

 

[MrFedEx]

Of course, the written policy at FedEx is not going to state that "all injuries are the fault of the employee". That would be illegal. However, the reality is that management will attempt to declare every injury possible "preventable", even when it isn't. It's nice that you have a SCIT that's actually empowered to do something. The regime at my station would never consent to have the SCIT do anything but write-up reminders every month about new and inventive ways to be safe.

I'll stand by my benefits statement. Co-pays and availibility of providers at CIGNA both suck. Our insurance has slid downhill as our out-of-pocket costs have risen. This isn't unusual these days, but since wages at FedEx have stayed depressed, how do you make-up the difference? You don't, and the employee is that much farther in the hole.

IMO, the loss of jumpseat has more to do with making the pilots happy and saving money. Most pilots don't like jumpseaters intruding into their world of Penthouse, The Robb Report, and naps at 45,000 feet. There isn't much to do at cruise but monitor ATC, switch frequencies, and argue whether a Lexus or Mercedes should be your next car. Fred also eliminated a reservation system and a whole bunch of liability. Every ramp I know has a thorough jumpseater search procedure, and your ID badge needs to indicate jumpseat-eligible status. Business jumpseat still exists because it saves money.

I just can't believe that so many employees just lay down like a rug and take-it...over and over again. They take, we give, and the cycle continues. Yeah, maybe the world has changed, but that doesn't justify the load of crap Fred has dished-out. Sorry, but FedEx is deserving of zero loyalty these days. Bad behavior is on the uptick, and they're not going to be able to control it. At my station, we've got the senior on the ropes because he can't handle the changes in employee attitudes. Performance is down, morale sucks, and sick calls are way-up.The MD has paid us several visits, and we aren't buying his BS, which is the usual company line of "we care" garbage. If they bring-in a new one, we'll eat him alive too. Everyone knows the games Fred is playing in Washington, and if he "wins", bad things are going to start happening. This goes well beyond what I just described under "bad behavior". We are ready to start breaking things and screwing-up the operation. The local RTD workgroup is ready to just park em', and we've already discussed shutting down the AM belt and just sitting there to see what they'll do. Pretty tough to deliver pkgs that are still sitting in a can or never got there in the first place because the RTD is pissed.

Maybe your station is "Happy Acres" but the ones around my district are smoldering volcanoes.

 

[quadro]

Of course, the written policy at FedEx is not going to state that "all injuries are the fault of the employee". That would be illegal. However, the reality is that management will attempt to declare every injury possible "preventable", even when it isn't. It's nice that you have a SCIT that's actually empowered to do something. The regime at my station would never consent to have the SCIT do anything but write-up reminders every month about new and inventive ways to be safe.

That's really unfortunate as a good SCIT team can go a long way towards building relationships between management and employees. Plus employees understand why their injury or accident is ruled the way it is.

I'll stand by my benefits statement. Co-pays and availibility of providers at CIGNA both suck. Our insurance has slid downhill as our out-of-pocket costs have risen. This isn't unusual these days, but since wages at FedEx have stayed depressed, how do you make-up the difference? You don't, and the employee is that much farther in the hole.

True but not unique to FedEx. Doesn't make it right but it's not just FedEx so it's not likely to change.

IMO, the loss of jumpseat has more to do with making the pilots happy and saving money. Most pilots don't like jumpseaters intruding into their world of Penthouse, The Robb Report, and naps at 45,000 feet. There isn't much to do at cruise but monitor ATC, switch frequencies, and argue whether a Lexus or Mercedes should be your next car. Fred also eliminated a reservation system and a whole bunch of liability. Every ramp I know has a thorough jumpseater search procedure, and your ID badge needs to indicate jumpseat-eligible status. Business jumpseat still exists because it saves money.

The reservations system is still alive and well. You just can't make a personal reservation unless you are FAA licensed as part of your job at FedEx. Hence my point that I'm not sure there was a bunch of money saved by eliminating personal jumpseat.

I just can't believe that so many employees just lay down like a rug and take-it...over and over again. They take, we give, and the cycle continues. Yeah, maybe the world has changed, but that doesn't justify the load of crap Fred has dished-out. Sorry, but FedEx is deserving of zero loyalty these days. Bad behavior is on the uptick, and they're not going to be able to control it. At my station, we've got the senior on the ropes because he can't handle the changes in employee attitudes. Performance is down, morale sucks, and sick calls are way-up.The MD has paid us several visits, and we aren't buying his BS, which is the usual company line of "we care" garbage. If they bring-in a new one, we'll eat him alive too. Everyone knows the games Fred is playing in Washington, and if he "wins", bad things are going to start happening. This goes well beyond what I just described under "bad behavior". We are ready to start breaking things and screwing-up the operation. The local RTD workgroup is ready to just park em', and we've already discussed shutting down the AM belt and just sitting there to see what they'll do. Pretty tough to deliver pkgs that are still sitting in a can or never got there in the first place because the RTD is pissed.

And that's your prerogative to feel that way. I think it's unfortunate that you feel you need to sabotage customers, other employees, etc. Everyone reading this needs to keep one thing in mind: If you follow MrFedEx's advice, you are putting yourself in a position where you are likely to end up with some sort of discipline if not termination.

 

[vantexan]

According to vantexan these are guaranteed. While that's not correct, there have been regular top of range increases over the last several years.

It hasn't been for just the last several years, and yes, when FedEx came up with the new pay policy, I believe it was in 2002, possibly 2003, it was posted in my station. Topped out employees get 3% as long as they get a 5 on their review. They were "guaranteed" although, as I've said and you choose to ignore, they apparently reserved the right to not offer a raise or to give a smaller one.

You said previously that I allowed mgrs to be abusive, didn't stand up for myself. When I pointed out 2 examples of standing up for myself, and they aren't the only ones, you chose to ignore it. Something you do when it doesn't fit in your narrative. Again, I've presented what has happened to me to illustrate that all isn't wonderful at FedEx. It's not just about me, as you've suggested. But I can say this until I'm blue in the face and we can continue to go in circles. Doesn't change the fact that if we have any hope of a better financial future working for FedEx we'll have to vote for a union. Doesn't guarantee anything, but we already know what we'll get without the union. You've said we should get better pay but you come from every angle possible to shoot down having a union. How then, in your estimation, should we proceed, without a union, to obtain better pay and benefits? What's our alternatives? Or are you saying that we are better off accepting what we've got now than have a union?

 

[fxdwg]

What makes you think that?

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_U/forumview?bn=19022


The Yahoo Message board....not Gospel; but perhaps a source of Intel...

 

[quadro]

It hasn't been for just the last several years, and yes, when FedEx came up with the new pay policy, I believe it was in 2002, possibly 2003, it was posted in my station. Topped out employees get 3% as long as they get a 5 on their review. They were "guaranteed" although, as I've said and you choose to ignore, they apparently reserved the right to not offer a raise or to give a smaller one.

Somewhere in this thread I said I wasn't sure how many years it's been. There wasn't a new pay policy. What you saw posted in your station is what's posted every time there is a top of range increase. It applies to that year only. It explains what you have to do to qualify. In this case, as in most if not all of them, you must have a 5 or better on your review. Reserving the right to not offer a raise or give a smaller one is not only true every year but is also in direct opposition to a guarantee. If it's guaranteed then there's no need to reserve the right to not offer a raise. I'm not choosing to ignore it, it's just not worth explaining over and over again.

You said previously that I allowed mgrs to be abusive, didn't stand up for myself. When I pointed out 2 examples of standing up for myself, and they aren't the only ones, you chose to ignore it. Something you do when it doesn't fit in your narrative.

I'm not ignoring it. I can't prove you wrong so I have to take your word for it. I've stated my opinion so there's not much left to be said.

Again, I've presented what has happened to me to illustrate that all isn't wonderful at FedEx. It's not just about me, as you've suggested. But I can say this until I'm blue in the face and we can continue to go in circles.

Thus the reason I chose not to respond.

Doesn't change the fact that if we have any hope of a better financial future working for FedEx we'll have to vote for a union. Doesn't guarantee anything, but we already know what we'll get without the union. You've said we should get better pay but you come from every angle possible to shoot down having a union. How then, in your estimation, should we proceed, without a union, to obtain better pay and benefits? What's our alternatives? Or are you saying that we are better off accepting what we've got now than have a union?

Personally, I believe that upper management is aware of the pay issue and while there's no guarantee that they'll do anything, I still think overall things would be better without a union. But that's just my opinion. I don't criticize you for wanting a union if you think that's going to be best for you. All I keep saying (and sounding like a broken record) is just make sure you have your facts right. You've gotten some wrong and I'm not saying that for any other reason than to have you go back and double check them. I'm not sure you will but that's your prerogative too.

 

[bbsam]

http://messages.finance.yahoo.com/Stocks_(A_to_Z)/Stocks_U/forumview?bn=19022


The Yahoo Message board....not Gospel; but perhaps a source of Intel...

The only think the two have in common is they occurred on the same day: UPS had a great earnings call and Fedex looks like they got their way on the FAA reauthorization fight in the Senate. Exclusive events driving the stocks of each company.

 

[vantexan]

Somewhere in this thread I said I wasn't sure how many years it's been. There wasn't a new pay policy. What you saw posted in your station is what's posted every time there is a top of range increase. It applies to that year only. It explains what you have to do to qualify. In this case, as in most if not all of them, you must have a 5 or better on your review. Reserving the right to not offer a raise or give a smaller one is not only true every year but is also in direct opposition to a guarantee. If it's guaranteed then there's no need to reserve the right to not offer a raise. I'm not choosing to ignore it, it's just not worth explaining over and over again.

I'm not ignoring it. I can't prove you wrong so I have to take your word for it. I've stated my opinion so there's not much left to be said.

Thus the reason I chose not to respond.

Personally, I believe that upper management is aware of the pay issue and while there's no guarantee that they'll do anything, I still think overall things would be better without a union. But that's just my opinion. I don't criticize you for wanting a union if you think that's going to be best for you. All I keep saying (and sounding like a broken record) is just make sure you have your facts right. You've gotten some wrong and I'm not saying that for any other reason than to have you go back and double check them. I'm not sure you will but that's your prerogative too.

Again, on the lowest payscale, topped out employees made $16.11hr in 1998. Over the next few years they got several adjustments up, with the company explaining in a detailed letter with graphics how the new pay system will work. They explained that with the last adjustment a new system was in place where mid-range employees would get up to a 5% raise with a 7 review, and with each .1 lower than a 7 the % would be incrementally lower. A 6.5 review was a 4% raise for example. The next year they raised raise %'s 1% so now a 7 review is a 6% raise, etc. At the same time they explained that for top of range employees the annual raise was 3%, guaranteed as long as the employee got a 5 or better on his review. This wasn't something posted annually on a wall but a mailing touted as why FedEx gives us a better deal, even claiming it's a better deal than UPS since their raises are negotiated every 5 years. At the time I was stunned that they would make such a claim. Just because you didn't see this doesn't mean it wasn't so or that I'm mistaken. The only real mistake I can recall making was confusing what Fred S was saying about operating margins. I acknowledged that. That I disagree with you on various issues doesn't automatically make you right. You are very mistaken about what I've said concerning top pay but you want to claim I'm wrong and try to marginalize anything I say by saying I'm making quite a few mistakes. You would've made a great Nazi propagandist. And were again offered no alternatives for us to get better pay. I'm certain upper management is aware of the pay issue to, they're the ones who crafted it. That offers no comfort knowing without a union my financial future is in their hands. If the legislation fails we still have the new rules changes under the RLA. Why we don't just go forward with it is beyond me. Ending the RLA exemption WAS the goal of the legislation but while Congress dragged their feet the NMB changed the rules and FedEx lost a court challenge of those rules changes. So what are we waiting for? See any mistakes?

 

[quadro]

Again, on the lowest payscale, topped out employees made $16.11hr in 1998. Over the next few years they got several adjustments up, with the company explaining in a detailed letter with graphics how the new pay system will work. They explained that with the last adjustment a new system was in place where mid-range employees would get up to a 5% raise with a 7 review, and with each .1 lower than a 7 the % would be incrementally lower. A 6.5 review was a 4% raise for example. The next year they raised raise %'s 1% so now a 7 review is a 6% raise, etc. At the same time they explained that for top of range employees the annual raise was 3%, guaranteed as long as the employee got a 5 or better on his review. This wasn't something posted annually on a wall but a mailing touted as why FedEx gives us a better deal, even claiming it's a better deal than UPS since their raises are negotiated every 5 years. At the time I was stunned that they would make such a claim. Just because you didn't see this doesn't mean it wasn't so or that I'm mistaken. The only real mistake I can recall making was confusing what Fred S was saying about operating margins. I acknowledged that. That I disagree with you on various issues doesn't automatically make you right. You are very mistaken about what I've said concerning top pay but you want to claim I'm wrong and try to marginalize anything I say by saying I'm making quite a few mistakes. You would've made a great Nazi propagandist. And were again offered no alternatives for us to get better pay. I'm certain upper management is aware of the pay issue to, they're the ones who crafted it. That offers no comfort knowing without a union my financial future is in their hands. If the legislation fails we still have the new rules changes under the RLA. Why we don't just go forward with it is beyond me. Ending the RLA exemption WAS the goal of the legislation but while Congress dragged their feet the NMB changed the rules and FedEx lost a court challenge of those rules changes. So what are we waiting for? See any mistakes?

Now you're talking about in-range raises as well as top of range. Previously we were talking about just the top of range increase which, by the way, varied from about 2% to 3.5% over the last several years. There may well have been a mailing about the merit increases, I don't remember as they didn't apply to me and weren't part of what we were talking about. Even then, I would challenge you to find where anything said a raise was guaranteed.

As for mistakes, you even admitted to misunderstanding the review in this thread and I showed you where you misunderstood. If you want other examples, feel free to go back and check your posts. I'm not trying to nitpick, just pointing out that at the very least, you've misunderstood how some things work. If you don't want to take the time to double check and make sure you understand things before you make a decision about them, that's your right. It doesn't make your or me a bad person. I know that I've talked to many of my coworkers over the years who were mad or upset about something. When I showed them how to go about challenging it if they were right or understanding it if they were wrong, they were better for it.

And you are correct, just because you disagree doesn't make me right. What makes me right is when you are wrong. Believe it or not, I am smart enough to know when you have a valid point and are just disagreeing with me. That's what discussions are about.

As for how to get better pay, I don't have the golden answer. Obviously the status quo isn't it and in my opinion a union isn't it either but that's just my opinion. I've said it here before, if a union gets in and we do end up with better pay, better benefits, better all around, I'll be the first one to come back here and say I was an idiot and thanks to all of you who knew better than me.

"What are we waiting for?". That is an excellent question and one I think you should be asking the Teamsters. If they're looking out for your best interest, why didn't they start making a push as soon as the RLA rules were changed? It's definitely a lot easier for them even without the NLRA change.

 

[MrFedEx]

You can go around and around about incremental pay increases all day, but the main issue remains that we are grossly underpaid, and all of the different scales and "merit" pay and FPP and all of the rest of it are smoke and mirrors to keep overall pay low. This is the main objective, and Fred has been extremely successful at getting most employees to gratefully take 2% here or there while their market level stays ridiculously low and our pay continues to diminish in comparison to UPS. Oh yeah, and it takes 20 years to even get to that point. What a load of crap.

Once a decent level of base pay is established, then we can sweat the small stuff. Until then, it really doesn't matter very much.