Offset the cost of dues? Really? At UPS they don't pay for their benefits. Doesn't that "offset the cost of dues" and then some? Loss of jobs and increase in workload? Really? How can they get rid of people and increase their workload when the workload is and has been maxed out and they already have routes dissolved to the tightest tee possible. Not sure what kind of Candyland Chutes and Ladders station you work at where all these couriers are standing around then doing their cake routes but I should would like to work there. What is that magic non union solution to these problems that you keep suggesting but failing to identify.
Sorry, didn't think I had to spell it out to the nth degree. Offsetting the cost of dues was just one item in the not all-inclusive list I presented. In other words, it is part and parcel of the whole deal. When considering whether or not a union would be best for you (you as in anyone reading this, not you personally) I think it's important that
all aspects of that decision are considered. Would a union be able to negotiate zero cost benefits? Maybe, maybe not. Would a union be able to negotiate a 20% (for example) pay raise? Maybe, maybe not? When considering all the presumably positive things that a union may be able to achieve, there are negative items to consider. One of those items is union dues. May not be a significant impact for some people, might be for others. Is there something wrong with considering the cons as well as the pros as you seem to suggest?
As for loss of jobs and increased workload, if you think that each and every courier at each and every station is performing at maximum capacity then you are in for a rude awakening. Certainly there are couriers who are the best of the best in their station and couldn't do more. They probably don't have to worry about increased workload. However, the money to pay for all the things that people want a union to get them has to come from somewhere. It is unrealistic and unlikely that FedEx will say "ok, you got us, here's the key to our hidden safe and the billions of dollars to pay for what you want". More realistically some of that money will come from increased productivity. That will mean that those couriers who are not the best of the best will have to improve their performance. Once they do that, as there is not likely to be a huge increase in volume, there will be a need to cut routes. It might be one route in any given station or it might be more. Even if it is just one route, what happens to the person that was on that route? Easy to say that you don't care because it won't affect you but as is often stated here, having a union is about looking out for everyone.
Whether there is a union or not, there is no magic solution. There is no one size fits all. There is no satisfying 100% of the people 100% of the time. There is only doing what's best for the majority of the employees. Whether a union can get that or whether FedEx can provide that on its own is the big question. My opinion is that FedEx will find a way to provide that on its own. Clearly yours is that it will take a union. All I was pointing out is that there are pros and cons to both choices.