Settlement approval

[dvalleyjim]

Thank you guys for the insight and information. I read about the two multi route contractors who want their drivers to get an equal share based on what I understand to be a case where those drivers were paid by these two contractors on 1099's claiming that they too were "independent contractors when they were employees all along . Their action is to try to avoid being on the hook for thousands in the way of unpaid employer taxes that were not collected and submitted..As for the 20 state MDL , the attorneys for the plaintiffs Leonard Calder want the maximum allowable fees and that's 30 % of the settlement. Can you believe it? After rolling over they want nearly a third of a paltry settlement. No question that if the attorneys were truly committed to getting justice for their clients they would have gone for an all or nothing appeal up to the 7th. Instead they just wanted to get the max for themselves. I have until 11-14 to file an objection. Might as well. Won't do any good but when I hear all bi*ching from the other present and former contractors at my terminal I can at least say, " I tried to do something about it . What did you do"?

How do you know this? Were they being sued for back payroll taxes or are they working for some other lawyers to try to get the drivers into the settlement? Thanks.

 

[59 Dano]

No need to get super defensive over things that you clearly don't understand.

Dork.

So you're on the same intellectual level as bacha?

 

[bacha29]

It always amazes me that people get optimistic about class action lawsuits. The payoff is rarely worth it unless you're the lawyer representing the class. Depending on the damages, it's often better to opt out of the class and file your own suit.

Look denial 59. The litigation and the subsequent restructuring of Ground goes all the way back to the mid 1990's. Obviously you haven't been following it. Someone in your position didn't need too. Instead of snide remarks and your blind defense of your beloved company just try follow along regarding this matter . You might find it interesting and maybe even a bit scary given that Uncle Fred may have to part with a small portion of his many billions.

 

[bacha29]

How do you know this? Were they being sued for back payroll taxes or are they working for some other lawyers to try to get the drivers into the settlement? Thanks.

The settlement involves people who were contractors. The objection to the settlement involves people who drove trucks and delivered for a contractor. Now if these claimants did not have a contract in place with FXG during the years in question how could they be anything other than employees of that contractor and how could they be entitled to payment under the settlement? if the contractor for whom those people drove and delivered filed W4 and withheld and payed employer taxes (w-2's) then these people would unquestionably be employees and therefore not part of the settlement. So what is the contractor claiming? That he simply proclaimed them to be contractors as well even though they have no contractual agreement with FXG in place but are also entitled to a equal share? Or are they saying that because they had more than one route they should be given a share for each one of the routes they controlled? Or since the courts ruled that the contractor's were employees should they and the people who worked for them should all be entitled to a share? It would appear that just who actually is a claimant is what is being challenged and must be narrowed and defined more clearly by the courts if this thing is to ever be finally settled. In the meantime the 20 state MDL often referred to as "The East Coast Settlement" is now the " next man up".

 

[dmac1]

The settlement involves people who were contractors. The objection to the settlement involves people who drove trucks and delivered for a contractor. Now if these claimants did not have a contract in place with FXG during the years in question how could they be anything other than employees of that contractor and how could they be entitled to payment under the settlement? if the contractor for whom those people drove and delivered filed W4 and withheld and payed employer taxes (w-2's) then these people would unquestionably be employees and therefore not part of the settlement. So what is the contractor claiming? That he simply proclaimed them to be contractors as well even though they have no contractual agreement with FXG in place but are also entitled to a equal share? Or are they saying that because they had more than one route they should be given a share for each one of the routes they controlled? Or since the courts ruled that the contractor's were employees should they and the people who worked for them should all be entitled to a share? It would appear that just who actually is a claimant is what is being challenged and must be narrowed and defined more clearly by the courts if this thing is to ever be finally settled. In the meantime the 20 state MDL often referred to as "The East Coast Settlement" is now the " next man up".

I can't see how someone could be added to the class unless they meet the definition of who the lawyers agreed to represent. And since those drivers had nothing in common as to treatment by fedex, since every contractor paid differently, including them in this class action probably won't be approved.

I do think that there are probably claims that could be made that they were fedex employees, but they need to make those claims separately because of how different they are from 'contractor's' claims. Just for example- the business support package charged contractors for things that are illegal to charge employees for in almost every state. Those who drove for 'contractors' made no such payments.

And I was disappointed that I didn't get a separate payment for each of my contracted routes, but understand that in my state, those weren't and couldn't be covered under the lawsuit. And now it is way too late to file another lawsuit, and there isn't an attorney who would take such a huge case with so few people in the same predicament as I was, in my state. Part of the reason that the california settlement was bigger is because under that state's laws, different expenses were found to be something fedex should have paid.

 

[59 Dano]

Look denial 59. The litigation and the subsequent restructuring of Ground goes all the way back to the mid 1990's. Obviously you haven't been following it. Someone in your position didn't need too. Instead of snide remarks and your blind defense of your beloved company just try follow along regarding this matter . You might find it interesting and maybe even a bit scary given that Uncle Fred may have to part with a small portion of his many billions.

I was speaking about the general nature of class action lawsuit settlements, nothing more and nothing less.

It's as if I mentioned that it's usually still kind of warm in October in my part of the nation, and you post a lengthy monologue about the how I don't know anything about weather because you know that it's not warm somewhere else.

Sea kelp.

 

[bacha29]

I was speaking about the general nature of class action lawsuit settlements, nothing more and nothing less.

It's as if I mentioned that it's usually still kind of warm in October in my part of the nation, and you post a lengthy monologue about the how I don't know anything about weather because you know that it's not warm somewhere else.

Sea kelp.

There you go again with insults and snide remarks when someone gets in your face because you jumped into an issue that you knew nothing about or had any experience with or a vested interest in equipped with nothing but insults put downs and snide remarks. Now if you had asked for a summary description and or a briefing of what this was about you would have been given one. But oh no, in keeping with your arrogant Fedex instilled attitude you have doing something such as that is something you consider beneath you.

 

[59 Dano]

There you go again with insults and snide remarks when someone gets in your face because you jumped into an issue that you knew nothing about or had any experience with or a vested interest in equipped with nothing but insults put downs and snide remarks. Now if you had asked for a summary description and or a briefing of what this was about you would have been given one. But oh no, in keeping with your arrogant Fedex instilled attitude you have doing something such as that is something you consider beneath you.

I said absolutely nothing about anything that you're talking about. You know why? Because I don't care. Maybe you should start eating a better brand of crayons. Those Big Lots clearance crayons are doing you no good.

 

[MrFedEx]

Look denial 59. The litigation and the subsequent restructuring of Ground goes all the way back to the mid 1990's. Obviously you haven't been following it. Someone in your position didn't need too. Instead of snide remarks and your blind defense of your beloved company just try follow along regarding this matter . You might find it interesting and maybe even a bit scary given that Uncle Fred may have to part with a small portion of his many billions.

"FedEx denies any and all wrongdoing, and will vigorously defend itself in court". Translation: We have been breaking the law for years, got caught, and will now need to settle out of court for millions of dollars.

 

[John Visi]

bacha29 and 59dano, if you read the final approval documents on page 7 footnote here is what is said about the two lawyers representing the two contractors holding up the settlement in California.

El Hani is represented by John William Davis and Steven friend. Helfand. At the hearing,
Plaintiffs indicated that counsel are serial objectors. Based on the Court‟s ECF review, Mr. Davis
appears as an attorney in 12 cases in this District. In 11 of these cases (including this one), Mr.
Davis represented an objector (in one case, himself).
Mr. Helfand was co
counsel for the objector
in several of the cases and had Mr. Davis represent him as an objector in one case. Mr. Helfand
has also represented an objector, on his own, in at least one other case in this District.

I hate to say it, but these lawyers could keep on objecting and drag this out for years, and Fedex is putting that money in the bank, collecting interest and laughing their off.

 

[bacha29]

bacha29 and 59dano, if you read the final approval documents on page 7 footnote here is what is said about the two lawyers representing the two contractors holding up the settlement in California.

El Hani is represented by John William Davis and Steven friend. Helfand. At the hearing,
Plaintiffs indicated that counsel are serial objectors. Based on the Court‟s ECF review, Mr. Davis
appears as an attorney in 12 cases in this District. In 11 of these cases (including this one), Mr.
Davis represented an objector (in one case, himself).
Mr. Helfand was co
counsel for the objector
in several of the cases and had Mr. Davis represent him as an objector in one case. Mr. Helfand
has also represented an objector, on his own, in at least one other case in this District.

I hate to say it, but these lawyers could keep on objecting and drag this out for years, and Fedex is putting that money in the bank, collecting interest and laughing their off.

John I thought El Hani was a multi route contractor who wants a share based on each one of his multiple routes.?

 

[John Visi]

You are right bacha29, but as you can see from the court transcript, he objected to the settlement because his employee might use this ruling to sue him for the same reason these driver are suing fedex. The judge basically threw it out saying his objection was merit less. That's were these two lawyers comes in, they are professional objectors, they will drag this case out as long as they can hoping to receiving confidential payoffs in exchange for dropping their objections.

 

[Marco Brazil]

I can't see how someone could be added to the class unless they meet the definition of who the lawyers agreed to represent. And since those drivers had nothing in common as to treatment by fedex, since every contractor paid differently, including them in this class action probably won't be approved.

I do think that there are probably claims that could be made that they were fedex employees, but they need to make those claims separately because of how different they are from 'contractor's' claims. Just for example- the business support package charged contractors for things that are illegal to charge employees for in almost every state. Those who drove for 'contractors' made no such payments.

And I was disappointed that I didn't get a separate payment for each of my contracted routes, but understand that in my state, those weren't and couldn't be covered under the lawsuit. And now it is way too late to file another lawsuit, and there isn't an attorney who would take such a huge case with so few people in the same predicament as I was, in my state. Part of the reason that the california settlement was bigger is because under that state's laws, different expenses were found to be something fedex should have paid.

Do you have any idea when the hearing of this appeal will take place? I was informed that they have until the end of November to rpesent something. After that we are good to go.

 

[Marco Brazil]

John I thought El Hani was a multi route contractor who wants a share based on each one of his multiple routes.?

I do not think there is going to be something new. They had the objections dismissed before, so we could have the settlement by beging of December.
Does anybody have an update about that?

 

[Marco Brazil]

Folks,

Does anybody have an update about the settlement? I have talked to Rosemary, at lawyer´s office, and the last information is that next month will be the deadline.
Anybody has an update about that?

 

[John Visi]

My friend who was a contractor and is part of the lawsuit spoke to Rosemary, here is what she said. The objectors asked for another month after the October deadline, and was granted until the end of November to explained their objections, after that his lawyer would send in their reason on why they thought the settlement was fair. Rosemary also said she does not think they can get a court date until next year. So i don't think my friend will see any money this year, he will call back in December for updates, if there is anything new i will post it.

 

[dvalleyjim]

These appeals can take 2 years or more. It's hard to get paid when people are fighting over money they were never expecting to get in the first place. Take the money. I want mine!

 

[bacha29]

Thank you for all of your updates. The " East Coast" settlement as it is come to be called is such a complete sell out by counsel for the plaintiffs I would have rather gone to the 7th and lost rather than to have them get off without having to admit anything. If we won even if we weren't awarded a dime it would have laid the groundwork for new legislation designed to bring an end to the so called 'Independent Contractor" model. The benefits of that would have been more far reaching. The so called ISP/CSP format is now places the "contractor" totally at the mercy of the company only now the " contractor" has to put more money at risk.