The Big News

[59 Dano]

At the same point companies like Fedex are OK with 1.4 billion profit otherwise they don't have to spend huge sums in upgrades and growth, just bank it. But Express volumes without question are a huge concern, total sign of the times.

It depends on the margin. You're right about Express, though. It is the most capital-heavy and volatile opco in the FedEx corporation.

 

[59 Dano]

YOU LIE!! Let's consider some other reasons profits have dropped, OK?

I didn't give *any* reasons for the lower profits; I only pointed out that they were lower and that there have been cutbacks.

Get over yourself, you joke.

 

[59 Dano]

Maury, Is that you?

Business lesson 101.....It takes money to make money.

I'm sick of all this corporate suck up like poor ol' FredEx is scraping the bottom of the barrell to get by and all these darned expenses. Wah, wah, wah.

Bud, learn to read. I never said that FedEx is "scraping the bottom of the barrel to get by," I said that its net profit margin is not that hot at the moment and that FDX isn't going to just sit around and wait for things to get better on their own. It's an objective observation.

All the money Fred spends to keep us under the phony umbrella of the RLA while treating the Memphis uppercrust, influential politicians and lobbyists to the finer things in life. Like MFE pointed amoung other things out that's where a good chunk of it is going.

Wake up and smell the coffee instead of drinking the Kool-aid

From FY'10 to FY'11, Express increased the money spent on salaries and benefits by $781 million to a total of $9.1 billion. That's just for the Express segment.

You're upset about the $20 million spent in lobbying during that same period?

FedEx Freight lost $175 million in FY'11 (and another $197 million in the two previous FY).

You're upset about the $20 million spent in lobbying in that year?

What's your point? Is it that 'Fred' won't spend money on pay and benefits or is it that the $20 million spent on lobbying is a bigger waste than the hundreds of millions that Freight is losing?

 

[MrFedEx]

I didn't give *any* reasons for the lower profits; I only pointed out that they were lower and that there have been cutbacks.

Get over yourself, you joke.

You are driving the clown car Bozo, not me. Let me add the cost of numerous lawsuits and large settlements to the drain on profits. The main point to draw from it is that no matter what the profit margin is, FedEx will continue to try an extract more blood from the rock (us). If that's OK with you, proceed straight to the main tent and perform your "act" at the Smith, Thornton, and Bronczek Circus. Maybe they'll let you clean-up after the elephants if you're a good little lackey.

 

[59 Dano]

And to think, the money they saved on our pension plan went to build up Ground so that they could do this to us. The circle of life. Hey Dano, the payroll savings ought to bump that profit margin up quite a bit.

When did they do that? It would show up in the financials of both segments and I'd definitely like to see it if indeed that's what happened.

 

[59 Dano]

And Dano they who are doing so badly increased the stock dividend. The goal is to keep the stock price high for those who own alot of stock. That's the goal behind making Express strictly an overnight service. Now let's see if they actually do it or if this is just another rumor.

The dividend went from 44 cents/share to 48 cents/share; the earnings per share went from $3.78 to $4.61. The divident increased by less than 10% as the EPS increased by more than 20%. They're being kind of tight with the dividends.

 

[59 Dano]

You are driving the clown car Bozo, not me. Let me add the cost of numerous lawsuits and large settlements to the drain on profits. The main point to draw from it is that no matter what the profit margin is, FedEx will continue to try an extract more blood from the rock (us). If that's OK with you, proceed straight to the main tent and perform your "act" at the Smith, Thornton, and Bronczek Circus. Maybe they'll let you clean-up after the elephants if you're a good little lackey.

ROTFLMAO!!! I think the main point is that you live a wretched existence marked by failure and disappointment that you blame on the big ol' corporate world of FedEx, with which you are obsessed to the point that I find lots of humor in your caustic, bitter nonsense.

 

[Cactus]

From FY'10 to FY'11, Express increased the money spent on salaries and benefits by $781 million to a total of $9.1 billion. That's just for the Express segment.

You're upset about the $20 million spent in lobbying during that same period?

FedEx Freight lost $175 million in FY'11 (and another $197 million in the two previous FY).

You're upset about the $20 million spent in lobbying in that year?

What's your point? Is it that 'Fred' won't spend money on pay and benefits or is it that the $20 million spent on lobbying is a bigger waste than the hundreds of millions that Freight is losing?

Did express couriers encourage Fred to buy American freightways?

If FedEx can't manage the Freight division then they should either figure out how to or dump the beast altogether. Couriers do their jobs everyday (and heaven forbid they only take 30 minute lunch) while the company expects more than perfection and while Memphis can't mange the Freight division?

Is that our problem? I don't think so.

Instead of Memphis micromanaging every step of the way maybe a better idea would be for them to focus their energies at how to make certain divisions more profitable rather than constantly biting the hand that feeds them.

And Dano (Bud) if you feel so sorry for the company, go into your manager's office tomorrow and demand a 20% pay cut then let us know how that goes after you receive that "attaboy!"

 

[59 Dano]

Did express couriers encourage Fred to buy American freightways?

If FedEx can't manage the Freight division then they should either figure out how to or dump the beast altogether. Couriers do their jobs everyday (and heaven forbid they only take 30 minute lunch) while the company expects more than perfection and while Memphis can't mange the Freight division?

I completely agree about Freight. It would suit me fine if they got rid of it today, though they're going to either try to make the restructuing work or at least make it work well enough to generate an interested buyer.

Instead of Memphis micromanaging every step of the way maybe a better idea would be for them to focus their energies at how to make certain divisions more profitable rather than constantly biting the hand that feeds them.

The quickest way to make things more profitable is to get rid of Express employees, who are the highest paid of any segment. That's the quickest and easiest way. Start with those who are topped out. Get rid of 200 topped out FT hourlies. Replace half of them with new hires and absorb the work of the other 100. Express will add over $5 million to the bottom line with that.

Ground's operating profit is 3X that of Express, so you can bet your ass that the heat is on and will stay on. What they want is more volume because we have the labor and infrastructure capacity to handle it. Until then, they're gonna shake every last bit of slack out of the system that they can as an alternative to laying people off, which is the smart business move but a lousy move.

 

[vantexan]

The quickest way to make things more profitable is to get rid of Express employees, who are the highest paid of any segment. That's the quickest and easiest way. Start with those who are topped out. Get rid of 200 topped out FT hourlies. Replace half of them with new hires and absorb the work of the other 100.....as an alternative to laying people off, which is the smart business move but a lousy move.

Can you answer a previous question of mine? Will FedEx be on the hook for paying unemployment if they lay off employees? With a guaranteed 35hr week if they go to strictly overnight for Express then most likely many FTer's are going to get an hour or 2 of guaranteed pay here and there. I'm betting that many topped out couriers eligible to retire will opt to stay on if they're only working 35-37 hrs a week. More income than their pension, cheaper healthcare than the retiree plan, and shorter days. I bet many of them hold out until their SS kicks in. There are other factors that favor going to strictly overnight. My station gets a Memphis freight truck from one city and a BABO truck from another city(Do they still call it BABO?). With strictly overnight freight they might be able to run all our freight through Memphis, eliminating a truck, possibly eliminating BABO operations all together at various ramps. Another big savings besides reducing courier hours. With the consolidation of stations in some cities recently they must've eliminated some RTD runs. So it looks pretty attractive to reduce Express. But if the company doesn't want to do layoffs and would have to shell out a huge amount of money if they did in unemployment claims, and would have to carry many expensive employees for years if they don't, wouldn't surprise me if they offered a targeted buyout to older employees. Maybe offer to buyout X number of employees based on seniority. Not so much paid out that it's not worth their while, but enough to clear out a bunch who were sitting on the fence about whether to retire of not.

 

[jmeti000]

OK, hang on. I read people claiming in some posts that ground is more profitable, and others that say express is. In another post I read how the profits were taken from express and used to improve ground, which would suggest that express is actually the more profitable. And I dont think you can go on just pure numbers alone with profitability. While I havent seen any reports or hard core figures, isnt ground much larger than express? If thats the case, then it would stand to reason that just looking at the bottom line profit number that ground should have a higher profit number based on its size. Express employees are paid more than ground last time I checked, but not by much. However, you also hafta take into account that in order to be employed (at least on the agfs side), we also must pass FAA security clearance as well as a USPS clearance...little bit more than your average ground employee. In general, most companies that require employees to hold extra clearances generally pay slightly higher because of the more stringent requirements.

 

[vantexan]

OK, hang on. I read people claiming in some posts that ground is more profitable, and others that say express is. In another post I read how the profits were taken from express and used to improve ground, which would suggest that express is actually the more profitable. And I dont think you can go on just pure numbers alone with profitability. While I havent seen any reports or hard core figures, isnt ground much larger than express? If thats the case, then it would stand to reason that just looking at the bottom line profit number that ground should have a higher profit number based on its size. Express employees are paid more than ground last time I checked, but not by much. However, you also hafta take into account that in order to be employed (at least on the agfs side), we also must pass FAA security clearance as well as a USPS clearance...little bit more than your average ground employee. In general, most companies that require employees to hold extra clearances generally pay slightly higher because of the more stringent requirements.

No, Express is still much larger than Ground. Probably won't be for long. I was the one who mentioned they took from Express to build Ground. Not that they specifically did that. But with the termination of the traditional pension they had more money available. And where was the company spending alot of their money? Building Ground facilities. And now they're close to being able to absorb our 2 and 3 day freight. Between the termination of the pension and the small raises Express employees helped shoulder the expense of building Ground.

 

[vantexan]

And I guess a layoff would have to be based on least seniority, otherwise there'd be a huge age discrimination lawsuit. So if they wanted to reduce the number of topped out employees quickly a buyout would be their best option.

 

[jmeti000]

Gotcha...thanks van

 

[59 Dano]

Can you answer a previous question of mine? Will FedEx be on the hook for paying unemployment if they lay off employees?

Probably, which is why it'd be a better idea to fire them in the scenario we're talking about. Fire them, as in, "Hi, we don't like you anymore. Go away and don't come back."

 

[59 Dano]

OK, hang on. I read people claiming in some posts that ground is more profitable, and others that say express is. In another post I read how the profits were taken from express and used to improve ground, which would suggest that express is actually the more profitable. And I dont think you can go on just pure numbers alone with profitability. While I havent seen any reports or hard core figures, isnt ground much larger than express? If thats the case, then it would stand to reason that just looking at the bottom line profit number that ground should have a higher profit number based on its size. Express employees are paid more than ground last time I checked, but not by much. However, you also hafta take into account that in order to be employed (at least on the agfs side), we also must pass FAA security clearance as well as a USPS clearance...little bit more than your average ground employee. In general, most companies that require employees to hold extra clearances generally pay slightly higher because of the more stringent requirements.

Ground makes more profit per dollar of sales; Express makes a smaller profit per dollar of sales but has 3X the sales of Ground.

 

[59 Dano]

I was the one who mentioned they took from Express to build Ground. Not that they specifically did that. But with the termination of the traditional pension they had more money available. And where was the company spending alot of their money? Building Ground facilities. And now they're close to being able to absorb our 2 and 3 day freight. Between the termination of the pension and the small raises Express employees helped shoulder the expense of building Ground.

What we don't have is any documentation of that money moving from Express to Ground. No big outflow from Express, no big inflow to Ground. No oddball transactions, either. Without the movement of the money, that speculation is pretty weak.

And I guess a layoff would have to be based on least seniority, otherwise there'd be a huge age discrimination lawsuit. So if they wanted to reduce the number of topped out employees quickly a buyout would be their best option.

Nah. You can fire anyone for just about any reason other than race, sex, religion, creed, and national origin. There's one mor that I can't remember. Or for no reason at all. You can say, "You make too much money and we don't want to pay you anymore. Go home. Don't come back."

 

[vantexan]

What we don't have is any documentation of that money moving from Express to Ground. No big outflow from Express, no big inflow to Ground. No oddball transactions, either. Without the movement of the money, that speculation is pretty weak. Nah. You can fire anyone for just about any reason other than race, sex, religion, creed, and national origin. There's one mor that I can't remember. Or for no reason at all. You can say, "You make too much money and we don't want to pay you anymore. Go home. Don't come back."

As I said, it wasn't specific, just that Federal Express Corporation spent alot of money building Ground facilities while we got squat in raises and our pension was terminated. Express and Ground are 2 divisions of the same corporation. The profit is for the entire corporation, as is the stock. You can't say this is Express profit here but Ground's profit is separate. If a company fires someone they still have to pay unemployment unless they can show just cause. Firing alot of people because you want cheaper employees and more profit doesn't qualify. Seriously, you're yanking our chain, right? Too much beer?

 

[snackdad]

What we don't have is any documentation of that money moving from Express to Ground. No big outflow from Express, no big inflow to Ground. No oddball transactions, either. Without the movement of the money, that speculation is pretty weak.



Nah. You can fire anyone for just about any reason other than race, sex, religion, creed, and national origin. There's one mor that I can't remember. Or for no reason at all. You can say, "You make too much money and we don't want to pay you anymore. Go home. Don't come back."

Or FedEx can do what they have been doing all along by firing people for petty made up infractions. A letter for a break violation, a letter for one too many sick calls and then a letter for standing up to a manager for safety concerns or working through breaks. They orchestrate this stuff all the time, firing the most senior, most experienced employees when they are used up and cost the company too much money or the people that stand up to their agenda. FedEx hopes that when firing for cause they do not have to pay for unemployment but they are usually wrong.
Google "versus FedEx" and see that there are hundreds if not thousands of lawsuits for wrongful termination going on right now. FedEx's response to this is to hire more lawyers, not fix the cause of the problems. The undereducated high school diploma managers that do the bidding of Memphis think that this is their job, just wait until they are forced out of the picture as well. Good luck with that.
FedEx has declared war on the career courier. You are only as good as your last delivery. There is no PSP and there is no big friendly family company behind you that cares at all about who or what you are.
I remember 5 years ago when a senior Express manager told me that in 3 years there would not be an "Express" anymore. Her timeframe was a bit off but maybe she was right.

 

[HomeDelivery]

in my state, there's an "at-will employment status"

At-will employment is a doctrine of American law that defines an employment relationship in which either party can break the relationship with no liability, provided there was no express contract for a definite term governing the employment relationship and that the employer does not belong to a collective bargaining group (i.e., has not recognized a union). Under this legal doctrine:

any hiring is presumed to be "at will"; that is, the employer is free to discharge individuals "for good cause, or bad cause, or no cause at all," and the employee is equally free to quit, strike, or otherwise cease work.

and that's how they'll get you out