Title 45, U.S.C., Subsection 152, Fourth

Discussion in 'FedEx Discussions' started by MrFedEx, Apr 18, 2014.

  1. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    This is the portion of the Railway Labor Act that forbids employers from interfering with the rights of employees to organize. Does FedEx interfere with our ability to organize? Why, yes, they do, don't they? Many sections of the RLA mirror the NLRA, which has provisions that allow organizers onto inaccessible properties (sound familiar?), limit the ability of the employer to "talk down" the union, and permit employees to use non-operational sections of the facility (breakroom, lunchroom, etc) in which to distribute union materials. Try this at FedEx and see what happens.

    Also, ever been in a "captive meeting", where management told you something like " a union will result in the end of FedEx" or "we'll have to lay people off" etc? It doesn't even have to be a meeting.These are implied threats, and are ILLEGAL. If your manager says something similar to you one-on-one, it is also illegal. FedEx has gotten away with thumbing their noses at labor law for over 40 years. Perhaps it's time to pursue the unionization issue from a different legal perspective.
     
  2. Cactus

    Cactus Just telling it like it is

    I'm sure Fred only cares about the parts of the Railway Labor Act that benefit him. And with his arrogant attitude that he's above the law, It's only natural that he's ignored the chapter about interfering with the rights of employees to organize. Would be nice though if he screwed up bad enough to lose the RLA altogether.
     
  3. CJinx

    CJinx Well-Known Member

    and you sound like the perfect guy to lead that charge.
     
  4. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    The right organization to lead that charge would be the IBT, but Jim is still cashing Fred's checks.
     
  5. thedownhillEXPRESS

    thedownhillEXPRESS Well-Known Member

    The UPS rank and file doesn't care for him anymore either.
    America is brewing for a new union movement in the next 5-10 years and the ups IBT will elect a more firebrand leader soon.
    Also,once the angry Tea Party folks realize who is really screwing them(it will be tough for them not to blame blacks and Mexicans so it will be a SLOW process)the anti corporate movement will intensify.
    They are already starting to wake up by seeing the big money rank and file republicans trying to stomp them out.
     
  6. Dex01

    Dex01 Banned

    I dedicate the following song to the venerable Mr. FedEx:
     
  7. barnyard

    barnyard KTM rider Staff Member

    Actually MFE, you are the one that needs to hire a labor attorney and sue FE. The IBT has not witnessed any of the 'alleged' activities, you have.
     
  8. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    Correct. I can file a ULP complaint, but I'm looking at he Big Picture and Aiming High in Steering. I'm just one person...we need the IBT to coordinate and organize nationally. Hoffa is still doing what he does best...nothing.
     
  9. barnyard

    barnyard KTM rider Staff Member

    Pretty sure that the IBT tried once and was soundly defeated. Until there is an absolute ground swell of FE drivers, I would prefer that the IBT does not waste my money.
     
  10. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    Unions are a dying breed, and they need new members. That's why the IBT needs fresh leadership willing to go out there and actually DO something. They won't even answer phone calls...pathetic.
     
  11. UpstateNYUPSer

    UpstateNYUPSer Very proud grandfather.

    You really can't call trying to organize a handful of package handlers in Brockton, MA, much of an effort.



    Sent using BrownCafe App
     
  12. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    No, you can't. And the IBT ran away like little kids. Weak efforts produce weak results.
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  13. Cactus

    Cactus Just telling it like it is

    Hoffa Jr. isn't even a shadow of what his old man was. And his dad would be ashamed at the paucity of efforts Jr. is doing to keep the union strong and alive. The Teamsters at Roadway/Yellow Freight aren't real happy with him either. One of their drivers told me they don't really do anything to handle a grievance anymore.
     
  14. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    I think Hoffa Sr. would be ashamed of his son. I have also heard that the YRC contract is something of a joke. Here's my main point, and it's that FedEx has been flagrantly afoul of labor law for 40 years, and nobody ever calls them on it. Back in 1996, we had captive meetings where management talked down the union (illegal), we were promised better wages if we didn't vote for a union (illegal), and FedEx does everything possible to keep organizers off the property and targets employees who do attempt to dispense information (illegal). Of course, when Fred's buddies "modified" the language of the FAA Reauthorization Act, it became academic. Fred had successfully kept us under the RLA.

    My favorite is that "Fred would shut Express down if it voted-in a union". I have heard many managers say this, and it's almost a mantra among the Kool-Aid crowd. Per labor law, this is considered a direct threat by management.
     
  15. Route 66

    Route 66 Flacid Member

    not to mention that for Fred to do so would have to be the ultimate in cutting off one's own nose just to spite their face. Just more FedExBS
     
  16. MAKAVELI

    MAKAVELI Well-Known Member

    And such a decision would not be only his to make.
     
  17. bbsam

    bbsam Moderator Staff Member

    So how can it be perceived as a threat if is completely impossible?
     
  18. MAKAVELI

    MAKAVELI Well-Known Member

    Psychological warfare. There are many uninformed, beaten down , employees that believe everything that comes out of Memphis. It's really sad.
     
  19. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    It's a threat if management intends it that way...and they do. The implication is that if you vote for a union, you will not have a job. How can you not understand that?
     
  20. MrFedEx

    MrFedEx Engorged Member

    Correct, but that doesn't stop it from being a statement intended as a fear tactic. Illegal.