Which Title of the Civil Rights Act relates to union representation? Excellent article indeed.
We need to be removed from the Railway Labor Act...NOW!
- Thread starter Broke
- Start date
FedEx courier
Well-Known Member
The Civil rights act deals with all people being treated with dignity and respect. When people are being denied the right for fair bargaining representation then it certainly becomes a civil rights issue. Everyone should have the right to participate in an organization without being ridiculed and humiliated.
You're like a little kid with the name calling. I never said it was my main argument. I was just pointing out that FedEx isn't the only company with skin in this game. And maybe you should take some time to look at who are some of the biggest political contributors over the last decade instead of wasting time calling people names. UPS and unions are half of the top 20 contributors. Why is it ok for them to do what FedEx is now doing but not ok for FedEx?
Ok and which Title is that again? The right to union representation is not, in and of itself, a civil rights issue.
FedEx courier
Well-Known Member
Waah Waah Waah! I never said it was your argument either, I said it was one of the brownbailout arguments. I was referring to the brownbailout argument when I said "your".
FedEx courier
Well-Known Member
Did anybody say it was a "title" except you. Good smokescreen but I think you may be getting a little ahead of yourself. The general idea of attaining dignity and respect for people in the workplace is certainly a civil rights issue. Whether the "Civil Rights Act" specifically has a title that deals with Unionization is something that you brought up for some reason. Don't think I ever said their was a specific title in the "Civil Rights Act" that said that, I said it was a civil rights issue.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
No, our pilots land the airplanes in the street and deliver the pkgs. That's why we're RLA and UPS is NLRA. Silly, isn't it?
fxdwg
Long Time Member
That's my point. Why is it different between FDX and UPS?
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
There is no basic difference in their operations.
Take a deep breath and go read the Civil Rights Act. It's made up of 10 (I think, can't remember exactly off the top of my head) Titles. If you bring Civil Rights into the discussion you are referring to the Civil Rights Act which therefore brings the Titles into the discussion. It's not a smokescreen, it's a matter of keeping facts straight. The right to unionize is not a Civil Right. It's not in the Civil Rights Act. You can argue it any way you want but it won't change that fact. You have a legal right to unionize but it's not a Civil Right. And the general idea of attaining dignity and respect for people in the work place is not a Civil Rights issue unless it pertains to discrimination etc. In fact, I don't think the word "dignity" is even in the Act.
As you can see, the reason I brought it up is because the article referenced earlier in this thread mentioned it and you also seem confused by what is and what is not a Civil Rights issue.
FedEx courier
Well-Known Member
"If you bring Civil Rights into the discussion you are referring to the Civil Rights Act" Really? I'm glad you make up the rules for everybody, I'm not going to argue it every which way, mentioning Civil Rights is not the same thing as mentioning the "Civil Rights Act". The right for people to be treated with dignity and respect is a civil rights issue.
I'm not making up the rules, you are. You're the one claiming that something that's not a Civil Right is a Civil Right. "mentioning Civil Rights is not the same thing as mentioning the "Civil Rights Act"". That's like saying mentioning the right to bear arms is not the same as mentioning the Bill of Rights. It's all part of the same thing. Where do you think the phrase "civil rights" comes from? It comes from the Civil Rights Act.
People have lots of rights. The Bill of Rights, the Civil Rights Act, there are legal rights, etc. and I fully agree that people have a right to be treated with dignity and respect. It's just not a Civil Right by definition of what are Civil Rights. If you still disagree, go to the ACLU or the EEOC or a Civil Rights lawyer and tell them that you weren't treated with dignity and respect and would like to sue under the Civil Rights Act. As long as there was no discrimination, they are going to tell you that you don't have a Civil Rights issue.
FedEx courier
Well-Known Member
If you remember after I posted the article you posted the above. Never did I say that forming a Union was protected under the Civil Rights Act which you brought up originally. Being treated with dignity and respect is a civil rights issue. I assume you are bringing up the Civil Rights Act because the writers of the article I linked. I really don't know where you got the idea that the article stated that the right to form a union was protected on the Civil Rights Act. The term Civil Rights is a very general term and does deal with people being treated with dignity and respect.
"Civil and political rights are a class of rights and freedoms that protect individuals from unwarranted action by government and private organizations and individuals and ensure one's ability to participate in the civil and political life of the state without discrimination or repression."
Would the right to form a Union or the belief that you should be allowed to form a Union not fall under this general definition.
FedEx courier
Well-Known Member
Looks like FEDx is insinuating victory again.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fedex-expects-senate-to-alter-driver-labor-laws-2010-06-16
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/fedex-expects-senate-to-alter-driver-labor-laws-2010-06-16
Correct. The article said something to the effect that allowing people to join a union was a civil right. Based on their, and it appears your, misunderstanding of what civil rights are, that's why I sarcastically said that it was an excellent article. You then went on to say that dignity and respect is a civil right. It's not and it appears that you would rather debate it than go research it.
Your text in quotes doesn't even mention the words dignity or respect and, no, the right to form a union does not fall under that general definition. The right to form a union is a legal right under the NLRA and the RLA, not a civil or political right.
I'm not disputing the fact that people have a right and should be treated with dignity and respect, it's just not a civil right and all I was doing was pointing that out to you. You chose to keep claiming that it is and that the right to form a union is also. People definitely do have those rights but it helps to understand which rights those are.
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Interesting article. It looks like Fred is dangling the 777 orders out there in an arm-twisting move. The trouble with that is unless you're Senator Murray(WA) or Senator Cantwell (WA), the 777 isn't a huge deal-maker. Once again, isn't it amazing how much effort FedEx is willing to put forth to keep us from having a union. Why is that? I wish some of the apologists on here could understand that Fred is going all out so he can keep our pay and benefits low. It's all about the money. Fred is openly throwing all of us under the bus, yet he has hourly employees that support those efforts wholeheartedly. 2+2=5.
FedEx courier
Well-Known Member
I was actually being general, but yes Civil Rights does deal with people being treated with dignity and respect. You make a fine blog sheriff.
Oh my goodness. Please, I'm begging you, show me where dignity and respect is part of the Civil Rights Act and therefore deals with this supposed Civil Right to dignity and respect. And what were you being general about? Just to be clear, yes, I agree with you, people should be treated with dignity and respect and they do have a legal right in most cases to be part of a union. These are just not Civil Rights. Are you really not getting this or are you just yanking my chain for the sake of it?
MrFedEx
Engorged Member
Doesn't the term "Civil Rights" inherently include the right(s) to dignity and respect? If you were an 1950's African-American person in some Southern states you were charged a poll tax in order that you might vote. Eliminating Jim Crow laws gave them both dignity, respect, and the right to particpate in the American political process.
It should be a legal right to join a union. What Smith has done to us is similar in concept to the poll tax. We are realistically prevented from joining because of the special FedEx RLA classification, just as blacks were realistically kept from voting. Sure, they could pay and vote, plus deal with the local KKK members hanging around outside the polling place. At FedEx, you just lose your job if you're brave enough to openly advocate for a union. Same difference. Oppression can take many differnt forms.
Last edited:
