Another lawsuit?

[CookiePuss]

According to the Fedex driver’s Facebook page just about every driver in the country got one of these. I’ve been gone over a month and mine came in the mail today. How can they go after Ground when it’s the contractor’s responsibility to pay us?

 

[It will be fine]

According to the Fedex driver’s Facebook page just about every driver in the country got one of these. I’ve been gone over a month and mine came in the mail today. How can they go after Ground when it’s the contractor’s responsibility to pay us?

View attachment 300186View attachment 300187

Ground has deep pockets. The original plaintiff’s contractor doesn’t exist anymore. It’s very easy to win an overtime case yourself against a contractor if you drove a truck under 10k. This is an attempt to get a lot of plaintiffs involved so Ground settles before any ruling on joint employment is made. Otherwise it’ll drag on a long time.

 

[bacha29]

This may not drag on for as long as one might think. Might be a lot of left leaning federal judges climbing on the bench after November who know a con when they see it which in turn might compel Fat Freddy to get this thing bottled up ASAP. And even if it does cost him a few bucks now it might cost him a whole lot of bucks later.

If this thing goes to the mat then what you're likely to see is a huge number of sub 10K panel vans and cut away's going among the missing.

 

[59 Dano]

This may not drag on for as long as one might think. Might be a lot of left leaning federal judges climbing on the bench after November who know a con when they see it which in turn might compel Fat Freddy to get this thing bottled up ASAP.

Yeah I bet that's how Fat Freddy thinks. "If the Democrat wins then he'll put up a whole bunch of liberal judges and I'll settle this fast. But if the Republican wins then I won't bother."

 

[bacha29]

Yeah I bet that's how Fat Freddy thinks. "If the Democrat wins then he'll put up a whole bunch of liberal judges and I'll settle this fast. But if the Republican wins then I won't bother."

Wrong. With a left leaning judge it might be a lot easier to get the suit certified as a class action ,making the going a lot easier and faster for the plaintiffs. Not to mention that it could serve to more clearly define the liabilities a joint employer could face and they may not end up as limited as joint employers would hope for.

 

[Working4the1%]

“if”?????

 

[59 Dano]

Wrong. With a left leaning judge it might be a lot easier to get the suit certified as a class action ,making the going a lot easier and faster for the plaintiffs.
Not to mention that it could serve to more clearly define the liabilities a joint employer could face and they may not end up as limited as joint employers would hope for.

You get more daft by the day.

 

[bacha29]

You get more daft by the day.

"Daft" huh? Hahahaha! A comment coming from a guy who because he couldn't get along with the people at his new job was left with no other choice but to endure the humiliation and go crawling back to Fat Freddy and ask for his job back . Only you Dano would do something such as that and have the audacity to describe the views of others as being "daft" . Perhaps it might explain WHY you couldn't get along with the people at that other job.

 

[CookiePuss]

I’m new here...... so much hostility!

 

[Fred's Myth]

I’m new here...... so much hostility!

Just another married couple. One is completely unhinged, and the other is @59 Dano.

 

[59 Dano]

"Daft" huh? Hahahaha! A comment coming from a guy who because he couldn't get along with the people at his new job was left with no other choice but to endure the humiliation and go crawling back to Fat Freddy and ask for his job back . Only you Dano would do something such as that and have the audacity to describe the views of others as being "daft" . Perhaps it might explain WHY you couldn't get along with the people at that other job.

What do you get when you weld a ridiculous whataboutism to a non-sequitur?

Every Bacha attempt at reasoning, ever!

 

[Operational needs]

I’m new here...... so much hostility!

It’s the norm here.

 

[dmac1]

Under a lot of laws, FEDEX could be considered at a minimum as a co-employer based on their complete control of how 'contractors' or ISPs operate. And in a lot of locations across the country, contractors were paying by the day, without any regard for overtime laws. If a driver was paid a daily rate of $160, and most days worked 8 hours, with occasional days of 9-10 hours, that driver has a claim that his normal rate was $20 an hour, and he was actually paid LESS per hour when he worked over 8 hours instead of MORE per hour. FEDEX as a co-employer would be just as liable, and easier to collect from. This is just the tip of the iceberg of issues that FEDEX could face as co-employer, and if the cost id high enough, more changes to the ISP contract could be coming. Sooner or later though, FEDEX will need to give up some control to avoid being named as a co-employer, or embrace employee status for drivers and get rid of the ISPs. Probably though, there will be years of hearings, years of rulings, years of appeals, and before it gets to court, there will be a settlement taking out of the courts jurisdiction and FEDEX will just make the ISP guarantee full compliance with any laws and actually enforce MORE control over the ISP. I think the totally misplaced hatred of unions has somewhat clouded the management. If FEDEX was so much cheaper to operate than UPS due to not having a union, UPS would be massively shrinking. But instead of just paying union wages, FEDEX instead pays off lawsuits, pays for a completely useless management middleman in the ISP, and the winners are the vehicle makers who sell to the ISP at higher prices than FEDEX would be paying. A lot of tax preparers would lose business too if the ISP was eliminated as the useless middlemen they are.

 

[bacha29]

Under a lot of laws, FEDEX could be considered at a minimum as a co-employer based on their complete control of how 'contractors' or ISPs operate. And in a lot of locations across the country, contractors were paying by the day, without any regard for overtime laws. If a driver was paid a daily rate of $160, and most days worked 8 hours, with occasional days of 9-10 hours, that driver has a claim that his normal rate was $20 an hour, and he was actually paid LESS per hour when he worked over 8 hours instead of MORE per hour. FEDEX as a co-employer would be just as liable, and easier to collect from. This is just the tip of the iceberg of issues that FEDEX could face as co-employer, and if the cost id high enough, more changes to the ISP contract could be coming. Sooner or later though, FEDEX will need to give up some control to avoid being named as a co-employer, or embrace employee status for drivers and get rid of the ISPs. Probably though, there will be years of hearings, years of rulings, years of appeals, and before it gets to court, there will be a settlement taking out of the courts jurisdiction and FEDEX will just make the ISP guarantee full compliance with any laws and actually enforce MORE control over the ISP. I think the totally misplaced hatred of unions has somewhat clouded the management. If FEDEX was so much cheaper to operate than UPS due to not having a union, UPS would be massively shrinking. But instead of just paying union wages, FEDEX instead pays off lawsuits, pays for a completely useless management middleman in the ISP, and the winners are the vehicle makers who sell to the ISP at higher prices than FEDEX would be paying. A lot of tax preparers would lose business too if the ISP was eliminated as the useless middlemen they are.

You spelled out the upcoming conflict and tough decisions X is going to have to make. Either put more distance between them and the ISP/CSP's by giving them more autonomy and genuine independence while placing at risk the viability of the network or scrap the ISP model and owe them nothing . "That's it ISP's you're done when you contract is done........And as for that economic windfall you expected by cashing out ? We promised no such thing. We just wanted your cheap trucking and labor for as long as it was needed.... And now it isn't needed".

Chances are they're pretty secure for the time being but it's all just a question of not sticking around too long. But perhaps the short term contracts and the never ending uncertainty given the pending litigation and political climate might help to explain the falling prices being asked for contracts currently on the market.