Can FDXG Contractors keep up with these number?

[Franklin Moore]

In another thread a seemingly very knowledgeable poster applied "Econ 101" to FDX current approach to the ISP driver wage issue.

The Economic factor that fascinates me is how FDXG ISP's will keep pace (with onerous FDX service metrics) while only paying new driver's $35 -40 K annually while UPS is adding new hires @ $19 an hr + benefits. I've also been informed that AMZN new hires at a StL contractor are receiving $17.50 per hour.

50 hour work week computations are as follows:

UPS $1072.50 w/overtime + benefits
AMZN $962.50 w/overtime
FX $750.00 (avg of $150 - $160 per day)

If it is accurate that FDX has screwed down contractor payments 8-11 % how does this play out?

 

[bacha29]

In another thread a seemingly very knowledgeable poster applied "Econ 101" to FDX current approach to the ISP driver wage issue.

The Economic factor that fascinates me is how FDXG ISP's will keep pace (with onerous FDX service metrics) while only paying new driver's $35 -40 K annually while UPS is adding new hires @ $19 an hr + benefits. I've also been informed that AMZN new hires at a StL contractor are receiving $17.50 per hour.

50 hour work week computations are as follows:

UPS $1072.50 w/overtime + benefits
AMZN $962.50 w/overtime
FX $750.00 (avg of $150 - $160 per day)

If it is accurate that FDX has screwed down contractor payments 8-11 % how does this play out?

X doesn't care if you have to give that guy manning the route everything the route makes just to get him to do it for a while they're still only going to give you a certain amount of money based on what they believe your cost of operation should be and it's always a low ball figure.
XG's stated goal is to gain a 51% share of the ground box business by 2020 and have spent the last decade gearing up for it and are right now licking their chops and husking their cobs waiting to see if the outcome of this year's UPS/IBT contract negotiations can get them to that goal and ahead of schedule.
With 10,000+ boomers marching off into retirement every day 365 days a year for the next decade and more it will open up some more jobs that offer better pay than what some contractors will be able to match.

 

[Franklin Moore]

So when considering your last para....what do you see in your crystal ball?

 

[Franklin Moore]

X doesn't care if you have to give that guy manning the route everything the route makes just to get him to do it for a while they're still only going to give you a certain amount of money based on what they believe your cost of operation should be and it's always a low ball figure.
XG's stated goal is to gain a 51% share of the ground box business by 2020 and have spent the last decade gearing up for it and are right now licking their chops and husking their cobs waiting to see if the outcome of this year's UPS/IBT contract negotiations can get them to that goal and ahead of schedule.
With 10,000+ boomers marching off into retirement every day 365 days a year for the next decade and more it will open up some more jobs that offer better pay than what some contractors will be able to match.

So when considering your last para....what do you see in your crystal ball?

 

[Oldfart]

So when considering your last para....what do you see in your crystal ball?

You must be so new you don't realize bacha likes to cut and paste from various financial sights and claims the opinions are his. Any financial opinion his gives are actually someone else with some of his gibberish added.

 

[bacha29]

So when considering your last para....what do you see in your crystal ball?

Continued pressure on contractor margins. Probably more contractor consolidation fewer in number larger in scale but operating on smaller margins. While some contractors are downsizing trying to sell off under performing routes the overall trend is toward fewer contracts overall but are larger in scale with contract ownership continuing to shift away from individual S-Corps and more toward absentee investor class C-Corps and hedge funds .

Roadway Package System/ Fedex Ground has never tried to hide the fact that it's contractor model was never designed to create equity for contractors but rather to simply acquire trucking and labor at the lowest possible cost. In fact it was only under the threat of a federal lawsuit that RPS grudgingly granted contractors goodwill and proprietary rights back in 1993.
In addition after battling for more than a decade over the question of whether we were contractors or employees was finally settled just last year out of court (cost to XG around 600 million) XG settled without any admission of quilt or wrong doing. But the court ruling back I believe in 2014 regarding the so called "coemployers" might have an impact going forward.

 

[bacha29]

PS: Mr. Moore. Pay no mind to Old Fart He worked for Fedex Express all his life back at a time when working for Express actually meant something.

 

[Oldfart]

Continued pressure on contractor margins. Probably more contractor consolidation fewer in number larger in scale but operating on smaller margins. While some contractors are downsizing trying to sell off under performing routes the overall trend is toward fewer contracts overall but are larger in scale with contract ownership continuing to shift away from individual S-Corps and more toward absentee investor class C-Corps and hedge funds .

Roadway Package System/ Fedex Ground has never tried to hide the fact that it's contractor model was never designed to create equity for contractors but rather to simply acquire trucking and labor at the lowest possible cost. In fact it was only under the threat of a federal lawsuit that RPS grudgingly granted contractors goodwill and proprietary rights back in 1993.
In addition after battling for more than a decade over the question of whether we were contractors or employees was finally settled just last year out of court (cost to XG around 600 million) XG settled without any admission of quilt or wrong doing. But the court ruling back I believe in 2014 regarding the so called "coemployers" might have an impact going forward.

Bacha just proved my last post correct. LOL

 

[bacha29]

Bacha just proved my last post correct. LOL

You obviously lack brain activity in quantities sufficient to realize that we were talking about FedEx GROUND, which in turn proves my point .

 

[dmac1]

In addition after battling for more than a decade over the question of whether we were contractors or employees was finally settled just last year out of court (cost to XG around 600 million) XG settled without any admission of quilt or wrong doing. But the court ruling back I believe in 2014 regarding the so called "coemployers" might have an impact going forward.

There was never a court decision nationally that determined that ground drivers were employees. There were a few rulings in a few jurisdictions that caused fedex to settle nationally before a court ruling became the law of the land. All the settlements were basically out of court settlements. I believe that only in California did a case go to trial. After that, fedex wanted to settle on the cheap.

 

[Oldfart]

You obviously lack brain activity in quantities sufficient to realize that we were talking about FedEx GROUND, which in turn proves my point .

You also proved my point about cut and paste and your usual gibberish.

 

[bacha29]

There was never a court decision nationally that determined that ground drivers were employees. There were a few rulings in a few jurisdictions that caused fedex to settle nationally before a court ruling became the law of the land. All the settlements were basically out of court settlements. I believe that only in California did a case go to trial. After that, fedex wanted to settle on the cheap.

That was the case that went in front of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals for the California District that went to trial which ruled that contractors in their district were employees which resulted in the more generous 'West Coast" settlement . As for the "East Coast" settlement a lower federal court accepted the out of court settlement before it went on up to the US District Court of Appeals for the 7th district which would have heard the "East Coast" multi state class action. Still can't believe the cheap terms they got off with.

 

[bacha29]

You also proved my point about cut and paste and your usual gibberish.

What is gibberish to you is accepted fact to others.

 

[dmac1]

That was the case that went in front of the 9th US Circuit Court of Appeals for the California District that went to trial which ruled that contractors in their district were employees which resulted in the more generous 'West Coast" settlement . As for the "East Coast" settlement a lower federal court accepted the out of court settlement before it went on up to the US District Court of Appeals for the 7th district which would have heard the "East Coast" multi state class action. Still can't believe the cheap terms they got off with.

Oregon got a court decision, but the contract changes made the point moot. Apparently, even in CA, the decision was made moot by the new ISP contract. But CA is populous enough and liberal enough that they will likely be the test case for any class action regarding the ISP contract, whether by drivers or by contractors.

 

[Shift]

In another thread a seemingly very knowledgeable poster applied "Econ 101" to FDX current approach to the ISP driver wage issue.

The Economic factor that fascinates me is how FDXG ISP's will keep pace (with onerous FDX service metrics) while only paying new driver's $35 -40 K annually while UPS is adding new hires @ $19 an hr + benefits. I've also been informed that AMZN new hires at a StL contractor are receiving $17.50 per hour.

50 hour work week computations are as follows:

UPS $1072.50 w/overtime + benefits
AMZN $962.50 w/overtime
FX $750.00 (avg of $150 - $160 per day)

If it is accurate that FDX has screwed down contractor payments 8-11 % how does this play out?

UPS starts at $10.10 unless minimum wage is $15

 

[Oldfart]

What is gibberish to you is accepted fact to others.

Not to anyone that knows anything. Anyone that listens to you is making a mistake.

 

[bacha29]

Not to anyone that knows anything. Anyone that listens to you is making a mistake.

That's for them decide not you.

 

[Oldfart]

That's for them decide not you.

Just offering free advice to anyone that doesn't know any better. Bacha is a just like the rest of us. A dumb ole truck driver. Except he wishes he knew financials better and he knows how to cut and paste.

 

[bacha29]

Just offering free advice to anyone that doesn't know any better. Bacha is a just like the rest of us. A dumb ole truck driver. Except he wishes he knew financials better and he knows how to cut and paste.[/QUOTE And they will judge your advice based on it's merits........That's if it has any .