Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pretzel_man" data-source="post: 550222" data-attributes="member: 927">From my perspective, the world changes, and laws should be updated to reflect that. The RLA was originally put together in the 20&#039;s to keep railroads running because we needed them for commerce. It was dangerous to have a wildcat strike in Omaha stop the nation&#039;s railway system.&nbsp;Airlines were added later. It was for the same reason. I wildcat strike in Omaha should not stop the national air network.&nbsp;Applying this law to a delivery driver is silly. If the drivers in Omaha went on strike, the air network still would run. Airplanes could fly, which by the way is exactly what happened duing the UPS strike. The air kept running.&nbsp;If UPS and FedEx are fundamentally different businesses, I don&#039;t see that. Both go after the same customers with the same services. In fact, when FedEx solicits customers, they tell them that they are not subject to strikes like UPS. They use that labor law as a selling point.&nbsp;If the RLA change passes, why would consumers pay more? The change does NOT dictate that higher wages will be paid. It does NOT stipulate that FedEx will be unionized. Only FedEx employees can cause that to happen.&nbsp;The bill does nothing else except treat FedEx the same way as UPS. I don&#039;t see that as giving UPS an advantage, just taking away the one that FedEx has and which they flaunt with our customers.&nbsp;My question remains to be answered. If FedEx employees are well paid and happy, why would they even consider joining a union? Why simultaneously say that there is no need to join a union but fight hard to make that extremely difficult?&nbsp;P-Man</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pretzel_man, post: 550222, member: 927"] From my perspective, the world changes, and laws should be updated to reflect that. The RLA was originally put together in the 20's to keep railroads running because we needed them for commerce. It was dangerous to have a wildcat strike in Omaha stop the nation's railway system. Airlines were added later. It was for the same reason. I wildcat strike in Omaha should not stop the national air network. Applying this law to a delivery driver is silly. If the drivers in Omaha went on strike, the air network still would run. Airplanes could fly, which by the way is exactly what happened duing the UPS strike. The air kept running. If UPS and FedEx are fundamentally different businesses, I don't see that. Both go after the same customers with the same services. In fact, when FedEx solicits customers, they tell them that they are not subject to strikes like UPS. They use that labor law as a selling point. If the RLA change passes, why would consumers pay more? The change does NOT dictate that higher wages will be paid. It does NOT stipulate that FedEx will be unionized. Only FedEx employees can cause that to happen. The bill does nothing else except treat FedEx the same way as UPS. I don't see that as giving UPS an advantage, just taking away the one that FedEx has and which they flaunt with our customers. My question remains to be answered. If FedEx employees are well paid and happy, why would they even consider joining a union? Why simultaneously say that there is no need to join a union but fight hard to make that extremely difficult? P-Man [/QUOTE]

Verification