Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
FedEx Fully Exploits WSJ Article & SFA
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Ricochet1a" data-source="post: 726853" data-attributes="member: 22880"><p>The reason for no changes to <strong><em>2010 </em></strong>is that many of the mandated changes for coverage don't kick in till later this year and there is tremendous political pressure on the major corporations to NOT start passing costs on to their employeee - which will happen regardless.</p><p> </p><p>Many large corporations have already done write downs to their financial statements - as required by SEC rules - reflecting the increased costs to them of the legislation. </p><p> </p><p>The changes to the 2011 benefits package is currently being worked over. Premiums will be going up and copays will be going up - the question is just how much. One of the contributing factors to FedEx not changing premiums yet - and not disclosing what they will be in 2011 - is due to the FAA bill still being in limbo. There have been almost endless continuing resolutions keeping funding levels were they were with the last funding bill. Since the Senate doesn't want to tackle the issues in the latest FAA funding bill - RLA being one of the biggest - they keep kicking the ball down the road every few months with a continuing resolution to keep the FAA funded. </p><p> </p><p>Supposedly - from what I'm hearing - is that the Senate will finally bite the bullet and move the FAA legislation sometime before the current CR expires in early July. There are enough votes in favor of FedEx keeping its RLA status that the people I talk with state that it won't be in the final bill passed by the Senate and the Conference Committee won't fight to replace the provision which changes FedEx's RLA classification. </p><p> </p><p>So unless Fred does something really stupid in the next couple of months - he'll get to keep his RLA classification. The 777 deal mentioned in another thread is connected to this. Fred is trying to play nice to the Senate right now. Buying jets from Boeing in the current economy is his big "nice" move right now. </p><p> </p><p>I think management in just about every station has posted a copy of that little WSJ piece. I really don't see how an "objective" editor wrote that. It is something right of out FedEx's talking points. The only thing I can think is going on with that piece is that it was "fed" to the WSJ and they printed it as an article practically verbatim. The interesting thing would be to see what the ties are between Rupert Murdock (which owns the WSJ now) and FedEx. One hand has got to be washing the other there.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Ricochet1a, post: 726853, member: 22880"] The reason for no changes to [B][I]2010 [/I][/B]is that many of the mandated changes for coverage don't kick in till later this year and there is tremendous political pressure on the major corporations to NOT start passing costs on to their employeee - which will happen regardless. Many large corporations have already done write downs to their financial statements - as required by SEC rules - reflecting the increased costs to them of the legislation. The changes to the 2011 benefits package is currently being worked over. Premiums will be going up and copays will be going up - the question is just how much. One of the contributing factors to FedEx not changing premiums yet - and not disclosing what they will be in 2011 - is due to the FAA bill still being in limbo. There have been almost endless continuing resolutions keeping funding levels were they were with the last funding bill. Since the Senate doesn't want to tackle the issues in the latest FAA funding bill - RLA being one of the biggest - they keep kicking the ball down the road every few months with a continuing resolution to keep the FAA funded. Supposedly - from what I'm hearing - is that the Senate will finally bite the bullet and move the FAA legislation sometime before the current CR expires in early July. There are enough votes in favor of FedEx keeping its RLA status that the people I talk with state that it won't be in the final bill passed by the Senate and the Conference Committee won't fight to replace the provision which changes FedEx's RLA classification. So unless Fred does something really stupid in the next couple of months - he'll get to keep his RLA classification. The 777 deal mentioned in another thread is connected to this. Fred is trying to play nice to the Senate right now. Buying jets from Boeing in the current economy is his big "nice" move right now. I think management in just about every station has posted a copy of that little WSJ piece. I really don't see how an "objective" editor wrote that. It is something right of out FedEx's talking points. The only thing I can think is going on with that piece is that it was "fed" to the WSJ and they printed it as an article practically verbatim. The interesting thing would be to see what the ties are between Rupert Murdock (which owns the WSJ now) and FedEx. One hand has got to be washing the other there. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
The Competition
FedEx Discussions
FedEx Fully Exploits WSJ Article & SFA
Top