FedEx Home wins round in Unionization efforts

Tornup

Member
Three things -

1. There is a world of difference, a galaxy of difference, between being an independent (Joe's Delivery Service & Lawnmower Repair) and being an independent contractor (FedEx Ground).

2. I never claimed any one model was better / worse than another. Anywhere. I did say it was a valid, legal model. And, if I didn't before, I meant to.

3. You state "To use the coffee truck analogy: You buy the coffee truck and route. After you've been running YOUR ROUTE (after all you paid for it). You find you've got some customers that want donuts but the people you buy your coffee from won't let you sell donuts."

I was waiting for something similar but better, but your anti-analogy (?) will work. If you purchased a route to sell coffee, knowing that you were to only sell coffee, then there should be no concern that you cannot sell donuts. It is a coffee company.

If I were hired as an independent contractor by say, Exxon, to go around & clean all the gas stations they have, then my job, what I have contracted to do, is go clean all the exxon gas stations. Just because I am an independent contractor does not, in any way, give me the right to say "ah, the hell with it, today I'm going to go PAINT all the exxon stations". The definition of "Independent Contractor" has nowhere in it the right to do as you choose, and was never meant to be such. It is contractually cooperating with outside individuals/companies to do a specific job, in a specific way.

Im sorry but you are lost and obviously Do not understand the definition of Independent Contractor. If you pay thousands of dollars to buy a route and a company tells you oh it will be great. You will have the opportunity to grow as an entreprenuer. Hire drivers and run your route. But then once you have the route. The company begins to try and control what you do. They tell you that you have to go back and deliver a package. They begin to make threats. They don't allow you to hire who you want to hire. They tell you that you have to knock on the door, you have to leave a tag. You cannot drop the package at the office first, no matter how busy you are. They control how many packages that you will deliver and how many stops you will make every day. They write you up and tell you if you get more than 3 complaints in a year then they can take your route. Now Do You Think As An Independent Contractor Who Pays Thousands Of Dollars For A Route. Should Be Controlled Like This? Do you think that they have the right to tell you that you should not take a break, or a lunch? When a company has the right to control---Such As Fedex....You Are No Longer A Independent Contractor. Im sorry that some of you are pointing your finger at the wrong people. Everyone would love to be able to have the chance to run their own business. That is why people paid thousands of dollars for routes. To be free of being underneath someone elses thumb. To have control of their business. But this is not what is happening. You do have contractors that are major brown nosers --some of you are probably reading this right now and I don't care. I know how you ended up with more routes. Some had easy, tight routes.But some of these people did not have easy routes and some were so bad that you couldn't afford to hire a driver or the contractor would lose too much money. Try to understand, or are you really just envious of the people that were really trying to be self-employed? These people broke their backs to try and have their right to be independent contractors. BUT THESE PEOPLE THAT WORK AT FEDEX ARE NOT INDEPENDENT CONTRACTORS. Im sure some of them will say how wonderful it is and swear by fedex that they are happy. They are the thieves and the brown-nosers. But many of them want out, but they are trapped. It is hard to get back what you paid into it, but they are not being treated like kings and queens. I would love for fedex to fall, they are crooks and they need to start forkin out what they owe. The next time you slam the door in a fedex drivers face-just remember don't blame it on the messenger. He does not really have that much control over how fast you get your package. And some of you really need to get a life if that is your main focus in life is to piss and moan to the driver for being a few minutes late. They work more hours than ups or dhl or fedex express ever did. I know go ahead, Im sure your ready to attack..bring it on. But just remember...You haven't really been there Have you?????
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
Im sorry but you are lost and obviously Do not understand the definition of Independent Contractor...... (followed by one HECK of a long run-on sentence that touches every subject known to man)

Well, like it or not, I actually do. In my "other than UPS life", I hire independent contractors on almost a weekly basis, and have for a few decades. I am also an IC a few times a year.

I design electric motors. I also have absolutely no artistic talent whatsoever. I need someone that has the talent, but I don't need an employee, don't want the tax hassles, don't want the benefit hassles. I also don't want to take my ideas to "Joes CAD Works" on the corner, because I want complete control of who does my drawings.

So I hire an independent contractor. I set the terms (and the terms, if put against an employee, would be illegal) such as the following;

1. IC cannot have worked for an electric motor supplier in the past (try that with an employee)

2. IC cannot work for an electric motor supplier for 1 year after our contract terminates (again, try that with an employee)

I could, if I wanted to, say all work had to be done between the hours of X and Y, I could dictate the programming software they were to use (I often do) I can and do use deadlines for milestones, etc. The fact is, I can dictate ANYTHING I WANT in the terms of the IC agreement, far more stringent terms than I could place on an employee, because if the IC does not like any of the terms, THEY DO NOT have to take the contract!

To clarify the term "Independent Contractor" -

It IS NOT "An independent that is a contractor"

It IS "A Contractor that is not associated with the Contractee"
 

LED

Well-Known Member
2. IC cannot work for an electric motor supplier for 1 year after our contract terminates (again, try that with an employee)

Just being curious here, but what would you do if a contractor broke this rule?

I would guess lawsuit, but how do you determine damages?
 

JimJimmyJames

Big Time Feeder Driver
Well, like it or not, I actually do. In my "other than UPS life", I hire independent contractors on almost a weekly basis, and have for a few decades. I am also an IC a few times a year.

I design electric motors. I also have absolutely no artistic talent whatsoever. I need someone that has the talent, but I don't need an employee, don't want the tax hassles, don't want the benefit hassles. I also don't want to take my ideas to "Joes CAD Works" on the corner, because I want complete control of who does my drawings.

So I hire an independent contractor. I set the terms (and the terms, if put against an employee, would be illegal) such as the following;

1. IC cannot have worked for an electric motor supplier in the past (try that with an employee)

2. IC cannot work for an electric motor supplier for 1 year after our contract terminates (again, try that with an employee)

I could, if I wanted to, say all work had to be done between the hours of X and Y, I could dictate the programming software they were to use (I often do) I can and do use deadlines for milestones, etc. The fact is, I can dictate ANYTHING I WANT in the terms of the IC agreement, far more stringent terms than I could place on an employee, because if the IC does not like any of the terms, THEY DO NOT have to take the contract!

To clarify the term "Independent Contractor" -

It IS NOT "An independent that is a contractor"

It IS "A Contractor that is not associated with the Contractee"

Ah, thank you for showing us that you have a horse in this race. I was wondering why, as a UPS employee, you so strenuously defend FedEx.

I suspect you will say that it does not matter, that you would on principle support FedEx's position. That may be, but let's not pretend this is some kind of moral conundrum.

We are talking not about morality but what the definition of an employee is, what an employer is, and the grey areas that can result.

I personally support UPS' and the Teamster's stance when it comes to what they believe to be a proper employer/employee relationship. I share this belief because I have a vested interest in their prosperity.

I also believe that FedEx Ground's business "model" is a threat to my company. For mostly selfish reasons I would like to eliminate that threat. I believe the bonus to FedEx employees would be a better job, either by FedEx adopting our wages and benefit structure, or by us eliminating FedEx altogether and hiring those ex-FedEx employees to deliver all that new volume we would have.
 

Tornup

Member
:wink2:
Ah, thank you for showing us that you have a horse in this race. I was wondering why, as a UPS employee, you so strenuously defend FedEx.

I suspect you will say that it does not matter, that you would on principle support FedEx's position. That may be, but let's not pretend this is some kind of moral conundrum.

We are talking not about morality but what the definition of an employee is, what an employer is, and the grey areas that can result.

I personally support UPS' and the Teamster's stance when it comes to what they believe to be a proper employer/employee relationship. I share this belief because I have a vested interest in their prosperity.

I also believe that FedEx Ground's business "model" is a threat to my company. For mostly selfish reasons I would like to eliminate that threat. I believe the bonus to FedEx employees would be a better job, either by FedEx adopting our wages and benefit structure, or by us eliminating FedEx altogether and hiring those ex-FedEx employees to deliver all that new volume we would have.

I totally agree with you about the difference between an employee and an employer. That is my arguement. Let me see a wave of hands of people that thinks its ok to make a independent contractor go back for a fourth time to pick up a package when the guy did not have it ready to be picked up three times in a row. Lets say you are on the other side of town and fedex calls you and tells you to go back. After you have followed the proper procedures. Are you going to tell me this is not a right to control issue?
 

Tornup

Member
Well, like it or not, I actually do. In my "other than UPS life", I hire independent contractors on almost a weekly basis, and have for a few decades. I am also an IC a few times a year.

I design electric motors. I also have absolutely no artistic talent whatsoever. I need someone that has the talent, but I don't need an employee, don't want the tax hassles, don't want the benefit hassles. I also don't want to take my ideas to "Joes CAD Works" on the corner, because I want complete control of who does my drawings.

So I hire an independent contractor. I set the terms (and the terms, if put against an employee, would be illegal) such as the following;

1. IC cannot have worked for an electric motor supplier in the past (try that with an employee)

2. IC cannot work for an electric motor supplier for 1 year after our contract terminates (again, try that with an employee)

I could, if I wanted to, say all work had to be done between the hours of X and Y, I could dictate the programming software they were to use (I often do) I can and do use deadlines for milestones, etc. The fact is, I can dictate ANYTHING I WANT in the terms of the IC agreement, far more stringent terms than I could place on an employee, because if the IC does not like any of the terms, THEY DO NOT have to take the contract!

To clarify the term "Independent Contractor" -

It IS NOT "An independent that is a contractor"

It IS "A Contractor that is not associated with the Contractee"

It is null and void because you want the right to control everything and yes you do not want to pay taxes or have an employee because this will cost you. You want the best of both worlds. Its abusing the system.
I do not understand why you want to bring in a whole different situation altogether. Fedex Independent contractors buy their routes for thousands of dollars. They are paying for everything under the sun. If they were an employee, then fedex would have the right to tell me when to * or get off the pot. But when a persons health is at stake and fedex is controlling their every move. This is wrong. When they send people to ride with you and people to harrass you, this is CONTROL. Obviously this is what fedex has been trying to get away with for so many years. Put the expense off on the little guy-call them independent contractors and still walk around demanding orders like they are employees, while they rake in millions.
Yes, I know why not? If you can get away with it. Why not? The contract is as thick as a book too and how many codes do you think people understand in that contract? Fedex purposely makes the contract confusing. They don't want you to understand it. And as far as you telling your people how you want things done. Thats fine if you laid that all out on the table from the start. But when the rules change later on down the road. That is when the fire starts getting too hot to handle. Employees have to abide by the boss. A Fedex Independent Contractor is the Boss.
:peaceful:
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
tornup--being a ground contractor for nearly 15 years, i respectfully have to disagree with your characterization of my company. much of what you have posted was at one time fairly accurate, but times have changed. due in large part to lawsuits, (i grudgingly thank the teamsters) the domineering control you speak of just does not exist to the extent you suggest. there really is opportunity for those who can be creative, but it can take some thinking outside the box. local terminals are now almost micromanaged by our now sizable legal department in pittsburgh.
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
It is null and void because you want the right to control everything and yes you do not want to pay taxes or have an employee because this will cost you. You want the best of both worlds. Its abusing the system.
I do not understand why you want to bring in a whole different situation altogether. Fedex Independent contractors buy their routes for thousands of dollars. They are paying for everything under the sun. If they were an employee, then fedex would have the right to tell me when to !@#$ or get off the pot. But when a persons health is at stake and fedex is controlling their every move. This is wrong. When they send people to ride with you and people to harrass you, this is CONTROL. Obviously this is what fedex has been trying to get away with for so many years. Put the expense off on the little guy-call them independent contractors and still walk around demanding orders like they are employees, while they rake in millions.
Yes, I know why not? If you can get away with it. Why not? The contract is as thick as a book too and how many codes do you think people understand in that contract? Fedex purposely makes the contract confusing. They don't want you to understand it. And as far as you telling your people how you want things done. Thats fine if you laid that all out on the table from the start. But when the rules change later on down the road. That is when the fire starts getting too hot to handle. Employees have to abide by the boss. A Fedex Independent Contractor is the Boss.
:peaceful:

So - in a nutshell - you are saying the FedEx ICs who entered into a binding contract were too stupid to read / understand it?
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
Ah, thank you for showing us that you have a horse in this race. I was wondering why, as a UPS employee, you so strenuously defend FedEx.

I suspect you will say that it does not matter, that you would on principle support FedEx's position. That may be, but let's not pretend this is some kind of moral conundrum.

We are talking not about morality but what the definition of an employee is, what an employer is, and the grey areas that can result.

I personally support UPS' and the Teamster's stance when it comes to what they believe to be a proper employer/employee relationship. I share this belief because I have a vested interest in their prosperity.

I also believe that FedEx Ground's business "model" is a threat to my company. For mostly selfish reasons I would like to eliminate that threat. I believe the bonus to FedEx employees would be a better job, either by FedEx adopting our wages and benefit structure, or by us eliminating FedEx altogether and hiring those ex-FedEx employees to deliver all that new volume we would have.

I never have defended FedEx.

My entire rant is with regards to the follower mentality, the sheep, who hear "The IC Model is wrong, we must destroy it to save those poor souls & make a level playing field" and they say baa, baa, that sounds right. Without looking at the facts.

I have never seen the FedEx IC contract. It sounds very difficult, it sounds like it is slanted towards the benefit of FedEx itself. It could be completely unfair for all I know, but that is not at all the point, nor do I care if it is or if it isn't; The point is is that it is legal.

My point has NEVER been we should use one model over another. It has never been US vs THEM. It has never been which one is better, which one is more fair.

My point HAS ALWAYS BEEN my dismay with UPS/Teamsters misinformation spread to all too many willing sheep, who then carry the torch saying "yeah, they are employees, FedEx is cheating, we need to save those workers, level the playing field" - people who should consider informing themselves of the simple facts, as simple as definitions of terms. Start with Independent Contractor. It appears 99% of those posting in opposition to this thread don't even know what that MEANS. How can you make an argument at all WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BASIS OF YOUR ARGUMENT IS???? Baa baa baa

Shoot. Back to the point. It bothers me that the Teamsters/UPS perpetuates the misinformed pitchfork & torch carriers to do this, when the only people it benefits is the UPS/Teamsters. It is self serving ONLY.

If the Teamsters/UPS came out & said the following up front -

"Yeah, we chose the legal "PATH A" to run our business, and FedEx chose the legal "PATH B" to run their business, and now it appears that "PATH B" is pretty advantagous over the course we took. Our Bad. We can't go back & change to "PATH B", or any other path for that matter, because we have the Union noose around our neck, so we are going to try & destroy/remove "PATH B".

That at least would be honest, simpler, and I would support it 100%.

I work at UPS. I want UPS to succeed. I'd like to think that we are a team, and that, as a team, we play fair. What I see is UPS/Teamsters lying to the troops before sending them into battle.

Oh, and as far as "having a horse in this race". pu-lease. ICs were around well before FedEx. And will be around well after. It simply is a valid, useful model. Are the other 10s of millions Independent contractors in the US also in on this?
 

bluehdmc

Well-Known Member
2. IC cannot work for an electric motor supplier for 1 year after our contract terminates (again, try that with an employee)

Many companies restrict their EMPLOYEES this way. It's usually called a "non-competitive clause" that employees sign when they are hired. Usually this is limited to sales people or people who design things, etc.
The company doesn't want someone taking their clients or proprietary information, or an employee engaged in research taking information to a competitor. Intel for example wouldn't want a chip designer going to work for AMD. Some of these can be enforced, some cannot be, depends on the circumstances.

NOTE: I said they restrict their EMPLOYEES.
 

JimJimmyJames

Big Time Feeder Driver
Are the other 10s of millions Independent contractors in the US also in on this?

No, but it appears FedEx Ground might be.

I also believe in independent contractors. I just don't believe thats what FedEx Ground employees really are. I came to this conclusion not through propaganda, but by examining the facts. You have come to a different conclusion and thats what makes the world go round. But I don't characterize you as a sheep.

You know Amway is not legally defined by our government as a pyramid scheme. But it is.

As Bob Dylan said "you don't need a weatherman to tell you which way the wind is blowing".
 

Dustyroads

Well-Known Member
It really matters not whether any of us believe FedEx ground drivers are independent or not. Various governmental and judicial agencies make that call, using the actual contracts as a basis to judge the "right to control". So far, FedEx has lost every one of these challenges before federal and state agencies and courts, save this one decision. The judgements are made from the contract itself and from the defacto actions taken by FedEx in its daily operations. Their contracts are, without a doubt, written to benefit FedEx at the expense of its workers. You can call their workers whatever you like, the courts will ultimately define their status. It's like what Abraham Lincoln said, "You can call a dog's tail a leg, but that doesn't really make it a five-legged dog."
 

Tornup

Member
tornup--being a ground contractor for nearly 15 years, i respectfully have to disagree with your characterization of my company. much of what you have posted was at one time fairly accurate, but times have changed. due in large part to lawsuits, (i grudgingly thank the teamsters) the domineering control you speak of just does not exist to the extent you suggest. there really is opportunity for those who can be creative, but it can take some thinking outside the box. local terminals are now almost micromanaged by our now sizable legal department in pittsburgh.

:laughing:That is your choice my friend, and Im happy for you If this is truly what you believe and what is truly happening in your neck of the woods. But in my neck of the woods-it hasn't changed. Some people have not walked in my shoes and they are very lucky. But I know others that have suffered a tremendous loss. Just because you do not see it-does not mean it is not happening somewhere. The domineering control does exist to the extent that I am talking about. I do not have to try and prove it to you. Look around, look up fedex lawsuits. This is not happening because people are sue happy. Its happening because-OUR RIGHTS ARE BEING TAKEN AWAY FROM US. The only reason why Washington lost is because too many people are afraid to stand up and go and trial. If they are still working, they don't want to take that risk. So the jurors only see one side of the coin. Those who can be creative??? Thats funny, how do you mean this? Creative, those who can pretend that nothing bad is happening, who can wear a fake smile and act like they love how they are being treated? Yeah sign me up for that one. Oh hurt me somemore LOL. :whatever:How long is it going to take before people finally wake up and stop acting like puppets? :puppet: Sit boo boo, roll over, play dead. No thank you.
 

Tornup

Member
So - in a nutshell - you are saying the FedEx ICs who entered into a binding contract were too stupid to read / understand it?

Dont try to twist things. Only you are trying to get away with pulling the wool over peoples eyes. Maybe that is all you are-is a nutshell, if this is how you interpret my words. That is not what I was saying at all. Im saying not even you could give me the definition of all those codes that are in the contract.
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
Dont try to twist things. Only you are trying to get away with pulling the wool over peoples eyes. Maybe that is all you are-is a nutshell, if this is how you interpret my words. That is not what I was saying at all. Im saying not even you could give me the definition of all those codes that are in the contract.

First, tell me, then, how I was to interpret your words, quoted here;

"...The (FedEx) contract is as thick as a book too and how many codes do you think people understand in that contract? Fedex purposely makes the contract confusing. They don't want you to understand it...."

Please, educate me as to what you meant.


Second - a question - do you often sign contracts that you don't understand?
 

Tornup

Member
I never have defended FedEx.

My entire rant is with regards to the follower mentality, the sheep, who hear "The IC Model is wrong, we must destroy it to save those poor souls & make a level playing field" and they say baa, baa, that sounds right. Without looking at the facts.

I have never seen the FedEx IC contract. It sounds very difficult, it sounds like it is slanted towards the benefit of FedEx itself. It could be completely unfair for all I know, but that is not at all the point, nor do I care if it is or if it isn't; The point is is that it is legal.

My point has NEVER been we should use one model over another. It has never been US vs THEM. It has never been which one is better, which one is more fair.

My point HAS ALWAYS BEEN my dismay with UPS/Teamsters misinformation spread to all too many willing sheep, who then carry the torch saying "yeah, they are employees, FedEx is cheating, we need to save those workers, level the playing field" - people who should consider informing themselves of the simple facts, as simple as definitions of terms. Start with Independent Contractor. It appears 99% of those posting in opposition to this thread don't even know what that MEANS. How can you make an argument at all WHEN YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE BASIS OF YOUR ARGUMENT IS???? Baa baa baa

Shoot. Back to the point. It bothers me that the Teamsters/UPS perpetuates the misinformed pitchfork & torch carriers to do this, when the only people it benefits is the UPS/Teamsters. It is self serving ONLY.

If the Teamsters/UPS came out & said the following up front -

"Yeah, we chose the legal "PATH A" to run our business, and FedEx chose the legal "PATH B" to run their business, and now it appears that "PATH B" is pretty advantagous over the course we took. Our Bad. We can't go back & change to "PATH B", or any other path for that matter, because we have the Union noose around our neck, so we are going to try & destroy/remove "PATH B".

That at least would be honest, simpler, and I would support it 100%.

I work at UPS. I want UPS to succeed. I'd like to think that we are a team, and that, as a team, we play fair. What I see is UPS/Teamsters lying to the troops before sending them into battle.

Oh, and as far as "having a horse in this race". pu-lease. ICs were around well before FedEx. And will be around well after. It simply is a valid, useful model. Are the other 10s of millions Independent contractors in the US also in on this?

Yes and evil has been around forever, but that doesn't make it right. You are just trying to brainwash people into thinking that ic's don't have any rights.
 

Livin the Dream?

Disillusioned UPSer
Yes and evil has been around forever, but that doesn't make it right. You are just trying to brainwash people into thinking that ic's don't have any rights.

Actually, I wish I could brainwash people. That would be cool. However, I guarantee you that I would use those powers at about a million other places before it occurred to me to use those powers on an internet forum.

Just giving my opinion where I see it. Facts as I understand them.

Oh, and here is a fact for you - ICs have only the rights given to them in a contract. Is that so hard to grasp? Those rights may be awful, unfair, poor, painful, draconian, etc., but (and it is a BIG BUT) they are laid out beforehand in a contract. Don't like it? Don't sign.
 
Top