FedEx Loses Suit In Wrongful Dismissal Case

[vantexan]

I didn't know that about UPS. Yeah, they would definitely be worth jumping ship. I've looked at UPS' website online for years and they never have jobs listed other than package handlers. I hope some do retire soon so there are driver openings. Our economy is doing great right now and so is the amount of packages being shipped by FedEx. Peak has never really ended where I'm at. I've heard other stations and ramps say the same thing. I'd say this great market we're in is prime for paying good raises. But unfortunately, I have a feeling FedEx's screw up with TNT will cost employees in the US this fall.

I applied for a handler job with UPS last Fall but after a week decided I'd rather travel. But while there heard both managers and co-workers say that it now took about a year or less to become a driver based on older drivers retiring. You might find out more from the UPS drivers here. May be legitimate, might be just trying to string handlers along to keep them at it. The year before I worked as a runner at Christmas. The driver was saying the same thing.

 

[bacha29]

I'm sure that nearly all of us saw the delivery bot video. An autonomous unit making a lightweight delivery while traveling on a completely dry perfectly smooth and level surface in broad daylight. Now let's take it over to Ground. Once there we'll see how well it can do lugging a 150 pound boulder in a box up some logging trail, abandoned strip mine or everybody's favorite....gas line right of ways after dark in the winter time to single junk loaded unmarked residence based on a GPS provided address which out in the jing weeds is at best accurate within 2-3 miles.

 

[59 Dano]

If you Google automation killing jobs you'll see plenty to worry about. Not just manual labor jobs but white collar too. Companies are partnering with Silicon Valley and Universities to make this happen. Agricultural jobs, military, waitstaff, accounting. All across the board. As for previous years automation has already taken close to 4 million autoworker jobs as well as other jobs in those communities as well paid autoworkers were no longer there to support other businesses. It's going to be very difficult for the lower paid 25% of workers to get by in another decade or so.

Automation has been steadily killing jobs for over 200 years, and here we are with more unfilled jobs than we have unemployed workers to fill them.

 

[vantexan]

Automation has been steadily killing jobs for over 200 years, and here we are with more unfilled jobs than we have unemployed workers to fill them.

And constant turnover and lack of willing workers in some industries. And the never ending quest for more profit. You're arguing from the view of the old paradigm. A new paradigm is coming.

 

[59 Dano]

And constant turnover and lack of willing workers in some industries.

Which only further proves my point~ it's an easier decision to quit those jobs because there are better opportunities elsewhere. According to you, after 200 years of automation that kills jobs, that opportunity shouldn't exist.

 

[vantexan]

Which only further proves my point~ it's an easier decision to quit those jobs because there are better opportunities elsewhere. According to you, after 200 years of automation that kills jobs, that opportunity shouldn't exist.

You're hanging on to the old paradigm. Right now in labs in Silicon Valley and universities like M.I.T. they're developing machines and A.I. advanced enough to handle the tasks that not only low skilled workers do, but even white collar workers. Don't take my word for it, do some research. Just one example among many...imagine machines that can replace soldiers, fully automated ships with skeleton crews, most fighter planes without pilots or support crews. Imagine a couple of million people out of work because of a mostly automated military. Imagine truck lanes separated from normal lanes, with trucks guided by onboard computers and sensors. How many people will that put out of work? Think about Model A's and T's of 1915 compared to today's cars. Think innovators can't come up with improved technology that helps companies become more profitable? To help the government spend less?

 

[CJinx]

To help the government spend less?

You had me right up to this point. The government has no interest in ever 'spending less'.

 

[vantexan]

You had me right up to this point. The government has no interest in ever 'spending less'.

You think a certain party wouldn't want to spend much less on the military so it could spend more on social programs?

 

[Fred's Myth]

You're hanging on to the old paradigm. Right now in labs in Silicon Valley and universities like M.I.T. they're developing machines and A.I. advanced enough to handle the tasks that not only low skilled workers do, but even white collar workers. Don't take my word for it, do some research. Just one example among many...imagine machines that can replace soldiers, fully automated ships with skeleton crews, most fighter planes without pilots or support crews. Imagine a couple of million people out of work because of a mostly automated military. Imagine truck lanes separated from normal lanes, with trucks guided by onboard computers and sensors. How many people will that put out of work? Think about Model A's and T's of 1915 compared to today's cars. Think innovators can't come up with improved technology that helps companies become more profitable? To help the government spend less?

And who will build those ships, planes, trucking roadways, robots, computers, sensors, etc? Technology can't design and implement, or improve itself without humans. Just because the workplace is evolving doesn't mean the workforce will become obsolete.

 

[It will be fine]

And who will build those ships, planes, trucking roadways, robots, computers, sensors, etc? Technology can't design and implement, or improve itself without humans. Just because the workplace is evolving doesn't mean the workforce will become obsolete.

It only needs to happen once. An AI capable of designing its replacement will happen. It’s called the singularity, when technological advancement will outpace anything currently imaginable.

 

[vantexan]

And who will build those ships, planes, trucking roadways, robots, computers, sensors, etc? Technology can't design and implement, or improve itself without humans. Just because the workplace is evolving doesn't mean the workforce will become obsolete.

There will be a lot less needed to do that than all the truckers, waitresses, farm workers, etc put out of work. Bottom line by 2030 25% of workers are displaced. That's 36 million people roughly. The last time we had 25% out of work was the Great Depression. And more job loss to come.

 

[fedx]

And constant turnover and lack of willing workers in some industries. And the never ending quest for more profit. You're arguing from the view of the old paradigm. A new paradigm is coming.

Constant turnover because a job sucks and or pays like crap. Here's how companies handle constant turnover: When 10 people in a row quit after only a couple of weeks on the job, the company will say "these lazy people" or "they don't want to work" or "they don't know a great job when they have one". In other words, it's all the employees who are in the wrong rather than realizing maybe the job sucks and should pay much better to keep turnover from happening. It's those 10 employees in the wrong, not the company.

Supply and demand would say the company should raise the wage since demand to work it is low. However, many companies want to being in illegal aliens who will work for that low wage in a sucky job. It artificially lowers wages for everyone as a result. The company says "why should I hire you for $13/hr when I can hire that illegal for $3/hr and hire 4 employees for every 1 of you?" That's the environment we're in right now.

 

[fedx]

There will be a lot less needed to do that than all the truckers, waitresses, farm workers, etc put out of work. Bottom line by 2030 25% of workers are displaced. That's 36 million people roughly. The last time we had 25% out of work was the Great Depression. And more job loss to come.

The goal of the global elite is to automate just about everything. The problem I see is, how are people going to buy "stuff" when they don't have a job due to being displaced by machines? They talk about a base wage for everyone, but that doesn't make sense either. That will just cause the price of everything to rise since everyone will have, say, $2,000 base every month. Plus nobody will be working to provide taxes for that base pay. If companies pay all the taxes it would be like having those automated companies giving away their stuff for free since they're paying your base. Obviously they wouldn't do that. In reality I see this automation leading to a societal collapse as it can't sustain itself. Companies want to automate everything so they don't have to deal with human workers, but then they won't be able to sell their goods since nobody will be working. So those companies will go out of business too. It's unsustainable.

 

[vantexan]

The goal of the global elite is to automate just about everything. The problem I see is, how are people going to buy "stuff" when they don't have a job due to being displaced by machines? They talk about a base wage for everyone, but that doesn't make sense either. That will just cause the price of everything to rise since everyone will have, say, $2,000 base every month. Plus nobody will be working to provide taxes for that base pay. If companies pay all the taxes it would be like having those automated companies giving away their stuff for free on the 1st day of every month. Obviously they wouldn't do that. In reality I see this automation leading to a societal collapse as it can't sustain itself. Companies want to automate everything so they don't have to deal with human workers, but then they won't be able to sell their goods since nobody will be working. So those companies will go out of business too. It's unsustainable.

I think companies are making a calculation that there's a big enough economy with the top 50% of salaried and wage earners that they can become immensely more profitable getting rid of most of the bottom half. Who buys those new pickups and SUV's anyways? This presidential candidate Yang is talking about a Universal Basic Income of $1000 a month for every adult 18-65. He points out that the poor would be putting the money right back into the economy on basic necessities. To pay for it he's advocating a Value Added Tax on everything, just as many other countries have. He points out that companies like Amazon are collapsing small companies that pay taxes while Amazon itself paid no taxes last year. A VAT would insure taxes are paid that would offset the job losses caused by automation. And he pointed out that a UBI has been discussed, even voted on, in Congress. Was actually passed twice during the Nixon administration by the House but failed in the Senate where they wanted an even higher UBI. Although much less, Alaska has a UBI given annually to every resident for oil revenue. That's been going on since the early 90's and was established by a conservative governor.

 

[fedx]

I think companies are making a calculation that there's a big enough economy with the top 50% of salaried and wage earners that they can become immensely more profitable getting rid of most of the bottom half. Who buys those new pickups and SUV's anyways? This presidential candidate Yang is talking about a Universal Basic Income of $1000 a month for every adult 18-65. He points out that the poor would be putting the money right back into the economy on basic necessities. To pay for it he's advocating a Value Added Tax on everything, just as many other countries have. He points out that companies like Amazon are collapsing small companies that pay taxes while Amazon itself paid no taxes last year. A VAT would insure taxes are paid that would offset the job losses caused by automation. And he pointed out that a UBI has been discussed, even voted on, in Congress. Was actually passed twice during the Nixon administration by the House but failed in the Senate where they wanted an even higher UBI. Although much less, Alaska has a UBI given annually to every resident for oil revenue. That's been going on since the early 90's and was established by a conservative governor.

I heard Zuckerberg promoting UBI. I don't think it can work. There's not enough rich to pay for all the poor. Plus, it will just create massive inflation. And it's all a shell game by the corporations. The government raises their taxes and they just pass it along to the consumer. And many of the poor I have encountered are poor due to bad decisions they make. They take their money and buy lottery tickets or booze. Many have no clue how to manage their money. Many are poor for a reason. Not all, but many. But UBI is another thing that isn't sustainable just like automated robots taking everyone's jobs.

And here's another thing to consider. If everyone is not working and getting free money, what are they going to do with all this free time? Well, one thing is have sex and more offspring. This will cause more free money needed from these corporations to pay UBI. They aren't going to want the population expanding while they're not doing anything, especially when they have to pay for their UBI. What will that lead to? Genocide of humanity. Humans won't be of much need. They are now a burden. They will want to get the population down so they won't have to pay UBI to hundreds of millions of people not working. Nothing good will come out of it.

 

[vantexan]

I heard Zuckerberg promoting UBI. I don't think it can work. There's not enough rich to pay for all the poor. Plus, it will just create massive inflation. And it's all a shell game by the corporations. The government raises their taxes and they just pass it along to the consumer. And many of the poor I have encountered are poor due to bad decisions they make. They take their money and buy lottery tickets or booze. Many have no clue how to manage their money. Many are poor for a reason. Not all, but many. But UBI is another thing that isn't sustainable just like automated robots taking everyone's jobs.

And here's another thing to consider. If everyone is not working and getting free money, what are they going to do with all this free time? Well, one thing is have sex and more offspring. This will cause more free money needed from these corporations to pay UBI. They aren't going to want the population expanding while they're not doing anything, especially when they have to pay for their UBI. What will that lead to? Genocide of humanity. Humans won't be of much need. They are now a burden. They will want to get the population down so they won't have to pay UBI to hundreds of millions of people not working. Nothing good will come out of it.

You may be right on some of it. But automation killing jobs appears to be underway. If they do put tens of millions out of work then something had better be done to alleviate the poverty these people will endure and the spike in crime it'll produce. Not to mention the civil unrest. And a VAT isn't soaking the rich. It's a tax on literally everything. You don't offset it by passing the cost to the consumer. The consumer will pay it anyways.

 

[MrFedEx]

Commonalities in how FedEx handles themselves:

- "FedEx attorneys maintained that the courier delivery service company committed no wrongdoing..."
-----(never showing accountability)

- "...Carter lost his job because he had three disciplinary write-ups..."
-------(always shift the blame to the other party and create a story to support your actions)

- "He claimed he was also was told to return within 90 days or lose his management position."
------ (use of bully and threatening tactics)

- "instead of accommodating him because of his limitations, his workload was actually increased compared to others"
------(create an unbearable situation to force you out)

- "He filed an internal complaint alleging discrimination, harassment and retaliation and was fired eight months later"
------(if you don't bow you will be beheaded)

- "FedEx never interviewed Carter about his internal grievance"
------(your concerns will fall on deaf ears, to maintain order)

Exactly. This is the way FedEx does business, and sometimes it bites them you know where. Overall, their calculation is that the payout for cases like this is mitigated by the enormous profits they make by treating employees like disposable diapers.

Bravo Zulu to the former employee, who won, in spite of "FedEx doing nothing wrong and vigorously defending themselves in court".

Screw you, Smith.

 

[MrFedEx]

Shamelessly, this company treats injured employees like convicted criminals. Maybe this will have them rethink that concept.

If you do something and they ask for a statement, write your name a thousand times, or something similarly inane and neutral. They are hoping you will incriminate yourself, and many do.

Go straight to a lawyer, do not go to HR, and do not collect $200. I've known many people that have won large settlements, but many more who haven't received a dime, mainly because they were stupid and didn't follow the instructions in my first paragraph.

So happy to be gone from Fred's Funhouse.

 

[59 Dano]

You're hanging on to the old paradigm. Right now in labs in Silicon Valley and universities like M.I.T. they're developing machines and A.I. advanced enough to handle the tasks that not only low skilled workers do, but even white collar workers. Don't take my word for it, do some research. Just one example among many...imagine machines that can replace soldiers, fully automated ships with skeleton crews, most fighter planes without pilots or support crews. Imagine a couple of million people out of work because of a mostly automated military. Imagine truck lanes separated from normal lanes, with trucks guided by onboard computers and sensors. How many people will that put out of work? Think about Model A's and T's of 1915 compared to today's cars. Think innovators can't come up with improved technology that helps companies become more profitable? To help the government spend less?

Sounds like you have a lot of imagination.

The history of automation has shown us that it creates opportunity and job growth rather than killing it off.

 

[59 Dano]

You may be right on some of it. But automation killing jobs appears to be underway. If they do put tens of millions out of work then something had better be done to alleviate the poverty these people will endure and the spike in crime it'll produce. Not to mention the civil unrest. And a VAT isn't soaking the rich. It's a tax on literally everything. You don't offset it by passing the cost to the consumer. The consumer will pay it anyways.

Good lord, you're actually wringing your hands over this. SMH.