From The Chairman: Transition to Ground

[bacha29]

Every couple of decades the industry undergoes a makeover transforming itself into a completely different industry that is in keeping with a changing economy.
Therefore, it's only a matter of time until there will be no economic necessity or legal basis to continue to provide Fat Freddy with his exemption because by that time the only thing the exemption will doing is to provide Fat's with an unfair and unjustified competitive advantage that can no longer be sustained either in Congress or the courts.

Given the industry's history of recession driven carrier consolidation this upcoming recession will likely do the same thing leaving fewer but stronger carriers including some who have the cash and might decide to challenge that exemption in court.

 

[Cactus]

When the FAA bill in 2010 had the attachment to it taking us out of the RLA do you think business owners across the country didn't voice their displeasure with their local Congressman?

That's a bit more than dramatic. More than likely, they didn't even notice much if anything.

 

[vantexan]

That's a bit more than dramatic. More than likely, they didn't even notice much if anything.

There are people on Wall Street and in major corporations whose job is to know everything out there that can have an impact on share price. It's not something they just stumble upon on a message board. Every piece of legislation is analyzed. I saw reports of it on CNBC back then. These analysts keep CEO's informed. So yes, if a CEO sees a potential spike in his operating costs he's going to call his lobbyist(who also are aware of impending legislation and its impact)and tell him to mention their stance for or against and how that could impact future campaign contributions.

 

[59 Dano]

Oh, like FedEx Ground does not exist for the principal purpose of serving FedEx Express now?

No, it doesn't.

Why does Fred get an exemption and UPS does not? This goes back to the initial FACT that FedEx Express is using it's own Ground opco to deliver Express freight. UPS Brown drivers deliver NDA, but are Teamsters covered by the NLRA. Do you see the problem here, Einstein?

Set the trap, place the bait, and wait for the shill to bite.

The problem is that you're ignorant. Ground is not an opco of FedEx Express; both are opcos of the FedEx Corporation. UPS Co. employees are covered by the RLA.

C'mon, stupid. Try to keep up. You'd think that a blowhard like you would at least have the basics figured out after TEN YEARS.

 

[Fred's Myth]

No, it doesn't.



The problem is that you're ignorant. Ground is not an opco of FedEx Express; both are opcos of the FedEx Corporation. UPS Co. employees are covered by the RLA.

C'mon, stupid. Try to keep up. You'd think that a blowhard like you would at least have the basics figured out after TEN YEARS.

And an intelligent trapper knows to place the bait before setting the trap to avoid getting snared by his own trap.

 

[59 Dano]

You're as bad as Dano. The RLA was originally intended to protect the US economy from a national railroad strike. This when the railroads were king and moved the vast majority of freight. It dates from 1934, when there was no such thing as Express air service.

Isn't it curious that Fred got his precious RLA Express Carrier Exemption exactly as the IBT was in the midst of an organization drive at Express? This was literally a last minute sweetheart deal inserted into the FAA Reauthorization Act to benefit one person and his company...FedEx.

You're out of your mind. Let daddy cut your steak for you again.

Airlines were covered under the RLA beginning in 1936.
There is no such thing as an "express carrier exemption." Express would be covered under the RLA with or without the express carrier language.

The opposing argument to mine is that FedEx is an airline. One section of it certainly is, but the vast majority of FedEx employees have zero to do with the "airline". 90% see a CTV or a shuttle, not a plane. You (and Dano) would say that all Express employees are airline employees, so does that now include Ground? After all, "critical", time-sensitive packages need to be moved by airline employees, right? We can't sub them out because they are so vital to the economy.

The structure of Express has fundamentally changed, sir. Instead of having a package move entirely within the Express system, that package is now "subbed-out" to an opco that is also within the FedEx system integrator family of companies. It's an incestuous move that tries to dodge the fact that the RLA exemption is no longer warranted and is, and has always been, false, and a gift to Fred.

Trying to blur the lines, are you? "[W]ithin the FedEx system inetgrator of companies" is irrelevant. Express is Express. Keep trying, boy.

To use your flaccid logic, Fred should also be able to give those packages to FedEx Freight, and not lose the RLA shield of protection. In fact, he should be able to sub them out to anyone. But, wait, they are SO important and critical that they had better be handled exclusively by airline employees, right?

No. Straw man argument.

UPS duplicated the FedEx system. About the only operational difference is that their main hub is in Louisville, not Memphis. The size of their fleet has zero to do with the debate here, sir. Is a UPS NDA package any less critical than an Express P1 package? Based on your "logic", that time-sensitive package needs to be handled by an airline employee all the way (remember the original rationale for the exemption?).Yet, most NDA is delivered by a UPS Brown driver, along with all the rest of his/her largely trucked or railed freight. They have a few pure air drivers who do the UPS equivalent of FO.

Your logic relies on your repeated lie that the package is so important that it can only be handled by an airline employee, and that's the rationale. That's interesting. It's also your lie.

You can argue your insanity of "Because of this, then that has to be true, and then if that's true, then something else has to be true, and since that's true, then this has to happen" that's based on something you made up in the first place, and I'll argue what the courts have ruled and what the National Mediation Board says.

 

[59 Dano]

Wrong, sir. If your arguments were valid, UPS should also be RLA. Like I said before, the RLA dates from 1934, which is 39 years before Federal Express came into existence. The RAILWAY Labor Act was designed to keep the railroads running and has zero to do with Express. If FedEx stopped dead tomorrow, it would not be a huge hit on the economy. In the 1930's, the railroads moved almost everything, including the US Mail, and trucking was a small player. Air express was almost unheard of, and didn't exist on any sort of scale.

To take a law written in 1934, and morph it into a gift for Fred is some real political gamesmanship. It wasn't fair to the competition and gave Federal Express an illegal advantage. It always made me laugh to see the copy of the RLA hanging on the wall in the stations (it used to be in all of them) and realize what a dated, irrelevant piece of legislation it was.

Yes, I'll always hate Fred and his company.

The RLA was amended in 1936 to cover airline employees. You didn't know that? The board's self-appointed foil-hat labor expert didn't know that?

 

[59 Dano]

And an intelligent trapper knows to place the bait before setting the trap to avoid getting snared by his own trap.

Exactly!!!!!!

The funny part? I keep asking him to debate the issue based on how Express conforms with the terms, conditions, rules, criteria, etc. set forth by the government to handle these things and he doesn't know what any of that is.

What's even funnier is the "but subbing the work out; Ground is part of the family and blah blah blah" argument. It's funny because there was a court case involving UPS Co. subbing out work to UPS, Inc. and the court went into great detail explaining how the RLA applies to that situation and then compared how the RLA applies to Express. The court's explanation (and the NMB's) don't resemble MF's. At all. Not even close.

 

[MrFedEx]

The RLA was amended in 1936 to cover airline employees. You didn't know that? The board's self-appointed foil-hat labor expert didn't know that?

I did know that, but when did "Express Carriers" begin, Dano? In 1936, the airline industry was incredibly small compared to the present day.

 

[MrFedEx]

Exactly!!!!!!

The funny part? I keep asking him to debate the issue based on how Express conforms with the terms, conditions, rules, criteria, etc. set forth by the government to handle these things and he doesn't know what any of that is.

What's even funnier is the "but subbing the work out; Ground is part of the family and blah blah blah" argument. It's funny because there was a court case involving UPS Co. subbing out work to UPS, Inc. and the court went into great detail explaining how the RLA applies to that situation and then compared how the RLA applies to Express. The court's explanation (and the NMB's) don't resemble MF's. At all. Not even close.

Let's wait for the court cases. You're continual blathering about how this is "established law" is meaningless until it's challenged and either upheld or overturned.

A Democratic administration and an NLRB with 2 Democrats instead of 2 Republican trolls might look at it quite differently.

"Express is still Express". Really? Wasn't the policy always to never, ever mix Ground and Express lest we endanger the RLA Exemption? Yes, I believe it was, and that Fred promised (another broken one) that Express and Ground would never combine. At the time, it was an easy lie to make because it was crystal clear to FedEx that combining the opcos would result in an end for the exemption.

And that is precisely what has been done, sir. You can spin whatever lie you want about subcontracting, and independent contracting, but the fact remains that Express and Ground have essentially become one.

The customer tenders a package to Express, which moves it part of the way before it is handed off to Ground for final delivery. Sorry, but that is an integral, intentionally-designed package system that fundamentally alters the way a package gets from shipper to consignee. Haven't all scanning, tracking, aircraft and truck movements been aligned and choreographed so this could happen? Yes, they have.

That means that "Express" is no longer Express, but an Express/Ground hybrid that can't be separated legally, although Fred will try. If you marry your girlfriend and have a kid (ugghh), it's still your kid, right? So, here it is in terms you might understand. You're Dano the individual, and your girlfriend is an individual. The outcome is something entirely different (especially in your case), and a separate entity. I just threw up over that, thinking you might have reproduced and tossed a Baby Ruth in the gene pool.

It will be especially interesting when the typical Ground driver(s) mess-up (could never happen) and result in numerous late and lost packages. If I'm a customer paying high Express rates for carriage, and WHEN (not if) my vital package is late or lost because Cletus Vantexan threw it in the dumpster, sold it, or just decided to let it age in his ex-Express W700 for a week, what is my recourse?

This will be another bonanza for the lawyers.

 

[Cactus]

The RLA was amended in 1936 to cover airline employees. You didn't know that? The board's self-appointed foil-hat labor expert didn't know that?

Let me ask you this, if FedEx Express is supposed to be automatically under the RLA under all the guidelines you say it is, then why did Fred have to pay off all those people on Capitol Hill with millions of dollars and woo them with being flown around all over the country and seats on the FDX board of directors when they retired from politics?

And why has this been referred to a "Special Deal?"

 

[Cactus]

There are people on Wall Street and in major corporations whose job is to know everything out there that can have an impact on share price. It's not something they just stumble upon on a message board. Every piece of legislation is analyzed. I saw reports of it on CNBC back then. These analysts keep CEO's informed. So yes, if a CEO sees a potential spike in his operating costs he's going to call his lobbyist(who also are aware of impending legislation and its impact)and tell him to mention their stance for or against and how that could impact future campaign contributions.

I still doubt it.

A CEO would just send a memo to the bean counters and let them handle it. Besides there has been so much money wasted on shipping things out overnight that could easily be avoided anyway.

 

[vantexan]

I still doubt it.

A CEO would just send a memo to the bean counters and let them handle it. Besides there has been so much money wasted on shipping things out overnight that could easily be avoided anyway.

All I ever hear is how corporations really run the government. How do you think they do that? It isn't sitting in the chair in Congress casting votes. It's campaign contributions. Getting them to vote your way. If Fred was on one side, UPS on the other, what tipped the balance? All the CEO's Fred called telling them if FedEx goes union the cost of overnight shipping will go way up. Ground wasn't as big back then. Between Fred contributing millions to campaign coffers and CEO's through their lobbyists threatening to cut off campaign contributions the Dems decided to kick the can down the road. I know we like to think that all CEO's do is photo op's and play golf but if they don't improve profits they aren't CEO'S very long.

 

[MrFedEx]

All I ever hear is how corporations really run the government. How do you think they do that? It isn't sitting in the chair in Congress casting votes. It's campaign contributions. Getting them to vote your way. If Fred was on one side, UPS on the other, what tipped the balance? All the CEO's Fred called telling them if FedEx goes union the cost of overnight shipping will go way up. Ground wasn't as big back then. Between Fred contributing millions to campaign coffers and CEO's through their lobbyists threatening to cut off campaign contributions the Dems decided to kick the can down the road. I know we like to think that all CEO's do is photo op's and play golf but if they don't improve profits they aren't CEO'S very long.

Fred had a second home in DC, which I don't know if he still owns. That says a lot, because it means his primary concern is influencing legislation. I'll give him credit, because he's done very well for himself.

Your theories aside, IMO it's always been all about Fred and his money. The RLA Exemption is a pure gift, one that was bought and paid for with big money spent on both parties. Whatever he spent, he's more than regained that money over the last 24 years.

I've always been amazed that UPS didn't do more to fight Fred on Ground and to secure their own RLA Exemption. FedEx really does have an unfair advantage.

 

[MrFedEx]

Let me ask you this, if FedEx Express is supposed to be automatically under the RLA under all the guidelines you say it is, then why did Fred have to pay off all those people on Capitol Hill with millions of dollars and woo them with being flown around all over the country and seats on the FDX board of directors when they retired from politics?

And why has this been referred to a "Special Deal?"

Shhhh. You're not supposed to talk about this part of it. It's all legal and above board because Fred told Dano to say it is.

FedEx, the unofficial airline of Congress. Fred flies more members of Congress around than the airlines. With the current Covid-19 issue, I'm sure there are plenty of politicians waiting to fly on a FedEx private jet, and then have their ear bent by the FedEx lobbyist who flies with them on each and every trip.

 

[Cactus]

All I ever hear is how corporations really run the government. I know we like to think that all CEO's do is photo op's and play golf but if they don't improve profits they aren't CEO'S very long.

If the CEO’s lose their jobs they usually walk away with a huge severance package, all part of their built-in golden parachutes. Many don’t really care. Their mission is do whatever and move on to the next position some headhunter has lined up for them.

 

[59 Dano]

Let's wait for the court cases. You're continual blathering about how this is "established law" is meaningless until it's challenged and either upheld or overturned.

No, I'm blathering that the issue, as it would apply to Express, has been addressed in court rulings and by the National Mediation Board. This isn't some murky, undefined area of the law. The law is clear, the court rulings are clear, and Express is so ridiculously consistent with both the test set up by the NMB and the tests applied by the court system that it's not even close.

"Express is still Express". Really? Wasn't the policy always to never, ever mix Ground and Express lest we endanger the RLA Exemption? Yes, I believe it was, and that Fred promised (another broken one) that Express and Ground would never combine.

LOL, you have a vivid imagination, I'll grant you that.

And that is precisely what has been done, sir. You can spin whatever lie you want about subcontracting, and independent contracting, but the fact remains that Express and Ground have essentially become one.

I'm sorry, but your stubborn ignorance doesn't mean squat.

The customer tenders a package to Express, which moves it part of the way before it is handed off to Ground for final delivery. Sorry, but that is an integral, intentionally-designed package system that fundamentally alters the way a package gets from shipper to consignee. Haven't all scanning, tracking, aircraft and truck movements been aligned and choreographed so this could happen? Yes, they have.

That means that "Express" is no longer Express, but an Express/Ground hybrid that can't be separated legally, although Fred will try.

OK, which parts of the tests to determine RLA or NLRA status does your LSD-inspired reasoning violate?

If you marry your girlfriend and have a kid (ugghh), it's still your kid, right? So, here it is in terms you might understand. You're Dano the individual, and your girlfriend is an individual. The outcome is something entirely different (especially in your case), and a separate entity. I just threw up over that, thinking you might have reproduced and tossed a Baby Ruth in the gene pool.

Sounds great. I know what the law says. You don't.

 

[59 Dano]

Let me ask you this, if FedEx Express is supposed to be automatically under the RLA under all the guidelines you say it is, then why did Fred have to pay off all those people on Capitol Hill with millions of dollars and woo them with being flown around all over the country and seats on the FDX board of directors when they retired from politics?

And why has this been referred to a "Special Deal?"

Express has been classified under the RLA since inception. Butt out, you're ignorant.

 

[59 Dano]

The RLA Exemption is a pure gift, one that was bought and paid for with big money spent on both parties. Whatever he spent, he's more than regained that money over the last 24 years.

They've been covered under the RLA since the seventies. One would think the board's self-appointed blowhard expert on the issue would know that.

I've always been amazed that UPS didn't do more to fight Fred on Ground and to secure their own RLA Exemption. FedEx really does have an unfair advantage.

UPS, Inc. attempted to have themselves reclassified as an RLA carrier (there is no "exemption," liar) and flopped. In fact, UPS, Inc. used Express as the reason why they should be granted RLA status and it bit them in the rear because the court pointed out that Express was a perfect example of an RLA carrier and then went on to point out the differences between UPS, Inc. and Express.

One would think the board's self-appointed blowhard expert on the issue would know that.

 

[Cactus]

Express has been classified under the RLA since inception. Butt out, you're ignorant.

Classified by who? Fred? Because he said so?

Upheld by 59 Dano? (company suckass.)

Butt out, you're butt ugly.