Glad I'm out of this Part2

[dmac1]

The union organized 111 drivers. That's a far larger number than my 12. Old RPS explained perfectly. Fedex doesn't have to deal with an ISP'S union drivers. If the ISP can't or won't live up to its deal with the union, the ISP will fail and a new ISP will enter under a new corporate entity and may or may not hire those drivers. Or X could wait for the Agreement to expire and give it to a different entity or spread those areas around to already existing ISPs if they want it.

Yes. My drivers could be organized. It's been that way all along. But what you fail to understand is that X isn't going to roll over because of it.

Now what MAY be possible and I have pointed out before only came to light recently.

If all drivers at a terminal are "Co-employees" per the McDonald's ruling, then the union could skip organizing each ISP and move on to building by building. If the Teamsters showed up and got 50+1 of the drivers in a building to sign, it wouldn't matter what contractor they worked for and I'm not sure how the company would respond to that. I wonder how much weight the NLRB ruling holds because I would have thought the union would have been "on scene, day one" when the ruling came down.

Here you go thinking small again. It isn't about organizing your 12 drivers. That may be a step, but not the goal. The goal is the thousands of ground drivers. The drivers know what the long term benefits are. And it is perfectly legal for drivers to strike for better conditions.

Yes. Local management will do anything to make service and avoid being on the district manager's list. If that means we rent a budget or several and deliver the freight ourselves when a contractor solution isn't an option, they will absolutely do it.

How is hiring ALL the vans at Enterprise and Hertz going to help when you have over half the drivers at every terminal on strike, or even if the have a day when they all happen to get sick on the same day???????? You are another small thinker. The thousands of drivers at fedex ground represent a huge target for the teamsters.

 

[dmac1]

The driver shortage is for CDL-A drivers. Local drivers with experience delivering pizzas are not that hard to find.

You can't afford to pay what pizza delivery drivers earn. Between tips, vehicle allowance, and hourly pay, they make $20 an hour. I made that much and more when I was in college 30 years ago. And pizza delivery driver's do not have the required experience in commercial vehicles, and half won't pass a background check.

You seem really clueless about the real world. Have you ever been in a labor union??? Have you ever delivered pizzas?????

 

[dmac1]

So the union will organize a group of drivers and not provide any large benefit? A few cents and hour you believe is enough to convince drivers to pay union dues? It would be pretty easy to convince the handful of drivers that would be exploring the union to negotiate directly with me over paying a union to do it for them. You may think big picture with this grand unionize scheme, but the average American worker only cares about what his check will be on Friday. They couldn't care less about some convoluted scam that will take years to bring to fruition.

If the drivers can see a longer term advantage to having a job that may get them into a unionized position in a few years, or maybe even sooner, they could easily forego immediate any immediate demands at all. But, once they have 50% of the drivers in a decent size terminal, they can make their move as a group. You guys are still thinking that the point is to unionize one ISP or one terminal. The union isn't interested in negotiating with you- they want the leverage with fedex.

And the unions spent several years and tens of thousands of dollars in just getting to the point where the NLRB recognized that drivers in one terminal were employees. You should know that history. As I said, fedex made sure that drivers were already employees. No NLRB rulings are needed now. And if the McDonalds ruling is found to apply to fedex drivers, the ISP becomes meaningless.

Do you honestly think that your drivers are happy with a $40k 'salary' when they see UPS drivers making upwards of $70k for the same or fewer hours of work??? Even non-union express drivers make more with benefits. And if the national minimum wage goes up to $12 an hour, your turnover rate will skyrocket as drivers realize they can earn almost as much without risking their lives on the road every day. There are a lot of easier jobs out there, guys.

Pull your head out of Fred's butt and at least be ready for any possibility, no matter how slim it may seem to you. It is smart to be prepared, and stupid to ignore possibilities that may make you broke.

 

[bbsam]

Here you go thinking small again. It isn't about organizing your 12 drivers. That may be a step, but not the goal. The goal is the thousands of ground drivers. The drivers know what the long term benefits are. And it is perfectly legal for drivers to strike for better conditions.




How is hiring ALL the vans at Enterprise and Hertz going to help when you have over half the drivers at every terminal on strike, or even if the have a day when they all happen to get sick on the same day???????? You are another small thinker. The thousands of drivers at fedex ground represent a huge target for the teamsters.

I think you are the one thinking small or maybe reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. Try again.

Ground is covered by the NLRB. Always has been. Unlike Express under the RLA, Ground can be organized BUILDING by BUILDING.

Now, if all drivers are considered "co-employees" of both "bbsam inc" and FedEx Ground per the recent McDonald's ruling, it stands to reason that the Teamsters no longer have to organize ISP to ISP. They could organize ALL of the drivers in my building with a 50% + 1 vote. None of my drivers would even have to vote Yea and the union could have the entire building.

Of course strangely there has been no union movement that I've seen.

 

[dmac1]

So you think once they get a few cent raise they would strike as a leverage move? Is that even legal? If the ISP is living up to the agreement with the union, how do they pull that off?

See the time stamp you posted this as 4:48 AM!?!?!?!?!?!?! I am shocked. Why were you up so early??????

 

[bbsam]

See the time stamp you posted this as 4:48 AM!?!?!?!?!?!?! I am shocked. Why were you up so early??????

I'm always up early. Often by 2:30.

 

[dmac1]

I think you are the one thinking small or maybe reading comprehension isn't your strong suit. Try again.

Ground is covered by the NLRB. Always has been. Unlike Express under the RLA, Ground can be organized BUILDING by BUILDING.

Now, if all drivers are considered "co-employees" of both "bbsam inc" and FedEx Ground per the recent McDonald's ruling, it stands to reason that the Teamsters no longer have to organize ISP to ISP. They could organize ALL of the drivers in my building with a 50% + 1 vote. None of my drivers would even have to vote Yea and the union could have the entire building.

Of course strangely there has been no union movement that I've seen.

That's exactly what I said. But at this point, the McDonalds ruling doesn't apply. And until recently, ground drivers were mostly called ICs. The courts just ruled otherwise and fedex is changing their model. The unions will move as soon as the ISP model is done being rolled out. Of course they haven't moved yet. I don't know why you would even think they'd act publicly now. But in the meantime, lawsuits are proceeding, maybe out of your sight, trying to get fedex ruled as a co-employer based on the McDonalds ruling. That lawsuit will focus mostly on things like retirement, benefits, health insurance, etc that other fedex employee drivers get. In time, I would bet that even some disgruntled ISPs make the same claims plus claims for unemployment if they lose there territories, worker's comp if injured, and liability to third parties for accidents and the like.

It's just a matter of time.

 

[bbsam]

Now the real question arises: if the McDonald's ruling is applicable, where are the Teamsters?

 

[dmac1]

I'm always up early. Often by 2:30.

Oh yeah, you have to work. I forgot.

 

[bbsam]

I'm not sure the ruling is even applicable to McDonald's yet. Haven't seen any votes there.

 

[dmac1]

Now the real question arises: if the McDonald's ruling is applicable, where are the Teamsters?

Working to get that ruling applied to ISPs.

The courts move slowly. The McDonalds ruling needs to be applied through the courts. It doesn't automatically just apply to every situation. You should know this stuff.

Do you REALLY think the union isn't looking at the thousands of fedex drivers they could help???????

 

[bbsam]

Oh yeah, you have to work. I forgot.

No. 8 have a wife and 3 kids. 2:30 is peaceful.

 

[dmac1]

I'm not sure the ruling is even applicable to McDonald's yet. Haven't seen any votes there.

McDonalds is appealing It may take years.

 

[bbsam]

Working to get that ruling applied to ISPs.

The courts move slowly. The McDonalds ruling needs to be applied through the courts. It doesn't automatically just apply to every situation. You should know this stuff.

Do you REALLY think the union isn't looking at the thousands of fedex drivers they could help???????

If the courts move too slowly, this ruling will be killed by Congress.

 

[bbsam]

McDonalds is appealing It may take years.

And if McDonald's appeals and it takes years, the X would do the same and eventually the political makeup shifts at the NLRB and the ruling gets reversed.

 

[dmac1]

If the courts move too slowly, this ruling will be killed by Congress.

Hillary will veto any action by congress to limit workers rights.

 

[bbsam]

Hillary will veto any action by congress to limit workers rights.

Lol. No, she won't. Bernie might, Hillary wont.

 

[bacha29]

I have to admit, the blind loyalty that some of you guys have to that company is impressive. That's the problem however, it's blind and it has been proven conclusively that it's a company that has spared nothing in it's efforts to avoid any degree of loyalty both moral as well as legal toward you guys. It all comes down to the printed word. And the printed word in your case is not on your side. Yet for some inexplicable reason it doesn't mean anything to you but for me and many others it's the only thing that matters.

 

[bbsam]

I have to admit, the blind loyalty that some of you guys have to that company is impressive. That's the problem however, it's blind and it has been proven conclusively that it's a company that has spared nothing in it's efforts to avoid any degree of loyalty both moral as well as legal toward you guys. It all comes down to the printed word. And the printed word in your case is not on your side. Yet for some inexplicable reason it doesn't mean anything to you but for me and many others it's the only thing that matters.

I don't think it's so much loyalty as seeing how things have worked over the years. I don't think anyone here is a cheerleader for X. But we're not playing into the doom and negativity of many here either. We've all k own for years that it could and can go up in smoke under a certain set of circumstances. The difference is that,.from a political, economic, and legal perspective, I don't forsee those circumstances materializing any time soon.

 

[instiches]

I have to admit, the blind loyalty that some of you guys have to that company is impressive. That's the problem however, it's blind and it has been proven conclusively that it's a company that has spared nothing in it's efforts to avoid any degree of loyalty both moral as well as legal toward you guys. It all comes down to the printed word. And the printed word in your case is not on your side. Yet for some inexplicable reason it doesn't mean anything to you but for me and many others it's the only thing that matters.

I can point out a potential negative outcome to any thing you do in your life until my face is blue as well. You just come off as a salty employee who couldn't figure it out. I think it's absolutely hilarious you were a single route contractor for 20+ years. It's obvious you only think like an employee, and so you got what you deserve.