Iamfedex.com/Newest PR Scam

[quadro]

Oh, please. Under the reformed RLA rules, a union is very possible. Under the old rules, which FedEx is fighting to keep, a union was virtually impossible and you know it. Cut the crap. If you're going to argue a point, at least have some ammunition, OK?

I agree that it was virtually impossible because there aren't enough union supporters and because the unions aren't willing to spend the money. They are looking out for their best interest, not yours.

One thing I will agree with you on is the apparent apathy of the Teamsters. Maybe they are waiting for the outcome of the RLA appeal, or perhaps they're hanging on for the potential end of the Express Carrier Exemption. Either way, they're sitting on their hands.

Things that make you go "hmmmmmm". Why would that be? Why would the union want to wait until the row isn't so tough to hoe? I believe I've already answered my own questions.

I'm not saying FedEx is Utopia. I'm merely pointing out that people should be asking questions as to the intentions behind these moves. Also, I could be wrong, but doesn't UPS enjoy pseudo RLA protection with their NMA. How would FedEx and it's employees be sure that there would be an NMA for them?

 

[vantexan]

But as is often pointed out here, hardly anyone is happy at FedEx so even under the old rule, those unhappy people would surely vote for a union, wouldn't they? After all, if they vote it in, they would be protected. Speaking of which, now that the minority of employees gets to decide what's best for the majority, why would their fear change just because the rule changed? Are you implying that under the old rule those in favor were afraid because they might not win? How could that be if so many people are unhappy that they would vote in a union? I suspect the answer is simply that the union supporters aren't really sure of themselves in terms of how many supporters they really have and the unions aren't going to spend the money to find out.

The rules have changed, let's have a vote, and if the majority who participate are happy as is then the union is out.

Fact is under the old rules the vote had to be nationwide and those who chose not to participate, for whatever reason, were counted as a "no" vote. I'm telling you what you already know. If, as some alledge, most are happy with their job, then you shouldn't have a problem with a vote under the new rules. Are you implying that those who are happy won't participate?

It's a moot point anyways, if our guesses are correct, FedEx is on the move to minimize a union's impact. We won't make $70k a year, will be lucky to get half that much. If we guessed right, and FedEx makes major changes, then they certainly believe most would vote for a union given a chance.

 

[bbsam]

The rules have changed, let's have a vote, and if the majority who participate are happy as is then the union is out.

Fact is under the old rules the vote had to be nationwide and those who chose not to participate, for whatever reason, were counted as a "no" vote. I'm telling you what you already know. If, as some alledge, most are happy with their job, then you shouldn't have a problem with a vote under the new rules. Are you implying that those who are happy won't participate?

It's a moot point anyways, if our guesses are correct, FedEx is on the move to minimize a union's impact. We won't make $70k a year, will be lucky to get half that much. If we guessed right, and FedEx makes major changes, then they certainly believe most would vote for a union given a chance.

Exactly.

 

[MrFedEx]

But as is often pointed out here, hardly anyone is happy at FedEx so even under the old rule, those unhappy people would surely vote for a union, wouldn't they? After all, if they vote it in, they would be protected. Speaking of which, now that the minority of employees gets to decide what's best for the majority, why would their fear change just because the rule changed? Are you implying that under the old rule those in favor were afraid because they might not win? How could that be if so many people are unhappy that they would vote in a union? I suspect the answer is simply that the union supporters aren't really sure of themselves in terms of how many supporters they really have and the unions aren't going to spend the money to find out.

Please continue your gibberish if you wish. Under the "new" RLA rules, we're going to have a union. Better start organizing all of your Purple Pals to stick-up for good old Uncle Fred. Geez.....

 

[bbsam]

Please continue your gibberish if you wish. Under the "new" RLA rules, we're going to have a union. Better start organizing all of your Purple Pals to stick-up for good old Uncle Fred. Geez.....

I stand ready for the marginalization of Express.

 

[MrFedEx]

I agree that it was virtually impossible because there aren't enough union supporters and because the unions aren't willing to spend the money. They are looking out for their best interest, not yours.


Things that make you go "hmmmmmm". Why would that be? Why would the union want to wait until the row isn't so tough to hoe? I believe I've already answered my own questions.

I'm not saying FedEx is Utopia. I'm merely pointing out that people should be asking questions as to the intentions behind these moves. Also, I could be wrong, but doesn't UPS enjoy pseudo RLA protection with their NMA. How would FedEx and it's employees be sure that there would be an NMA for them?

Maybe people should be asking themselves about your intentions. You claim to be a courier, yet you seem to be more of a corporate apologist trying to raise angst among employees. Which is it? Or is it both? Take all of your happy co-workers and go create a glee club for the company, or better yet, head to Iamfedex.com and tell them how freaking happy you are. When we do get a union, do a sit-down on the belt and refuse the higher wages and better benefits with all of your like-minded pals. Be content with the crummy deal we've got. In short, stay ignorant.

 

[quadro]

Maybe people should be asking themselves about your intentions. You claim to be a courier, yet you seem to be more of a corporate apologist trying to raise angst among employees. Which is it? Or is it both? Take all of your happy co-workers and go create a glee club for the company, or better yet, head to Iamfedex.com and tell them how freaking happy you are. When we do get a union, do a sit-down on the belt and refuse the higher wages and better benefits with all of your like-minded pals. Be content with the crummy deal we've got. In short, stay ignorant.

There you go again calling people corporate apologists. Do you really not have a valid answer to my questions or do you know the answer and are afraid to say it? Funny thing is I wasn't even apologizing. I was questioning the unions intentions but I didn't realize it is only ok to question FedEx's intentions. I also didn't realize that it's only ok to raise angst when it is anti-FedEx and not anti-union. Lastly, I didn't realize that you've already negotiated the contract for us and know that we are getting higher wages and better benefits. Please, Obi Wan, tell me how much harder I am going to have to work to get the higher wages and what the better benefits are.

If you don't want to discuss both sides of the argument, that's fine. But be honest with yourself and everyone here and say that you don't care what it costs, you want a union even if the net result could be a step backwards. I'm not saying it will or will not but it apparently doesn't matter to you if it is as you certainly appear to support a union at any cost.

 

[Broke]

There you go again calling people corporate apologists. Do you really not have a valid answer to my questions or do you know the answer and are afraid to say it? Funny thing is I wasn't even apologizing. I was questioning the unions intentions but I didn't realize it is only ok to question FedEx's intentions. I also didn't realize that it's only ok to raise angst when it is anti-FedEx and not anti-union. Lastly, I didn't realize that you've already negotiated the contract for us and know that we are getting higher wages and better benefits. Please, Obi Wan, tell me how much harder I am going to have to work to get the higher wages and what the better benefits are.

If you don't want to discuss both sides of the argument, that's fine. But be honest with yourself and everyone here and say that you don't care what it costs, you want a union even if the net result could be a step backwards. I'm not saying it will or will not but it apparently doesn't matter to you if it is as you certainly appear to support a union at any cost.

Our total revenue is around 36 billion. UPS total revenue is around 46 or 47 billion with about 150,000 extra employees to compensate than Fedex. Could you please explain how a union would hurt Fedex? You say Mr. Fedex wants a union at any cost, I believe Mr. Fedex and the rest of us want a union so we can have a little extra pay and maybe a decent pension. Certainly we can agree that Fedex can afford that. Can't we?

 

[bbsam]

Our total revenue is around 36 billion. UPS total revenue is around 46 or 47 billion with about 150,000 extra employees to compensate than Fedex. Could you please explain how a union would hurt Fedex? You say Mr. Fedex wants a union at any cost, I believe Mr. Fedex and the rest of us want a union so we can have a little extra pay and maybe a decent pension. Certainly we can agree that Fedex can afford that. Can't we?

I think the point quadro is making is that whether or not Fedex can afford it is a moot point. They are intent on not paying it and they believe they have the business model to avoid it.

 

[Broke]

I think the point quadro is making is that whether or not Fedex can afford it is a moot point. They are intent on not paying it and they believe they have the business model to avoid it.

Well.. we're intent on obtaining it.

 

[quadro]

Our total revenue is around 36 billion. UPS total revenue is around 46 or 47 billion with about 150,000 extra employees to compensate than Fedex. Could you please explain how a union would hurt Fedex? You say Mr. Fedex wants a union at any cost, I believe Mr. Fedex and the rest of us want a union so we can have a little extra pay and maybe a decent pension. Certainly we can agree that Fedex can afford that. Can't we?

You are only painting part of the picture. UPS delivers about 2 to 2.5 times as many packages (including FedEx Ground) and almost 5 times as many as Express. I don't remember the numbers but I'm pretty sure that UPS makes more per package and with the number of packages that they deliver it makes a big difference.

My point isn't that FedEx can't afford to pay more or give better benefits, nor is it that a union won't be able to negotiate those things. My point is simply that there is and will always be a cost to that. The money to do all that has to come from somewhere. You can cut executive salaries, you can shed dead weight, etc, but that isn't going to provide the savings needed to spend an extra billion or so per year. That savings has to come from where the largest spend is, namely hourly employees. There are couriers in just about every station that you can hear on a daily basis complain that they have to go out and deliver 90 stops. What's going to happen when the union says "hey we got you $5/hour raise, we got your pension back, we got your medical insurance premiums reduced just like UPS......oh, and you only have to deliver 180 stops a day just like UPS".

As I've said before, I really don't have anything against a union, I'm just not willing to risk what I have for what I might get, or in this case, be required to do.

As for MrFedEx, what he wants is to do exactly what FedEx is doing except from the opposite side. He clearly would be happy with a purplebailout.com or an IamUnion.com and certainly wouldn't accept people using the same adjectives to describe those as he uses to describe the FedEx sites. After all, neither FedEx nor the unions are perfect. They both have their pros and cons (no pun intended).

 

[UnconTROLLed]

You are only painting part of the picture. UPS delivers about 2 to 2.5 times as many packages (including FedEx Ground) and almost 5 times as many as Express. I don't remember the numbers but I'm pretty sure that UPS makes more per package and with the number of packages that they deliver it makes a big difference.

My point isn't that FedEx can't afford to pay more or give better benefits, nor is it that a union won't be able to negotiate those things. My point is simply that there is and will always be a cost to that. The money to do all that has to come from somewhere. You can cut executive salaries, you can shed dead weight, etc, but that isn't going to provide the savings needed to spend an extra billion or so per year. That savings has to come from where the largest spend is, namely hourly employees. There are couriers in just about every station that you can hear on a daily basis complain that they have to go out and deliver 90 stops. What's going to happen when the union says "hey we got you $5/hour raise, we got your pension back, we got your medical insurance premiums reduced just like UPS......oh, and you only have to deliver 180 stops a day just like UPS".

As I've said before, I really don't have anything against a union, I'm just not willing to risk what I have for what I might get, or in this case, be required to do.

As for MrFedEx, what he wants is to do exactly what FedEx is doing except from the opposite side. He clearly would be happy with a purplebailout.com or an IamUnion.com and certainly wouldn't accept people using the same adjectives to describe those as he uses to describe the FedEx sites. After all, neither FedEx nor the unions are perfect. They both have their pros and cons (no pun intended).

You are basically saying you are unwilling to work harder for more money and better benefits, and a real pension like mine...is that what I am reading?

 

[Broke]

You are basically saying you are unwilling to work harder for more money and better benefits, and a real pension like mine...is that what I am reading?

You are correct. I don't care how many stops they put on me, if they pay me a decent wage and offer a decent retirement, then I'll do all I can do. I already work 2 jobs, maybe I could even quit my 2nd job.

 

[MrFedEx]

You are only painting part of the picture. UPS delivers about 2 to 2.5 times as many packages (including FedEx Ground) and almost 5 times as many as Express. I don't remember the numbers but I'm pretty sure that UPS makes more per package and with the number of packages that they deliver it makes a big difference.

My point isn't that FedEx can't afford to pay more or give better benefits, nor is it that a union won't be able to negotiate those things. My point is simply that there is and will always be a cost to that. The money to do all that has to come from somewhere. You can cut executive salaries, you can shed dead weight, etc, but that isn't going to provide the savings needed to spend an extra billion or so per year. That savings has to come from where the largest spend is, namely hourly employees. There are couriers in just about every station that you can hear on a daily basis complain that they have to go out and deliver 90 stops. What's going to happen when the union says "hey we got you $5/hour raise, we got your pension back, we got your medical insurance premiums reduced just like UPS......oh, and you only have to deliver 180 stops a day just like UPS".

As I've said before, I really don't have anything against a union, I'm just not willing to risk what I have for what I might get, or in this case, be required to do.

As for MrFedEx, what he wants is to do exactly what FedEx is doing except from the opposite side. He clearly would be happy with a purplebailout.com or an IamUnion.com and certainly wouldn't accept people using the same adjectives to describe those as he uses to describe the FedEx sites. After all, neither FedEx nor the unions are perfect. They both have their pros and cons (no pun intended).

Once again, I will explain that I am not seeking to match UPS pay and benefits and never have. FedEx wages are extremely low relative to the amount of work we perform right now and have been steadily decreasing relative to the cost of living for many years. If Fred wants to match UPS dollar for dollar I'm not going to argue with him, but we all know that will never happen. When will you "apologists" get it through your thick heads that Fred doesn't want to change ANYTHING because we've already got it too good as far as he's concerned. That's a big problem. Again, relative to our productivity we are severely underpaid. If Fred had stayed within a buck or two of UPS and hadn't killed the pension, we wouldn't be having this argument. But he did, and he's been backtracking for about 15 years and has reaped millions because we couldn't do a damn thing to stop him. That's about to change, isn't it?

 

[quadro]

You are basically saying you are unwilling to work harder for more money and better benefits, and a real pension like mine...is that what I am reading?

No. I am saying I'm unwilling to work 100% harder for 20% more pay/benefits, etc. I have no idea if that's what I would be asked to do but I'm not naive enough to think that I'm just going to get more for doing the same work. And it's not just the pay etc. It's the work rules that will no doubt change that I worry about more than being asked to work harder. I suspect that many employees who think that a union will just mean more pay are in for a rude awakening.

 

[MrFedEx]

No. I am saying I'm unwilling to work 100% harder for 20% more pay/benefits, etc. I have no idea if that's what I would be asked to do but I'm not naive enough to think that I'm just going to get more for doing the same work. And it's not just the pay etc. It's the work rules that will no doubt change that I worry about more than being asked to work harder. I suspect that many employees who think that a union will just mean more pay are in for a rude awakening.

What a crock!! Do you really think a UPS driver works 100% harder than you do? Try 10-15%, OK? And you will probably get more for doing the same amount of work because you are critically underpaid right now. Smith has enjoyed a tremendous labor bargain at our expense forever. Get a backbone.

 

[quadro]

What a crock!! Do you really think a UPS driver works 100% harder than you do? Try 10-15%, OK? And you will probably get more for doing the same amount of work because you are critically underpaid right now. Smith has enjoyed a tremendous labor bargain at our expense forever. Get a backbone.

MrFedEx can you ever reply without insulting the poster? Your blind hatred of FedEx and anyone that likes working at FedEx really does undermine your cause and says a lot about your character.

How many stops does a UPS driver do in a day? If I'm doing 75 to 100 stops and they are doing 150 to 200, then yes, I would says that a UPS does 100% more work. Perhaps they only have to work 50% harder to do that extra work but that still isn't worth a 10% pay increase. And I'm critically underpaid right now am I? First of all, you have no idea how much I make but then again I forgot that you already know everything up to and including the results of contract negotiations.

 

[MrFedEx]

MrFedEx can you ever reply without insulting the poster? Your blind hatred of FedEx and anyone that likes working at FedEx really does undermine your cause and says a lot about your character.

How many stops does a UPS driver do in a day? If I'm doing 75 to 100 stops and they are doing 150 to 200, then yes, I would says that a UPS does 100% more work. Perhaps they only have to work 50% harder to do that extra work but that still isn't worth a 10% pay increase. And I'm critically underpaid right now am I? First of all, you have no idea how much I make but then again I forgot that you already know everything up to and including the results of contract negotiations.

OK, genius. There are 4 UPS drivers in the area I cover with 1 FedEx route. 2 of them have routes that are basically only a couple of major streets. If I do 100 stops a day and each of them does 150 because they're right next to each other, who is working harder?

If you're happy with your deal, BE FREAKING HAPPY, OK? Don't vote for a union and continue being one of Fred's lackeys forever if you wish. But don't come on here misrepresenting the issues and expect me to agree with you. Even if you're topped-out in a major market you are making significantly less than a UPS driver in terms of both wages and benefits....especially benefits, since Fred reneged on your pension.

As I've said many times before, my concern is for those who have to stay and put up with it. I'm topped-out and maxed-out under the old plan, so none of this will probably ever benefit me personally. It makes me sick to see the way FedEx takes advantage of it's people, and I will always do my best to educate them as to the degree to which they are being screwed-over.

 

[vantexan]

MrFedEx can you ever reply without insulting the poster? Your blind hatred of FedEx and anyone that likes working at FedEx really does undermine your cause and says a lot about your character.

How many stops does a UPS driver do in a day? If I'm doing 75 to 100 stops and they are doing 150 to 200, then yes, I would says that a UPS does 100% more work. Perhaps they only have to work 50% harder to do that extra work but that still isn't worth a 10% pay increase. And I'm critically underpaid right now am I? First of all, you have no idea how much I make but then again I forgot that you already know everything up to and including the results of contract negotiations.

Gotta call B.S. here. FedEx tries to maximize productivity on all their rts. I can't do any more than I'm already doing due to necessity to get back to station to turn in outbound. The only way we'll ever do as many stops as UPS drivers is if we are doing their volume and our rts will shrink to their size. Whether you do 175 stops in a small area or 75 in a much larger area or 35 to 45 in a huge area there's only so much that can be done within the constraints of D.O.T. rules, our particular rts, and the logistics of moving freight to and from our particular stations.

 

[quadro]

OK, genius. There are 4 UPS drivers in the area I cover with 1 FedEx route. 2 of them have routes that are basically only a couple of major streets. If I do 100 stops a day and each of them does 150 because they're right next to each other, who is working harder?

A stop is a stop is a stop. How hard is it to drive between stops? A union likely won't affect me one way or the other. My concern is that people don't take the time to research and think things through and they end up listening to the misleading info that you post. It is a lot harder to get in and out of your vehicle 150 times a day than it is 100 times a day. So thanks for proving my point. The UPS driver does about 50% more work than you and, for arguments sake, let's say he works just 25% harder. Voting in a union isn't going to suddenly provide FedEx extra volume. Common sense tells you that some of the money to pay for whatever is negotiated (which we don't know what that would be even though you like to think you do) is going to come from requiring couriers to do more work in less time. Given that there is no additional volume, that work will come from other employees. Can you say "layoffs"? That's a good way to look out for each other.

If you're happy with your deal, BE FREAKING HAPPY, OK? Don't vote for a union and continue being one of Fred's lackeys forever if you wish. But don't come on here misrepresenting the issues and expect me to agree with you. Even if you're topped-out in a major market you are making significantly less than a UPS driver in terms of both wages and benefits....especially benefits, since Fred reneged on your pension.

I have no expectation of you agreeing with me and I would suggest you take your own advise and stop misrepresenting the issues. Once again, you cloud the issue by casting aspersions on me rather than explaining how you believe 150 stops is less work than 100 stops.

As I've said many times before, my concern is for those who have to stay and put up with it. I'm topped-out and maxed-out under the old plan, so none of this will probably ever benefit me personally. It makes me sick to see the way FedEx takes advantage of it's people, and I will always do my best to educate them as to the degree to which they are being screwed-over.

You say educate, I say mislead. There is certainly a lot of opportunity for FedEx to improve but blindly assuming that a union is the lesser of two evils is going to lead many people down the wrong path. Your claims all boil down to the fact that a union will ensure more pay, better benefits, and the return of a defined benefit pension plan. You rarely, if ever, point out the pitfalls of voting in a union. If you truly wanted to educate people you would present the pros and cons of a union, not just your assumed beliefs of a contract negotiation.