NLRB "Operational Freedom" Guidelines 2019

bacha29

Well-Known Member
Doesn't matter who they are employed by. There won't be any big push by anyone to change the status quo. Only a big union seeking to spend many years and many millions could change anything. A few drivers of an ISP might try to organize, or maybe some of every ISP in a terminal and could be successful against some or all of the ISPs, but the ISP doesn't have any resources to pay union benefits of wages. So the ISP would either 1:hire scabs or 2:fail to service his routes, and lose his contract. Those drivers would be out of a job, and the current NLRB wouldn't step in to say fedex was a co-employer.

The NLRB is going to deny a unions claim that the drivers are fedex employees, so the unions would need to organize each ISPs drivers separately. A union might even get more than half a terminals drivers voting to unionize but depending on how the vote is spread out, maybe only a small % ISPs actually face a loss to the union. Kind of like how Hillary won the general election but lost the presidency because of where the votes were.

In the unlikely event that fedex stepped in directly and fired a ISP who had drivers trying to unionize, that ISP can't make much of a legal claim for damages. The ISP is going to lose his ability to service the contract sooner or later anyway when facing a unionization effort, so fedex has no reason to step in. Other contractor/ISPs won't step in to join any legal fight- they have too much invested at risk. And the ISP is partly designed to make it unattractive to the unions to try to organize drivers if they have to organize one ISP at a time. It could MAYBE be done, but very expensive and very long term.

The unions would be more likely to target an Amazon ADP if they do end up with 30-60 routes requiring maybe 100 employees.

There is no real point in talking about whether drivers are employees anymore. They ARE employees. Moot point, as I said, and who employs them is moot too. They have the same rights and legal protections that every employee has already. The NLRB won't be involved unless a unionization effort is somehow thwarted by fedex.

Fedex will likely just go ahead and payoff any liability a driver might cause if the ISP is unable to pay to keep it out of the courts. For example- an employee of an ISP with a criminal background, or bad driving record slips through the system and kills a busload of kids in an accident, or forces his way into a customers home on a delivery and rapes a woman, fedex could and should be held liable. They will probably pay it off rather than fight to prove they shouldn't be liable. It's already been found in court that fedex has used this model to avoid liability and confuse the issue.

Fedex saves so much now with this model, that an occasional payoff to protect it means little. Attorneys don't want to fight a class action just to prove some claim of employment status for ISPs. They learned their lesson with the last class actions that went on for for at least 12 years.
We are well aware of the fact that if there is a move by contractor employed drivers to join with the IBT or similar transportation union the contractors contract will be terminated That much is a finished matter The question is would DOJ or state attorney's general move on the matter as it pertains to the manner by which it commands and controls contractors in light of the NLRB return to the previous common law guidelines and it's relationship with state laws?

I'm sure that you if anybody would know that the entire battle began at the state level and was based on the common law guidelines. That was the flash point back then and it might just reignite including potential blow backs from the SCOTUS New Prime vs Olievera case which invalidated the mandatory arbitration hammer trucking companies used to enforce their unilaterally drafted and implemented contracts. It's a new ball game.
 

bbsam

Moderator
Staff member
I think the goal would be to get X named as co-employer and then organize such that no single ISP is targeted. In fact, the ISP’s become something of a non factor.
 

bacha29

Well-Known Member
I think the goal would be to get X named as co-employer and then organize such that no single ISP is targeted. In fact, the ISP’s become something of a non factor.
One party that we may be overlooking here are the one tractor one route line haul contractors from a standpoint of what impact the Prime vs Oliviera ruling could have on their past and present agreement with XG.
 

dmac1

Well-Known Member
I think the goal would be to get X named as co-employer and then organize such that no single ISP is targeted. In fact, the ISP’s become something of a non factor.
That is a long term- probably at least a decade or probably 2 decades, and expensive in terms of court time. It would take two long drawn out battles. First the battle to determine that fedex is a co-employer, and then the battle to unionize.

The IBT may not want to focus their attention on it. And I don't think fedex would really fire someone for letting drivers unionize. I think the ISP would fail on his own if his drivers tried to unionize, successful or not. and the drivers would lose their job. Basically, if drivers ask for union wages, the ISP won't be able to pay. In fact, fedex might see it as an opportunity to show other drivers that they will be out of their jobs if they try to unionize.

I believe that it is the NLRB that would rule regarding if fedex was a co-employer for unionization purposes on a national basis, and at this time, they would rule that fedex is not a coemployer. Drivers could succeed in organizing one ISP, or even every ISPin a terminal, or in a state, but every ISP would go broke, and every driver would be out of a job. Fedex would find temp drivers to fill in, or ISPs could hire scabs. It would be such a long battle that no one would really benefit. What is going to help drivers are the multiple states where the minimum wage will be going to $15 an hour. ISPs will need to pay more to keep drivers when they can find easier jobs for the same money an ISP can afford. If fedex needs to pay the ISP more, at some point it will be at a break even point to just hire their own employees. When the ISPs start demanding a return on their investment PLUS a fair wage on their labor, something will break.
 

XEQaF

Well-Known Member
Points well made here. Everyone here may well be retired by the time any significant changes to the model takes place either by way of NLRB rulings, union movements, economic/political environments etc. Real scalability for ISPs and drivers needs to come with pressure on X for more autonomy in deciding direction, but balanced with a higher level of collaboration so that the corporation doesn't override the success of it's ISP partnerships
 
Top