Why do you talk franchise? No one here is a franchise.
The negotiation scam
- Thread starter fedupcontractor
- Start date
Why do you talk franchise? No one here is a franchise.
The rules of business are no different. You can spin it how you want. Fedex pics it's vendors. So does every other customer. In this model you only have one customer. Welcome to the real world. The ISP model probably won't be challenged because they have gotten rid of all the individuals who got butt hurt. The larger contractors have figured out a lawsuit would hurt them in the long run.
Since you can't answer questions, correct me then. Tell me when the clause was questioned, and its enforcement challenged. Tell me, don't answer.
Agree and disagree, you have to put your rose colored glasses down for a moment though, where do these businesses manage their drivers, what is the address of the business franchise since the rules are no different. Large contractors time will come, and X will discard per usual.
Last edited:
ISp is still in its infancy, as soon as x screws one of the ISPs over it will be challenged and x will lose. It will take some time as x will make changes to the contract until they corner themselves. Like I said the ISPs are not my enemy x is. Unfortunately, there might be some collateral damage.
It came into existence the last schedule k. I'm not subject to it because i didn't sign it.Since you can't answer questions, correct me then. Tell me when the clause was questioned, and its enforcement challenged. Tell me, don't answer.
Overall, it's not uncommon for X to write something in knowing fill well it isn't enforceable but knowing they can get significant compliance just by putting it in. Not unlike when X gave a monetary settlement to contractors when transitioning to ISP. Supposedly it was to incentivized not suing and most didn't but some lawyers out of MN were able to successfully challenge that clause...but you knew that already, didn't you?
ISP is contracting by another name. There is no reason not to challenge it law firms can find where it fails to adhere to contract law.
No, wouldn't you call that a challenge to ISP? What was the result?
There is a reason.
No. That was a payment to owners who didn't get to scale and thus they were never in the ISP model.
Go on. What is the reason?
They meet them at the terminal (just like many contractors meet their employees at job sites). The address is the address of the corporation. I consider that a convenience and most other people would too.
As for the rose colored glasses, I have none. I'm on this site learning. I own other businesses but am no affiliated with any ISP or IC business nor Fedex.
Some of the arguments about this being a scam because there is one customer is a joke. There are many examples of this across the nation. Many big companies have cut departments (especially) in the construction side where the former exec running it starts a business serving just them. Tyson is the 1st one that pops to my mind but there are many others. The guy that owns the company that refurbs Tyson's chicken houses works only for them. It will soon be the way many corps operate. They have the money to get any inconvenient law changed.
So how did the owners challenge a clause to an agreement they never signed? The clause has been changed under ISP from how ridiculously it was written in OA, which is what owners challenged, since that was the agreement they under, is my understanding.
Job sites, chicken houses, Mickey d's, please read some business law. Let me ask you this since you have never had any skin in this game.......What difference as a consumer do you see in the tasks performed by express and ground delivery people?
Also how many independent contractors in the delivery industry with at least 10 trucks, have one customer (other than the defacto managers for X ground)? Just give me 5, if you can find that many.
So just because one has one customer they are employees. That is a flawed statement. If every business that was different from all the rest was breaking the law there would be no innovation.
So are you a lawyer? If so get a case started. I am giving you examples of the same set of rules you are saying are illegal that are never challenged. I don't need to read business law. If I need a lawyer I hire the scumbag.
That's not what I asked.
No, not a lawyer. I'm sure when you need a lawyer the one you hire will appreciate that you think of them as a scumbag. You examples are not relevant to this industry. How can an Express driver build chicken coops when they are piloting the plane making deliveries? That would be innovation!
Last edited:
Labor laws are not industry specific.
Similar threads
