MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
They kept "dealing" with Chhabra- Smoley after Vincent Chhabra was arrested and its main fulfillment pharmacy was shut down. Yea FedEx didn't know anything.
You Sorry Bastards
- Thread starter UPSBOT
- Start date
59 Dano
I just want to make friends!
They kept "dealing" with Chhabra- Smoley after Vincent Chhabra was arrested and its main fulfillment pharmacy was shut down. Yea FedEx didn't know anything.
I see. So it was dealing with the pharmacies that the DEA deemed legal enough to keep open, even after asking the DEA for a list of pharmacies to avoid (that the DEA refused to provide).
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Keep deflecting, it's the FedEx way. Playing dumb is also a FedEx tactic. Which you do so well, but it's not acting.
Dude, our station hauls a ton of
out of the border stations every day....It's a well known joke.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
Google Inc. in 2011 agreed to pay $500 million to settle allegations by the U.S. Department of Justice that it profited from ads purchased by online pharmacies that the search giant knew was improperly selling prescription drugs.
At the opposite end of the spectrum is FedEx rival UPS. To avoid similar criminal charges, the Atlanta-based company agreed last year to pay $40 million and change its policies and procedures, including appointing a compliance officer to monitor online pharmacies.
The officer's job is to report suspicious activity to senior executives and federal investigators. UPS was also required to hire an outside auditor to oversee the compliance officer and both appointments were approved by the DOJ, UPS spokeswoman Susan Rosenberg.
"The issue of illegal online pharmacies is not about privacy but a matter of supply chain integrity and the creation of processes to ensure that illegal activity is not facilitated," Rosenberg said. She said the agreement with the government doesn't require UPS to search packages.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/fedex-charges-raise-online-pharmacy-issues-24726188
At the opposite end of the spectrum is FedEx rival UPS. To avoid similar criminal charges, the Atlanta-based company agreed last year to pay $40 million and change its policies and procedures, including appointing a compliance officer to monitor online pharmacies.
The officer's job is to report suspicious activity to senior executives and federal investigators. UPS was also required to hire an outside auditor to oversee the compliance officer and both appointments were approved by the DOJ, UPS spokeswoman Susan Rosenberg.
"The issue of illegal online pharmacies is not about privacy but a matter of supply chain integrity and the creation of processes to ensure that illegal activity is not facilitated," Rosenberg said. She said the agreement with the government doesn't require UPS to search packages.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/fedex-charges-raise-online-pharmacy-issues-24726188
That seems pretty silly. They want UPS to hire a compliance officer to report what the DEA already knows is happening, knows who is doing it, and knows where the shipments are going. If law enforcement wanted to shut it down, they could easily with federal, state, and local teams.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
I think you are missing the point. This whole process is to eliminate the carrier from facilitating illegal drug purchases and conspiring with these rogue pharmacies. If anything it covers them from future litigation as long as they follow the protocol. The charges against FedEx look to be more serious and if convicted could really do some damage to their brand.
I think the point is that law enforcement should do their job. I understand you hate Fedex, but how do you exonerate the DEA when they already had all they needed to close down these operations without Fedex or UPS?
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
I think your relationship with with FedEx is clouding your judgement. The DEA did their job. They shut down these 2 specific companies and arrested one of the company's top executives. Now they are going after the co conspirator. It's pretty obvious as to why you are trying to defend FedEx. FedEx is no more above the law than you or I.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
The federal investigation of the two shipping giants stems from a blitz against online pharmacies that was launched in 2005. Since then, dozens of arrests have been made, thousands of websites shuttered and tens of millions of dollars and pills seized worldwide as investigators broadened the probe beyond the operator.
http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/fedex-charges-raise-online-pharmacy-issues-24726188
hypo hanna
Well-Known Member
The DEA needs PR cover too. They know better then the rest of us what a failure the war on drugs has been but doesn't mean they want to give up their billions in funding.
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
We have had DIAD training concerning this issue----I have to assume that this was part of the settlement.
The DEA's cover is going to be blown if Fedex takes this to trial. Both sides have reason to reach a deal.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
And I'm sure you are praying that will happen.
Why would I? Even if Fedex had to pay $1.6 billion, it's not a long term detriment to the company and it's not money I was going to see anyway.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
Think again Fred Fan.
Smith will pickpocket the employees one way or another. For example, no raises at for 5 years. Vacation/personal days/sick days cut back, even higher insurance premiums the next couple of years etc.
When Zapmail crashed in 1989, the loss was $720 million dollars and Fred's been recouping that loss ever since. One reason why it takes 30 years to reach top scale these days. Before then it was 18 months.
Think about it.
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
$1.6 billion is no pocket change. It would put a huge hole in profits for quite some time. Stock prices would drop like a rock and their image would be severely damaged. All that effects your cash cow. What's bad for FedEx is bad for you.
Cactus
Just telling it like it is
And what's good for FedEx is not necessarily good for you.
if you read what the "Motley Fool" had to say about it (it's posted on latest FedEx headlines) you'd see why your assessment is wrong. And what's bad for Fedex (recession) has actually been very good for Ground. Think like Fred. If he has a $1.6 billion bill to pay, where does he want more volume being handled?
