In response to an earlier column, reader “scdaddyo” (FedEx supporters rarely, if ever, use their real names) wrote:
“FedEx Express is the largest Airline in the world. . . . UPS is the largest trucking company in the world.”
Well, perhaps Federal Express, now FedEx Express, was started as an airline company and UPS was started as a trucking company, but over the last decade or so both have morphed into competing express package delivery companies.
FedEx Express has planes and trucks; UPS has planes and trucks. The two companies have distinctions without differences. If makes no more sense to treat express delivery company FedEx Express differently under the law from express delivery company UPS today than it would be to treat Wells Fargo, originally started as a stagecoach, as an express delivery company today rather than as a bank.
As much as FedEx Express would like to debate this issue as if we were still living in 1971, we’re now in the 21st century. Heck, Al Gore still hadn’t even invented the Internet when Fred Smith started Federal Express. Fed and Fred need to get with the times.
FedEx Express is no longer just an “airline,” if it ever was.
“Scdaddyo” continues:
“As to your point about putting FedEx under NLRA does not mean Teamsters will take over FedEx – are you nuts? Do you know how the Teamsters work? They will make FedEx their top priority.”
The only problem with this is – well, the facts.
What we’re talking about here are the 86,000-plus drivers who work for FedEx Express, not the drivers who work for FedEx Ground or FedEx Freight. In fact, there are already some 100,000 FedEx workers currently working under the same National Labor Relations Act that UPS workers operate under.
Now, if the Teamsters – and we all know how they work, right? – haven’t been able to unionize all of the other FedEx drivers, why does FedEx Express think the Teamsters will be any more effective in unionizing FedEx Express drivers? Even if they did make it their top priority.
Good ol’ “scdaddyo” followed up with:
“How about answering who, other than UPS or the Teamsters, benefits by putting the largest Airline in the World under the NLRA? Perhaps you? Are you a closet UPS stockholder? Or closet Teamsters supporter?”
Ah, yes. The old trick of trying to change the subject from the substance of the debate when you are losing it by accusing your opponent of having a vested interest on one side and, therefore, couldn’t possibly have a valid point.
But no, I do not own UPS stock – though I do have a UPS shipping account and a mailbox at a UPS store. I also have a brother working for UPS; however, he and I have never discussed this issue, not even once.
But what does any of that have to do with the merits of the debate? Even if I did have UPS stock up the wazoo, the facts of the matter would remain that FedEx and UPS are both express delivery shipping companies and should be governed by the same labor law. It really is just that simple.
As for being a Teamster supporter….you gotta be kidding? If I had my way I’d ban all unions as un-American purveyors of European socialism. But then again, I’m sugar-coating it.
Our friend “scdaddyo” wraps up with the following:
“If the NLRA incorporates Airlines and Franchised businesses what’s next? Will it go after ocean freight just because they too offer delivery from the port to the final leg using a truck?”
Now, unless I miss my guess, ocean freight couldn’t, under any circumstance, be considered in the business of express delivery service. So let’s not be ridiculous here.
On the other hand, let’s take “scdaddyo’s” argument to its logical conclusion in the other direction.
If FedEx can claim that its 86,000 FedEx Express package delivery drivers are part of their “integrated” airline and, therefore, should be covered under the Railway Labor Act rather than the National Labor Relations Act, FedEx could just as well go out and start a national chain of gas stations to compete with Chevron and say THEY were part of its “integrated” airline and be covered under the RLA instead of the NLRA.
Hey, package delivery drivers get hot during the day, don’t they? So why not start a national chain of ice cream stores and “integrate” them into the airline and compete against Dairy Queen? Drivers gotta eat, too. So why not start a nationwide chain of burger joints to compete with Mickey D’s and Burger King?
To buy FedEx Express’s argument that it can “integrate” any business and compete with other businesses and still retain favorable advantages as an airline under the law is a bridge to nowhere too far.
The bottom line remains: FedEx Express is today an express package delivery company using trucks and airplanes. UPS is today an express package delivery company using trucks and airplanes. Now, they can conduct their businesses differently in any way they so choose, but the American principle of equality under the law dictates that both companies be treated equally by the government.
So let it be written; so let it be done.
#1 by DAve Scholl on June 27th, 2009
| Quote
I posted this comment before – but since you set up a separate blog for this issue, please allow me to resubmit it.
Basically, you argue that it is unfair for UPS to be under tougher restrictions and regulations than FedEx – giving FedEx an unfair competitive advantage.
Your “solution” is to impose the same regulations and restrictions on Fed Ex out of fairness.
But that is comparable to saying some people pay 50% income tax, and others only 10% – so lets be fair and raise everyone’s tax to 50%.
The true LIBERTARIAN and Free Market response is to REDUCE the regulations and restricitons on UPS to match those of FedEx.
LESS REGULATION – NOT MORE.
#2 by chuckmuth on June 27th, 2009
| Quote
So you’re arguing that it’s OK to tax some people 50 percent under the law and others only 10 percent?
Show me the bill which puts UPS drivers under the same law as FedEx Express drivers, and I’ll support it. Please give us the bill number and the lead sponsor.
#3 by FedEx 4 Life on June 29th, 2009
| Quote
I think FedEx Express is an airline and always has been. You’re right in the sense that both companies use trucks and planes to delivery packages, but their business models are very different.
Why would localized strikes by couriers be more devastating to FedEx Express’ business and its hard earned reliability than the other guys? Well, consider that flying a regular flight to a specific city is no easy task and requires a lot of commitment. Having couriers the ability to strike in any city would drastically affect FedEx’s model. Remember, 85% of FedEx Express’ packages are moved by plane.
Consider if all of the couriers in Boston chose to strike. If this occurred, at least during the period of the strike, FedEx would have great difficulty (or outright inability) in delivering all of the packages to that city and still preserve the 10:30 a.m. money-back guarantee – which is the purpose of the RLA – to protect the consumer from this happening. So it may not make sense to run a flight to Boston during this localized strike (doing so would cost money for fuel, for pilots etc. yet no packages would reach their ultimate destination).
Consequently, because of the way the air-based network works, it may not even make sense to fly a plane with overnight packages OUT of Boston in this scenario because doing so would first require either flying an empty plane to Boston, or first flying a plane full of overnight cargo that can’t be delivered to Boston. The latter would mean using jet fuel to fly a plane full of overnight packages, unload the cargo, and then let the packages pile up until the demands of a localized group of couriers are met. Of course it would be easier and not as painful to a company and its customers to just send a truck to the same city and let a trailer full of 2 and 3 Day packages sit in a warehouse until the strike ends, at least if you were a Ground based company. But Fedex Express is not a Ground based company, yet everyone wants to say that they should be playing by the same rules as one that is.
It’s interesting that everyone is criticizing FedEx for threatening to not purchase all 30 Boeing 777s but at the same time they think FedEx should be playing by the same rules as the other company. I’m not saying FedEx should or shouldn’t buy all 30 but think about this: Why would FedEx, an airline-based delivery company that may be forced to play by rules that are more applicable to a Ground based delivery company (which FedEx Express isn‘t), buy even MORE planes without evaluating what effect such legislation would have on the company?
I also find it interesting that UPS has chose to switch sides on their belief of this issue. FedEx has always had the same stance. UPS tried for years in the 90s to get their air division reclassified under the RLA but failed. Now, they’ve switched their position.
#4 by morocca on June 29th, 2009
| Quote
Where is this 85% air coming from ? These people do not work for Fedex. We have point to point,ECO( East Coast Overlay ),Express Saver being trucked, etc.
No evidence is being presented that this is true. The propaganda continues.
#5 by chuckmuth on June 30th, 2009
| Quote
Nice try “FedEx4Life,” but your argument doesn’t fly….as I explain HERE.
#6 by JC on July 3rd, 2009
| Quote
It would be so much easier, and FAIR, to raise the regulation of one company, than to lower the regulations of many companies. UPS isn’t the only delivery company operating at a disadvantage! UPS’s Reputation speaks for itself and would never operate at an unfair level of competition and risk tarnishing it 100+ years or excellent service to it customers!
#7 by FedEx 4 Life on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
Type your comment here
Tell that to R.E.A. Oh, that’s right, they’ve been out of business since the 70s. Thank you, UPS!