An anonymous (naturally) FedEx supporter, “Prayer-Soldier,” writes:
“The Railway Labor Act was established such that entire regions could not be held hostage by union work stoppages at a few hubs of service such as railway stations. As technology progressed, this same concept was extended to air lines because they are tied to air ports as railways are tied to rail yards.”
The problem with this argument is that we’re not talking about work stoppages at railways stations or airports. We’re talking about drivers outside of the airports.
If FedEx pilots – who are already unionized and covered under the Railway Labor Act – were to shut down, say, Chicago or Dallas, that would, indeed, foul up package delivery services for the nation, as there just aren’t a whole lot of people sitting around who can jump into a 747 and replace a striking pilot. That’s why pilots are included under the Railway Labor Act and not the National Labor Relations Act.
But we’re not talking about pilots here. What we’re talking about are FedEx Express’s drivers on the ground. And the fact is, a driver strike in Chicago or Dallas, while inconvenient to FedEx customers, wouldn’t bring national commerce to a streaking halt.
As many FedEx proponents have already noted, FedEx has not one, but two separate on-the-ground package delivery companies: FedEx Express and FedEx Ground, both of which cover similar territories. Indeed, FedEx stores get two different drivers from the two separate companies every day; one picks up “Ground” packages, the other picks up “Express” packages.
UPS, by the way, is much more fuel efficient (Big Brown is “green”?). One truck is used to pick up both ground and express packages – and then sorters at the warehouse, you know, sort them out. Why send two trucks to do the job of one?
Anyway, if, say, FedEx Express drivers were placed under the same unionization law as every other express delivery driver, and if, say, the Teamsters, say, successfully organized FedEx Express drivers, and if, say, there happened to be a strike by FedEx Express drivers in Chicago or Dallas – that’s a lot of “ifs,” isn’t it? – but if all of this came to pass, FedEx could simply have drivers from its “Ground” division pick up and deliver the “Express” packages which are on their way anyway. Just like UPS does.
But even if this arrangement was somehow is too big of a burden for the company, it’s not like driving a van requires any special skill set – as does flying a plane. Replacement drivers could be hired by FedEx Express during a labor stoppage to keep packages moving from airports to local businesses and homes.
A FedEx Express driver strike at Chicago or Dallas would not bring national commerce to a halt. That said, it’s certainly true that dealing with a unionized workforce presents companies with a major operating headache, which is why FedEx Express would do well to keep its employees very happy and union free. It just shouldn’t get special treatment under the law.
#1 by FedEx 4 Life on June 30th, 2009
| Quote
Each component of the air express network is equally important in the overall success of this type of service- including drivers. It is an extremly complex device – like an engine. Take something out and it will reduce output or outright not work at all.
You also suggest that FedEx can do things just as UPS does. The problem is, FedEx does not do things the same way UPS does and who are we to tell them they should? Considering linehaul issues and equipment, it is not as simple as replacing “Express drivers” with “Ground drivers. I’m not saying it is or isn’t less efficient method, but the fact remains that FedEx chose this model for the Express divison.
#2 by 5 year UPS Employee on July 3rd, 2009
| Quote
Fedex 4 Life, come on now, seriously? LOGIC dictates that if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck and quacks like a duck it is therefore a DUCK. Unless at a moments notice a Fedex Express (why is express twice anyway?) driver can jump into a plane, take off and deliver that plane and all of its cargo to a destination then I see a major problem. 1) UPS Drivers (Trucks not Planes like at Fedex) are truck drivers 2) Fedex Express Drivers are Truck Drivers. Do you see the similarities between 1 & 2? I do, so therefore they should be held accountable BY Law under the same rules otherwise as stated Fedex Gets Unfair Treatment. A truck driver is a truck driver is a truck driver…..See my point? ‘Nuff Said! BTW I’m only 27 y/o fedex, how can you be so blind to common sense I can see it clearly!
#3 by UPS Killer on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
I think people are forgetting that Fedex carrys the all US mail on thier planes.A strike from Fedex would actually screw everything up.Also,Fedex express trucks pickup packages,but they end up on a plane.Its still part of an airline.When an American Airline picks up passengers from hotels,do they arrive in planes? No.
#4 by chuckmuth on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
U.S. mail on planes, huh? Tell me, what does a strike by FedEx drivers have to do with the planes? The pilots of the planes would still be covered under the RLA.
FedEx Express drivers are part of an express package delivery company; they are NOT an “integral” part of the airline. If the Express drivers went out on strike, that would have no effect on the ability of the planes to fly from city to city.
As for American Airlines competing with taxis and shuttle services, this is the first I’ve heard about it. Nevertheless, if they ARE doing so, then the drivers who shuttle passengers from hotels to the airport should be government by the NRLA, not the RLA since they would not be an “integral” part of the airline itself – though they might be integrated into the corporation.
#5 by UPS Killer on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
“U.S. mail on planes, huh? Tell me, what does a strike by FedEx drivers have to do with the planes?”
Who will load the planes?Whos gonna drive the trucks Whos gonna unload them moron?
#6 by chuckmuth on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
Now you want us to believe that FedEx drivers load and unload the planes? Stop now “UPS Killer,” before you embarrass yourself any further.
As for “Whos gonna drive the trucks” (nice grammar), it doesn’t require any more skill to drive a FedEx truck than it does to drive a car to the local supermarket. Heck, 16-year-olds can do it.
In any event, driving packages from the airport to someone’s home is NOT “integral” to the AIRLINE’s function, therefore, the drivers should not be considered “airline” employees.”
As for me being a “moron,” I just made you look like a fool, so what’s that make you?
#7 by UPS is the Rhoda on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
It doesn’t require skill to drive the FDX truck. right. Its not about how the truck is driven, the reason why FDX is numero uno for “priority”deliverys is because we know how to manage time and get people the package consistently on time. This is not something anyone can learn overnight.
The RLA ruling fits perfectly into FDX corporate model. If Express were under the NLRA and decided to strike, I’m sure the pilots would not continue flying anything and will disrupt service for FDX customers around the country. Makes you wonder though, If UPS and FDX were under the same union (teamsters) would they strike together and totally hold the nation hostage until their demands are met?
#8 by Tommy Gun on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
I dont get your logic.How will packages and mail get to the airports if Fedex goes on strike?
#9 by C.S on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
The bottom line here is this; if Fedex pays us fairly for what we do and starts showing us a little more respect on the job then we won’t go on strike. I’m so sick of hearing people say that if we’re reclassified under the NLRA that it will disrupt our entire operation or shut us down, what a complete lie and scare tactic.
Chuck, keep up the good work, and keep getting the facts out there for everyone to see.Thanks
#10 by chuckmuth on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
Yes, “Tommy Gun,” I understand that many of you FedEx guys don’t get it. That’s the point. You don’t understand the difference between an airline and an express delivery driver.
We’re not talking about driving 18-wheelers here. We’re talking about driving the FedEx Express delivery vans around town.
And if the FedEx Express guys go out on strike (highly unlikely as long as FedEx takes care of its employees), there are plenty of FedEx Ground drivers who could easily step in to pick up the slack. Hell, the Express and Ground drivers already run pretty much the same routes as it is.
#11 by chuckmuth on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
Dear “Rhoda,” the FedEx pilots would continue to fall under the RLA because they are, get this, an “integral” part of the airline. Therefore, their ability to strike just because the express delivery drivers went out on strike would be severely constrained by the law.
You folks really need to stop throwing out these red herrings and get your facts straight.
Also, just because FedEx Express drivers might be put under the same law as UPS drivers, that doesn’t mean the company would automatically go union. In fact, plenty of other FedEx drivers are already operating under the NLRA and have been for a long, long time – and none of them have gone union.
What is it you folks are REALLY afraid of? Competing on a level playing field?
#12 by Tommy Gun on July 4th, 2009
| Quote
Arent the 18 Wheeler guys who drive to the airport part of Express?Wont they go on strike?Am i missing something?
#13 by FedEx 4 Life on July 5th, 2009
| Quote
UPS Employee – it’s simple. Business model, linehaul and logistical issues. “Don’t judge a book by its cover.”
#14 by John on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
Fedex is not the only carrier for US mail, UPS and probably many other airlines carry US Mail, probably depends on amount of mail and destination, so that arguement doesn’t apply here.
#15 by FedEx 4 Life on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
I would mostly agree except you know there are those employees that are unhappy no matter what. This is the type of things unions feed from. I’m not saying that FedEx couldn’t pay us better, offer better incentives, etc., but the answer (from my own experiences) certainly is not the union. If you think it is difficult enough having one entity managing you, imagine two.
#16 by morocca on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
Fedex 4 Life,what is your solution ? You have been a nay sayer for everything Chuck says but you have presented no solutions. Should we leave the status quo ? When was the last time Fedex consulted you in regards to decisions they have made about us ?
#17 by FedEx 4 Life on July 13th, 2009
| Quote
Type your comment here
Solution to what? I assume if you’re referring to its current labor status (Express), my opinion is pretty clear.
In regards to your second question – never. I am grateful for what I have. Certainly I wouldn’t mind having more, but that’s the greed of human nature. I’ve come from much less and I am proud of what I have today. No matter what, people will always be disappointed, so no matter who ‘represents’ you, I guess there is no “one-solution-fits-all.”
#18 by Andy Kubicki on July 14th, 2009
| Quote
I’m an Express employee for almost 25 years now. Though I am not a pro union guy, consider what changes will Fedex have to undergo if we unionize.
Fedex 4 life, you mentioned greed- as if we employees are greedy for wanting to get similar compensation for similar work that our fellow workers get at UPS. Have you looked at the compensation for our executives? Please, do that. You can get a good idea of their compensation and bonuses by looking at a stock site- look at insider trading. Then ask yourself if you are being greedy, or if you are being taken advantage of and want to do something about it. And look at the older employees disappearing at Fedex. Look at UPS. I see more grey haired drivers with UPS (percentage-wise) than I do at my job. I wonder why Fedex is fighting this bill. Hmmmm….
22 years ago, the Teamsters showed up at our gates and we basically told them “thanks, but no, thanks!”. We stood by our employer. Could it be possible that something is different today, or maybe I must be an unhappy disgruntled employee…that must be it!
Federal Express treated us fairly then. We returned the loyalty. But, if you ask anyone who has been around as long as I have, you will hear that things have changed. Fedex is living off the reputation of Federal Express Remove the restrictions of the RLA and have the Teamsters show up at the gates of Fedex today. Are you afraid of this, Fedex?
Why so many anonymous nicks here?
#19 by Andy Kubicki on July 14th, 2009
| Quote
Oh, wait, this is titled “what if Fedex employees went on strike?” What happened when UPS went on strike a few years ago?
#20 by ofb1995 on July 15th, 2009
| Quote
Fedex could have avoided putting themselves into this situation by treating it’s employees better (especially it’s senior employees). Since 1988 they have been implementing policies and procedures that have set their express couriers up for wrongful termination and a diminished chance to reach retirement. 1988 – they changed the eligibility to gain maximum medical benefit coverage in retirement from 10 to 20 years. 1994/95 – they started a program called “gainsharing” which quickly turned into “Best Practices”. The M.A.P.S system (Minimum Acceptable Performance Standard) was also put into use. Both M.A.P.S and Best Practices have been used to terminate (wrongfully) senior employees. It is still being used. I have been there over 20 years and have seen these changes take place and the effect it has had on Fedex’s employees. Add to that Fedex taking away profit sharing early on (which we enjoyed in the 80’s), and their unwillingness to compensate it’s employees with at least an adequate pay rate to keep up with inflation throughout the years (even in times of record profits). Fedex employees don’t want a union to “hamstring” it’s operations, stop commerce, or go on strike, they just want to be treated fairly. Fedex has used it’s RLA status to hide behind so they can abuse and retaliate against targeted employees without fear of retribution. Look at any of the recent employee handbooks they give out to employees (that they ask them to sign off on before receiving). The paragraph that says “the company can modify this publication by amending or terminating any policy, procedure, or employee benefit program at any time.” That does not sound like a People-Service-Profit company philosophy to me.
#21 by FredSmithcanBITEME on July 22nd, 2009
| Quote
The sooner Fred Smith drops dead, the better off we’ll all be. The PSP motto at FedEx has always stood for “People Screwing People”, and Smith could care less about the drivers/sorters/handlers, as witnessed by the high turnover rate and crappy rate of pay/raises/and time it takes to reach top pay. Yet Smith is worth 3 billion dollars, has money to spend on golf tournaments, basketball,football, baseball, etc., but when the economy turns south, who gets hurt?: The employees, ie., termination of the pension plan, termination of contributions to the 401k, cutting managers salary(long over due, these idiots are worthless, spending the entire morning/evening walking around playing pocket pool and asking loaders/sorters/drivers why they aren’t doing more work.
God Bless the Teamsters, God Bless James R. and James P. Hoffa
If Smtih doesn’t like Unions and his employees, may a union made/French conglomerate AirBus fall on him and his buddies.
#22 by FredSmithcanBITEME on July 22nd, 2009
| Quote
When UPS went on strike, FedEx made millions, stopped their money back guarantee and told customers that their deliveries and pickups would be taken care of whenever the driver got there. The drivers, meanwhile got overworked and over-stressed, nothing new at FedEx, and only overtime for hours worked, no bonus, no thank you, this company is really a joke when it comes to how it treats it’s employees. FedEx’s initial success in the 70s is based on UPS going on strike, otherwise FedEx may have gone out of business back then.
God Bless the Teamsters!