A few weeks ago, the anonymous hired guns who run FedEx’s disingenuous anti-UPS website released the results of a “poll” which purportedly shows that a majority of Americans support the notion of treating FedEx differently under the law from every other similar company in the country.
The headline for the press release announcing these results boldly claimed that “Eight in 10 Americans Oppose More Government Bailouts and Seven in 10 Say Brown Bailout Is Unfair.” Among the self-described “highlights” of this so-called poll:
• “75 percent say the reliability of overnight package delivery – knowing that a package will be delivered, when promised – is extremely or very important.”
• “61 percent say overnight package delivery is extremely or very important to the U.S. economy.”
• “81 percent of those polled believe FedEx and UPS have been operating successfully for decades, and since consumers have choices, competitive prices and service options, there is no need to change the laws.”
• “58 percent of those polled say they would be extremely or very concerned if Congress considered legislation that could make the overnight delivery system less reliable in the United States.”
• “70 percent say it is unfair for Congress to impose trucking regulations on FedEx’s shipping business because four out of five packages delivered by FedEx travel by air. UPS began as a trucking company and delivers four out of five packages by truck.”
• “67 percent of those polled oppose this proposed action by Congress to impose trucking regulations on FedEx Express.”
This “poll” was apparently paid for by FedEx (or one of its unnamed surrogates) and conducted by Public Opinion Strategies (POS) – which ought to be ashamed of itself for allowing its name to be associated with this kind of flapdoodle. Let’s go point-by-point.
1.) Gee, huge surprise that 75 percent of people think that reliable package delivery is “extremely or very important.” Duh. Problem is the legislation FedEx is so opposed to has nothing to do with the company’s ability to deliver its packages on time.
2.) Ditto. Duh.
3.) Fact is both FedEx and UPS have, indeed, been operating successfully. However, an inequity in federal law gives FedEx a competitive advantage. Our laws shouldn’t pick and choose winners and losers in the marketplace. It should treat all parties equally. That’s the American way and that’s why a change in this particular law is called for.
4.) Well, yes, if this change in the law would “make the overnight delivery system less reliable in the United States,” that would be cause for concern. But it won’t – so this is just another FedEx Express red herring.
5.) Problem is, FedEx Express is no longer just an airline and UPS is no longer just a trucking company. Both have “morphed” their operations over the last decade or so and both now use trucks and planes to deliver express packages. Therefore, both companies should be treated the same under our laws.
6.) Congress isn’t trying to impose “trucking regulations” on FedEx. It’s trying to impose the same labor law to one express delivery company which applies to every other express delivery company.
This so-called “poll” was anything but professional and objective. It was, at best, a “push” poll designed to elicit a desired result – the kind of underhanded polling widely condemned by polling professionals.
I mean, these results aren’t much different from poll results showing that 75 percent of people think fresh air is good for you or that 81 percent think it’d be bad for Congress to impose Canadian Football rules on the NFL.
I’m surprised there wasn’t a question in here assessing the public’s view of puppies and how they might impact the express delivery system. Sheesh.
Seriously, pollsters Glen Bolger and Bill McInturff, co-founders of POS, should be ashamed of themselves for taking money and being used like this by FedEx. I know the economy is hurting right now, guys, but isn’t your reputation something worth protecting? Or should POS rename itself “Anything for a Buck”?
By the way, if 75 percent of people say it is “extremely or very important” that their packages and letters be reliably delivered on time, why do we still have the post office?
#1 by Sam Jones on July 5th, 2009
| Quote
I’d be willing to bet that 100% of the package delivery by both companies is by truck! Never have I seen a Fed-Ex or UPS plane land on Main Street to deliver a package!
#2 by Tommy Gun on July 5th, 2009
| Quote
And American Airlines pick up passengers at the hotel with planes.Whats your point?
#3 by C.S on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
His point is that the RLA is meant to govern airlines not truck drivers.Duh!
#4 by Tommy Gun on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
But the truck drivers work for an airline.So do all the other people at American.Only pilots should be protected?
#5 by chuckmuth on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
Dear “Tommy Gun.” You have now claimed at least twice on this blog that American Airlines picks up passengers from hotels and takes them to the terminal. I’ve never heard of this service and neither has anyone I’ve talked to about this – including at least one AA pilot.
I also called American Airlines today and asked if such a shuttle service was available from their airline. The response was that shuttle services such as you are describing are provided by the hotels, not American Airlines.
So it’s put up or shut time, Mr. “Gun.” Back up your claim that American Airlines picks up and delivers passengers from and to hotels or I will remove your unsubstantiated claim from this blog. FedEx is already putting out enough anonymous false information as it is. We don’t need any more from you.
#6 by Tommy Gun on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
everyone that works at American Airlines is a pilot? i think not.
#7 by chuckmuth on July 6th, 2009
| Quote
Never said they were. I have simply pointed out that local ground delivery is NOT an “integral” part of the airline operation, such as pilots, airplane mechanics, etc.
I also pointed out the American Airlines informed me that, contrary to your claim, they do NOT pick up and drop off passengers to and from hotels. I’ve challenged you to back up your claim which, we now see, you are unable to do and thus, your effort to dodge the challenge and change the subject.
Sorry, Mr. “Gun,” you have no credibility on any aspect of this issue unless you can put your money where your mouth is.
Does American Airlines pick up and drop off passengers at hotels the way you claim or not? If you answer yes, prove it. And if so, then prove that those drivers for those American Airlines shuttle vans are covered under the RLA and not the NRLA. At that point your argument will be worth considering.
We’re waiting….
#8 by ofb1995 on July 10th, 2009
| Quote
Fedex Express 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.
Also, that BrownBailout website bullshit. No one is allowed to post an opposing view on there. It’s moderated and any negative comments are promptly discarded. Some PUBLIC forum, eh?
#9 by ofb1995 on July 10th, 2009
| Quote
Fedex Express 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.
Also, that BrownBailout website bullshit. No one is allowed to post an opposing view on there. It’s moderated and any negative comments are promptly discarded. Some PUBLIC forum, eh?