Kevin L. Kearns, president of the U.S. Business and Industry Council – certainly anything but a “shill” for UPS – lays out the argument for changing existing law so that FedEx Express drivers are treated the same as express drivers for every other company in a column appearing today in the Atlanta Journal Constitution. Some highlights:
Because of an unreasonable classification of its Express division employees, FedEx enjoys a permanent competitive advantage, neither earned nor logical, over its main rival, UPS.
Labor relations law that governs the operations of rivals FedEx and UPS is determined by two statutes: the Railway Labor Act (1926) and the National Labor Relations Act (1935).
The RLA covers workers in the railroad and airline industries, while the NLRA governs most other private sector employees. The rights of employees are markedly different under the two laws, and the disparate treatment can be used to FedEx’s advantage. . . .
Because UPS was originally organized as a trucking company, its drivers are governed by the NLRA. UPS has since entered the airline package delivery business, in competition with FedEx.
Thus, FedEx Express drivers, who do the same work as the UPS drivers, have fewer rights because the company was originally organized as an airline.
In other words, the past has been institutionalized at the expense of current reality. Truck drivers, and in fact all employees, should be defined by labor law according to the work that they do, not by corporate history.
FedEx touts the fact that it is routinely considered one of the best companies for which to work. If it truly is a great place to work, FedEx has nothing to fear from the application of the NLRA to its Express division employees. . . . .
There is currently an effort in Congress to correct this injustice to both FedEx Express drivers and FedEx competitors. Section 806 of the FAA Reauthorization Act, would require that only those employees of express delivery companies who perform airline-specific functions (e.g., pilots and aircraft mechanics) would be covered by the Railway Labor Act. All others would be covered by the National Labor Relations Act.
It is clear to any impartial observer that similar employees at both FedEx and UPS should be governed by the same law.
It is also clear that the changes embodied in the House legislation merely create a level playing field by treating similar employees equally.
What he said.
#1 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?