One of the most frustrating aspects of the fight over a field-leveling labor amendment to the FAA reauthorization bill has been FedEx’s blatant efforts to mislead both Members of Congress and the public with disinformation and misinformation – especially its lobbyist’s intellectually dishonest PR campaign to characterize the law change as a “bailout” for UPS.
In a guest column published today in the Buffalo News, Rep. James Oberstar, chairman of the House Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, brings some much-needed clarity and facts to the conversation:
The labor issue in question stems from language dropped into the conference report on a similar aviation bill by the Republican Congress in 1996 — language that was not in either the House or Senate versions of the bill. This provision gave FedEx special status and had effectively prevented thousands of Fed- Ex employees from organizing a union and bargaining collectively. UPS drivers are now governed by one set of federal labor laws, while FedEx drivers who do the same work are covered by another. We are only trying to correct what had been misdone in a past authorization and restore basic fairness under the law.
My provision to change this special status has been in the public domain since 2007. It was agreed to by a vote of 51-18 in the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and the full bill, including the labor language, has been approved by the full House of Representatives three times.
If anything threatens this legislation, it is the willingness of the two senators from Tennessee to kill the entire bill at the behest of FedEx. The company and its allies are threatening to use procedural maneuvers to stop consideration of the bill in the Senate. At the same time, FedEx CEO Fred Smith has begun a campaign to try to paint me as the obstacle to progress on the safety provisions. Unfortunately, News editorial writers appear to agree with that spin.
In short, the labor amendment simply closes a legal “loophole” which has given FedEx an unfair competitive marketing advantage. The provision is actually an elimination of a “corporate welfare benefit” for FedEx, not a “bailout” for UPS. As such, we continue to urge the Senate to ignore FedEx’s spin and correct this inequity in our nation’s labor law.
#1 by Driver on May 31st, 2010
| Quote
It shows you where we are in America, when we have someone (Mr. Oberstar) standing up to a very large corporation and trying to do something that is good and just, but is being criticized for it. This man is a hero for many of us who work for Fedex and ALL our elected officials need to rally behind this man.
#2 by Lynn Oliver on June 7th, 2010
| Quote
I think there needs to be fairnest for UPS and FedEX. The playing fields need to level for both sides so we need to ensure that occures.
#3 by Common Sense on June 30th, 2010
| Quote
I concur with Lynn but come with a flipped argument; why doesn’t Oberstar change the rules for UPS to make them more like FedEx than make FedEx more like UPS? I know every time I get a package from FedEx it is in better condition than UPS so they must be doing something right. Each time unions get involved they manage to mess things up (Public schools, GM, the US government, need I go on?)