Section 806
H.R. 915 – the 2009-2010 FAA Reauthorization Act of 2009 – would amend title 49, United States Code, to authorize appropriations for the Federal Aviation Administration for fiscal years 2010 through 2012, to improve aviation safety and capacity, to provide stable funding for the national aviation system, and for other purposes.
Section 806 of the bill would change the way federal law treats some drivers for FedEx.
“Representative James L. Oberstar (D-Minn.) inserted an amendment into The Federal Aviation Authority Reauthorization Act of 2009,” writes Adrian Gonzalez of Logistics Viewpoints, “calling for ‘express carrier employee protection’ -shorthand for having FedEx Express employees fall under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA) instead of the Railway Labor Act (RLA). In a nutshell, it’s easier for employees to unionize under NLRA (which covers UPS) than under RLA, which is a big reason why FedEx is fighting back.”
In fighting back, FedEx is claiming that Section 806 is a “bailout” for competitor UPS. UPS is claiming the existing law is an “earmark” for FedEx. This blog obviously believes FedEx is barking up the wrong tree on this issue and is dedicated to fleshing out this issue decidedly from a conservative/libertarian point of view.
Here’s the exact language which has giant package delivery company FedEx facing off against giant package delivery company UPS:
SEC. 806. EXPRESS CARRIER EMPLOYEE PROTECTION.
(a) In General- Section 201 of the Railway Labor Act (45 U.S.C. 181) is amended–CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(1) by striking ‘All’ and inserting ‘(a) In General- All’;CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(2) by inserting ‘and every express carrier’ after ‘common carrier by air’; andCommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(3) by adding at the end the following:CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(b) Special Rules for Express Carriers-CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(1) IN GENERAL- An employee of an express carrier shall be covered by this Act only if that employee is in a position that is eligible for certification under part 61, 63, or 65 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations, and only if that employee performs duties for the express carrier that are eligible for such certification. All other employees of an express carrier shall be covered by the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act (29 U.S.C. 151 et seq.).CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(2) AIR CARRIER STATUS- Any person that is an express carrier shall be governed by paragraph (1) notwithstanding any finding that the person is also a common carrier by air.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
‘(3) EXPRESS CARRIER DEFINED- In this section, the term ‘express carrier’ means any person (or persons affiliated through common control or ownership) whose primary business is the express shipment of freight or packages through an integrated network of air and surface transportation.’.CommentsClose CommentsPermalink
(b) Conforming Amendment- Section 1 of such Act (45 U.S.C. 151) is amended in the first paragraph by striking ‘, any express company that would have been subject to subtitle IV of title 49, United States Code, as of December 31, 1995,’.
#1 by Bennie on July 9th, 2009
| Quote
i am a ups employee but still a conservative and wanted make sure that this admendment is not messing with none of our other rights. it looks like to me it is just trying to level out the playing field. what do you think?
#2 by troy on July 9th, 2009
| Quote
ups is going about this the wrong way. you don’t correct government interfering with your business by demanding more government interference.
#3 by Bob Larino on July 10th, 2009
| Quote
It is apparent that UPS is trying to establish that if you want to be in the package delivery business, the rules should be the same for all participants. As for taking it to congress, there is no other way to change laws in this country other than to go to those he can rewrite or ammend them (congress). It’s amazing in this country that the only line of defense for such a large company is to create a campaign of misinformation. I think GM should buy some planes and establish themselves as an integral service… Oh wait they did get a bailout.. they took money.. I haven’t read anyone say that UPS took money from the government because that would be an ouright lie. And I guess such an integral division of FedEx as their Express division would be right to resort to handcuffing congress or insinuate that if they change the law, FedEx would cancel their Boeing order.
#4 by FedEx 4 Life on July 31st, 2009
| Quote
Well, when you’re an airline and your business model is threatened by this legislation, then yes, it would make perfect sense. Boeing didn’t exactly say no to the provision, either.
#5 by JTB on April 17th, 2010
| Quote
When the “officials” don’t listen to the people we no longer have a government of the people by the people. I have and remain a long term employee of Federal Express nearly 3 decades. Over those years I have not seen a reason to join any union and still don’t. I believe that when a company is run effective without governmental interference we then are afforded the freedoms America is proud of. It is time for the people to voice their voice to congress and oppose the “Brown Bail out”. Call congress now. Get involved.
#6 by Scozzy on May 26th, 2010
| Quote
The post by JTB seems like it was written by a FedEx media campaign.
As the facts show, FedEx’s other NLRA-regulated employees have not joined a union, so what makes you think its truck drivers will? From what I understand, FedEx treats its drivers very well. People don’t unionize for fun.
And calling it a “Brown Bailout” is such a bold-faced lie. There is no bailout. All the amendment would do is level the playing field by ending FedEx’s special treatment. It’s a government-sponsored competitive advantage. Stop lying. It’s un-American.
#7 by Marty in Pa. on June 9th, 2010
| Quote
The problem with this amendment is it benefits 2 entities, The Teamsters because they need Fedex’s Pension money to remain solvent. Unions served a purpose 70 years ago but now they are just a group of cronies looking to prey on uninformed individuals and continue to keep their pyramid scheme afloat (or until they get a bailout). It also benefits UPS since they are saddled by a union and cant get out from under it. The biggest difference between Fedex and UPS is how freight is moved. Most Fedex freight is flown and any disruption in labor at one location could cause potential problems throughout the country. UPS with their massive trucking network can work around these distractions. Fedex is not trying to stop unionization but rather if the drivers wish to unionize then do so as one group across the country so as not to disrupt the network. Fedex employees have had the right to do this since day 1, but havent………..Think about it, what are the advantages of a union????????? I have a voice and am capable of speaking for myself, I like knowing if I will have a pension at retirement and I know that I am very fortunate to work for a company like Fedex that treats its employees with respect and listens to their ideas and opinions!!!! Wake up congress stay out of business and stop letting the Unions buy your votes!!!!!
#8 by KGBIRD on June 29th, 2010
| Quote
This is no special deal for UPS, or theTeamsters, it simply allows Fedex worker to form unions locally vs. nationaly, as far as the pension goes any fedex employee with 20+years(like me) knows the truth about the pension how we all just got screwed,wake up Marty the numbers dont LIE. 2% for 25yrs based on your best 5 grossing years ,nice how they change the rules after all these year REAL FAIR MARTY