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.