Express volume finally moving to Ground...

[MAKAVELI]

You guys don't get it. Doesn't matter who picks up what or who delivers it.

You're looking at it as how you think the RLA works vs how it works.

UPS has an airline that's a separate opco from the regular old ground package division, just like we do.

Is FedEx Express an airline? Yes. End of story.

UPS doesn't have any drivers covered under the RLA. Ttku bootlicker.

 

[Cactus]

FedEx Express is an airline. The debate begins and ends there.

And you say WAGN? Well, Ground sure has some funny looking aircraft then.

 

[Aquaman]

If FedEx Express is an airline, then they're all airline employees and should be classified as such and there's no reasonable argument as to why they shouldn't be.

Well then I guess Express should have a separate opco for Express trucking.

 

[59 Dano]

Not long ago you were telling us that there are some types of sensitive freight that are barred from being handled by third party contractors.

No I wasn't.

 

[59 Dano]

If Express went to a contractor model, drivers wouldn't be Express employees. Ttku boot licker.

I never said they would.

You said that a combination of opcos would cause Express to lose its RLA status. It wouldn't. All Express employees would still be covered by the RLA. The drivers would be employees of Jimmy's Package Delivery Inc and such companies. Sorry that this is about your head but you're going to have to try harder.

 

[vantexan]

Like I said if they could combine the two, using a contractor model, they would have done it already. They will not make Express a contractor model because they will lose their RLA status.

Doesn't the contractor model also limit the possibility of a union?

 

[59 Dano]

UPS doesn't have any drivers covered under the RLA. Ttku bootlicker.

Who said they did? Are you in the wrong debate?

 

[59 Dano]

Well then I guess Express should have a separate opco for Express trucking.

Why would Express have a separate opco to move Express freight?

 

[MAKAVELI]

I never said they would.

You said that a combination of opcos would cause Express to lose its RLA status. It wouldn't. All Express employees would still be covered by the RLA. The drivers would be employees of Jimmy's Package Delivery Inc and such companies. Sorry that this is about your head but you're going to have to try harder.

FedEx's exemption specifies the employees to be under FedEx control and authority. Not Joe Blow Inc.

 

[yadig]

I never said they would.

You said that a combination of opcos would cause Express to lose its RLA status. It wouldn't. All Express employees would still be covered by the RLA. The drivers would be employees of Jimmy's Package Delivery Inc and such companies. Sorry that this is about your head but you're going to have to try harder.

If it weren’t a issue then why not join the two right away? It’s got to be more efficient wouldn’t you agree?

 

[59 Dano]

FedEx's exemption specifies the employees to be under FedEx control and authority.

I think you're at the point that you're just arguing random things for the sake of arguing.

 

[59 Dano]

If it weren’t a issue then why not join the two right away? It’s got to be more efficient wouldn’t you agree?

The obvious answer is that they need direct control over the premium product that carries a higher overhead, and they can reduce costs by rolling deferred service freight to Ground.

 

[MAKAVELI]

I think you're at the point that you're just arguing random things for the sake of arguing.

I think you're at the point that you really need to do some research to argue your point.

https://www.fedbar.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/feature3-jan10-pdf-1.pdf

. The limit [on coverage] is that the carrier must have continuing authority to supervise and direct [its employees]. ... The couriers, tractor-trailer drivers, operations agents and other employees sought by the UAW are employed by FedEx directly. As the record amply demonstrates, these employees, as part of FedEx’s air express delivery system, are supervised by FedEx employees.

 

[It will be fine]

I think you're at the point that you really need to do some research to argue your point.

https://www.fedbar.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/01/feature3-jan10-pdf-1.pdf

. The limit [on coverage] is that the carrier must have continuing authority to supervise and direct [its employees]. ... The couriers, tractor-trailer drivers, operations agents and other employees sought by the UAW are employed by FedEx directly. As the record amply demonstrates, these employees, as part of FedEx’s air express delivery system, are supervised by FedEx employees.

How does handing off freight to other companies change the relationship between FedEx and its employees?

 

[MAKAVELI]

How does handing off freight to other companies change the relationship between FedEx and its employees?

It's blurring the boundaries. When FedEx was given the exemption Ground and Express were completely separate. Express freight didn't enter the Ground system and vice versa. Dano doesn't want to admit it but FedEx is stuck using employees if they want to keep their RLA status for it's ground ops personnel.

 

[MAKAVELI]

How does handing off freight to other companies change the relationship between FedEx and its employees?

Eventually it will be challenged by unions and customers. The 4Z freight is still labeled Express and charged at Express rates. I would guess the Express fuel surcharge also is being applied. It's a bait and switch scam. If they were truly ground packages, then have them labeled as ground and have ground drivers pu from customers.

 

[It will be fine]

Eventually it will be challenged by unions and customers. The 4Z freight is still labeled Express and charged at Express rates. I would guess the Express fuel surcharge also is being applied. It's a bait and switch scam. If they were truly ground packages, then have them labeled as ground and have ground drivers pu from customers.

Customer pays for delivery within 3 days with no guarantee, customer gets delivery within 3 days. Where exactly is the bait and switch?

 

[MAKAVELI]

Customer pays for delivery within 3 days with no guarantee, customer gets delivery within 3 days. Where exactly is the bait and switch?

The customer is given a choice of service and price quote. Obviously if they are choosing the more expensive option it's for a reason.

 

[MAKAVELI]

Customer pays for delivery within 3 days with no guarantee, customer gets delivery within 3 days. Where exactly is the bait and switch?

You didn't answer the other part of the question. Why not labei these ground, charge ground rates, and have ground pick them up from the customer?

 

[Mutineer]

It's a bait and switch scam.

Very many things in business and in life are thinly veiled rackets, hustles, and scams. Status quo. Business as usual.

A particular business practice is legit.

Until the day it is legally challenged and judged otherwise.