What's new

FedEx Freight | FDXF Health options

As info. This a Central states Health and Welfare deductible, and out of pocket costs. Employee pays zero weekly, or monthly premiums.

2OOWpgR.jpg
 
SwampRatt said:
You may not be aware, Unions were (are still?) EXEMPT. The cost, if incurred, could not be passed along without an agreed to contract.

As for eating crow? You asked for one company. Seems to me the burden is on you to prove I'm wrong. I'll wait. :smile new:
Click to expand...
Yes, Obama Democrats exempted unions. So their Cadillac plans were not affected by the horrendous Obama plans. Thanks for proving my point.

Do you like crow rare or medium? We don’t serve tough crow.
 
dsh69 said:
Yes, Obama Democrats exempted unions. So their Cadillac plans were not affected by the horrendous Obama plans. Thanks for proving my point.

Do you like crow rare or medium? We don’t serve tough crow.
Click to expand...
Try again, no one has yet proven your point.

Fact is, there are many companies out there in this great country that DID NOT pass along increased costs, yet... Mostly small, close knit companies, not publicly held.
 
SwampRatt said:
Try again, no one has yet proven your point.

Fact is, there are many companies out there in this great country that DID NOT pass along increased costs, yet... Mostly small, close knit companies, not publicly held.
Click to expand...
No, there are not. The fact that you posted UNION companies that were exempted proves the point.
 
Crazy Trucker said:
Listen rookie I have been here a lot longer than you. If I want to complain about our insurance or anything else I will, if you don't like it put me on ignore. You seem to like to ignore facts anyways with you're ignorant posts.
Click to expand...
I don't want to "ignore" you. I just don't understand why someone who is so fed-up with FedEx stays with them. Go to UPSF and get a pension and fabulous healthcare. Oh, are there other reasons why you may not want to work there? Tell us ....
 
dsh69 said:
No, there are not. The fact that you posted UNION companies that were exempted proves the point.
Click to expand...
Hey Einstein (can I call you Einstein??), you should be careful speaking in absolutes.

Wasn't going to push it, but you asked for it. Turns out you are, in fact, wrong.

In addition to voodoo.com:
10 companies that will pay 100% of your health insurance premiums
https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/companies-pay-health-insurance-0816

9 companies hiring now that cover 100% of employee health insurance premiums
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/9-c...nt-of-employee-health-insurance-premiums.html

You asked us to name ONE company who has not passed along increased costs. Kinda hard to pass along costs when the company pays 100%.

Class dismissed.

:smilie93c peelout:
 
SwampRatt said:
Hey Einstein (can I call you Einstein??), you should be careful speaking in absolutes.

Wasn't going to push it, but you asked for it. Turns out you are, in fact, wrong.

In addition to voodoo.com:
10 companies that will pay 100% of your health insurance premiums
https://www.monster.com/career-advice/article/companies-pay-health-insurance-0816

9 companies hiring now that cover 100% of employee health insurance premiums
https://www.cnbc.com/2017/08/09/9-c...nt-of-employee-health-insurance-premiums.html

You asked us to name ONE company who has not passed along increased costs. Kinda hard to pass along costs when the company pays 100%.

Class dismissed.

:smilie93c peelout:
Click to expand...
Somewhere in those companies wage and benefits packages you will find where they had to hold back or eliminate benefits to offer a company paid health plan as opposed to the similar company who does not offer those benefits. There is always a set amount of Total compensation that Any company is willing to spend per employee to remain competitive in its respective industry. Just because you cannot do a cost benefit analysis does not mean that your ignorant Arithmetic is correct.
 
dsh69 said:
I don't want to "ignore" you. I just don't understand why someone who is so fed-up with FedEx stays with them. Go to UPSF and get a pension and fabulous healthcare. Oh, are there other reasons why you may not want to work there? Tell us ....
Click to expand...

Listen like i have told you i have been here along time why would i just pack up and leave? I guess keeping on fighting for less and i will fight for more. Still don't understand it, probably never will but be proud driver. lol
 
FRTCHUCKER said:
Sorry somehow my post got posted in your quote so I deleted it.
My point was that FDXF has Decided that Higher starting wages and a shorter progression is a better game plan for the demographic that they are trying to recruit. That demographic is young & healthy . The Free market will decide if that game plan will continue. This notion that you are entitled to someone else's money because they have so much is a Socialist mentality and is the opposite of how a capitalist society works. You can work wherever and for whoever you would like in this country . If you have decided that higher coverage health care is a priority then you have options to seek those out at UPSF,ABF,YRC . But you will be giving up something that is hard to quantify in chasing the perfect wage and benefit package.
Click to expand...

Nice post, but where did i say i am entitled to anything? So me coming on here and pointing out that our company received billions in tax breaks and in same year raised insurance premiums is entitlement? Sorry that's not entitlement, it is me calling a spade a spade. Good luck if you come on here, but i think you would be better off in long run staying where you are at looking at total benefits packages not just pay.
 
Crazy Trucker said:
Thank you for proving my point. We have enough excuses to fill up ocean, meanwhile record profits roll in. For once it would be nice to see Fed ex reinvest in their workforce rather than make excuses on why not to.
Click to expand...

Record profits? I would be interested in how you have come to that conclusion.
 
SwampRatt said:
Just to clarify: Overtime or layoffs are strictly based on market conditions and the available workforce, and are not discretionary gifts/penalties. Pens and seat padding? Perhaps. But costs to provide healthcare coverage are NOT really a factor in those decisions.
Click to expand...

Are you saying that companies that are overly cost concious do not limit the overtime benefit provided or participate in a seasonal economic layoff process? I dont think you are, but that is kind of the point i was trying to make. The seats and pens were thrown out there somewhat in jest, but you would be surprised at what could be deemed an area that needs a more controlled cost. Take a company that has adopted a bare bones parts maintenance budget. Having cheap air lines that break all the time might save some cost and allow that money to be put toward a benefit, but from a driver aspect, wouldnt acquiring the higher quality air lines also be a big part of investing in our people?
 
aflifer said:
Record profits? I would be interested in how you have come to that conclusion.
Click to expand...
These guys cannot separate Total Revenue from Net Profit Minus Operating Costs. Not to mention Retained earnings needed to implement new business and equipment into the system. Then there is the shareholders Dividends that must be satisfied.
 
FRTCHUCKER said:
These guys cannot separate Total Revenue from Net Profit Minus Operating Costs. Not to mention Retained earnings needed to implement new business and equipment into the system. Then there is the shareholders Dividends that must be satisfied.
Click to expand...

I disagree partner......thats painting with an awful broad brush. There are certainly some here that delve very deep into the numbers, there are also some that only consider what is of value to them, others that only see the numbers that support their position. If we all agreed, it would actually be pretty boring.....
 
aflifer said:
I disagree partner......thats painting with an awful broad brush. There are certainly some here that delve very deep into the numbers, there are also some that only consider what is of value to them, others that only see the numbers that support their position. If we all agreed, it would actually be pretty boring.....
Click to expand...
Let me specify. Those doing Math that only has value to them.
 
aflifer said:
Are you saying that companies that are overly cost concious do not limit the overtime benefit provided or participate in a seasonal economic layoff process? I dont think you are, but that is kind of the point i was trying to make. The seats and pens were thrown out there somewhat in jest, but you would be surprised at what could be deemed an area that needs a more controlled cost. Take a company that has adopted a bare bones parts maintenance budget. Having cheap air lines that break all the time might save some cost and allow that money to be put toward a benefit, but from a driver aspect, wouldnt acquiring the higher quality air lines also be a big part of investing in our people?
Click to expand...
NOT saying that at all. Just that business levels, or lack thereof, dictate acceptable levels of OT or layoff potential. Discretionary, nonessential costs are most certainly effected by higher costs. Staffing target levels are guided by need, IMHO.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top