What's new

FedEx Freight | Listen to the Anti Union Guys, PLEASE!

Status
Not open for further replies.
Insane Trucker said:
What terminal you out of junior?
Click to expand...

So your answer to my question is to ask me another question lmao time to you put you on ignore you bring no facts to this argument just a bunch of personnel opinions and the classic scare tactics from the company. Time for you all to get a new union busting troll.
 
Crazy Trucker said:
So your answer to my question is to ask me another question lmao time to you put you on ignore you bring no facts to this argument just a bunch of personnel opinions and the classic scare tactics from the company. Time for you all to get a new union busting troll.
Click to expand...


Crazy Trucker, Why do you waste your time with him!!! You have bigger things to do here....
 
Insane Trucker said:
The reason is UPS has how many thousand package drivers in the teamsters. Ups has went through strikes and didn't even fight when they bought over nite . FedEx doesn't have to worry about any of there package guys striking ground or express. The only way I think they would even negotiate is if we all voted it in. Maybe I'm wrong. I believe they would get out of the freight business if we were all to go union. Sell the freight company with the union with it. I believe they will not let freight affect their real money makers Express and Ground. We are only 13% of FedEx after all. IMHO
Click to expand...
Why would FedEx get out of the freight business, and throw away 13% (as you say) of the company? They would do that to avoid a 2% +/- cost increase? Doing so would eliminate the whole bundling advantage of combining all shipping services under one umbrella, thereby effecting the whole.

If anything, as I've said before, the more likely scenario would be, adding a truckload carrier to the mix. This would put purchase transportation "in house", increasing profit potential. The only drawback to that would be, high turnover in that industry. FedEx, really doesn't like high turnover.
 
silent trucker said:
Eldridge Cleaver once said: "You're either a part of the solution; or you're a part of the problem.".

Sadly, for the last 35 years, since deregulation, the teamsters have been part of the problem. They haven't worked with the company's to adapt to the business conditions caused by Senator Teddy Kennedy pushing deregulation through Congress. Geez, a democratic Senator created legislation that crucified his financial backers, and he never was bad mouthed for it. Imagine that...the democratic machine screwed its' power base, and the folks on the street were clueless....

Be a part of the solution, work with regional managers and their bosses to identify what's wrong and find solutions that insure the company and it's employees continue to succeed and prosper. Tell the Teamsters to go back to giving their employers concessions...oh wait, they don't need a reminder, they trashed the National Master Freight Agreement and gave back to everyone, to save the paychecks of the union bosses......

Imagine that...
Click to expand...
I wouldn't say that the Teamsters haven't worked with these employers.Two parties sit down and agree or disagree on different terms of a contract.When the two parties reach an agreement that both parties feel comfortable with.Walla a contract is born.Then in the future.If said corporation falls into financial trouble (yrcw) Then the parties come back to the negotiating table and try to hammer out some sort of an agreement.Teamsters aren't totally all to blame for failing companies.As in YRCW problem.They merged in a bad economy and the past President and CEO tried to monopolize the market.We all see where that went.Mr.Z spent way too much money and lost.
 
SwampRatt said:
Most no guys, it seems, believe it to be noble to sacrifice the personal gain potential of us all, for the benefit of a few corporate execs and the shareholders. They see no need for balance. They think it's just right, like it is. MAYBE EVEN WILLING TO SETTLE, for a little less. True.
Click to expand...
No, most no voters don't believe in redistribution of wealth. We're not wealth envy! The markets dictate what we make, upper execs to the janitors. If I wanted to make and have the bennies that the top execs have, I'd have went to college and prepared myself for that career. If I'd have wanted the same as the janitors, I would not have gotten a CDL with the proper endorsements.
Again, life is about choices. If your not happy with your choices, you're free to leave and look else where for your happiness.
 
Redracer3136 said:
No, most no voters don't believe in redistribution of wealth. We're not wealth envy! The markets dictate what we make, upper execs to the janitors. If I wanted to make and have the bennies that the top execs have, I'd have went to college and prepared myself for that career. If I'd have wanted the same as the janitors, I would not have gotten a CDL with the proper endorsements.
Again, life is about choices. If your not happy with your choices, you're free to leave and look else where for your happiness.
Click to expand...
If the company is making bigger profits why shouldn't the employees that made the money for them not want just a little of it. No one is saying they should make as much as upper management, they just feel they should get more than what they're making. If it's what the market dictates then why are you making less than other companies.
 
30yearman said:
If the company is making bigger profits why shouldn't the employees that made the money for them not want just a little of it.
Click to expand...

You want profit sharing? Buy stock.

FDX is up 15.07% annually over the last 5 years. .45% Dividend as well.
 
Because some would rather have the raise. Having the cash in hand lets you chose what you want to do with it.

The company is always going to work hard to keep investors happy. It's the only way you can "hedge your bet" so to speak.
 
Redracer3136 said:
No, most no voters don't believe in redistribution of wealth. We're not wealth envy! The markets dictate what we make, upper execs to the janitors. If I wanted to make and have the bennies that the top execs have, I'd have went to college and prepared myself for that career. If I'd have wanted the same as the janitors, I would not have gotten a CDL with the proper endorsements.
Again, life is about choices. If your not happy with your choices, you're free to leave and look else where for your happiness.
Click to expand...
or your free to try and change things.signed a concerned driver.
 
EX396 said:
Curious how you came about this +/- 2% number.
Click to expand...

Ok... Considering the current level of support, and the fact that no one wants to cripple the company, this is my rough estimate:

If we we were to gain 10% across the board, that would be roughly a $2.50/hour raise (based on a rough average of $25/hr), Plus 10% additional benefits. Benefits include, insurance, pension, etc.

Now, considering the fact that ALL Salaries and employee benefits make up 42.5% of revenue, that 10% would only raise cost about 4.25%. Stay with me, we'are not done yet!

Now consider the fact that Drivers do not make up the whole of that figure, we have to reduce the percentage of cost, by an appropriate amount factoring out "other" Salaries and employee benefits. Here is where the numbers become "rough estimates". I can only use my center as an average. Drivers at my center, make up about 60% of the entire workforce. Note, I'm being conservative, as I'm not even factoring in the "unseen" support employees at corporate offices, etc. that would not be part of this negotiation nor executives.

Now then, that 10% increase, only affecting 60% (or less) of the workforce would equal a 2.55% increase in total cost, as a percent of revenue.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top