No, you are confused and that is OK. I completely understand. I was speaking of something entirely different than what you thought.
FedEx Freight | Louisville results
- Thread starter bigdaddy300
- Start date
So in 2011 I think was the year at the teamsters annual convention in Las Vegas when Hoffa said we must organize fedex,so we went to the union hmm seems like they wanted us, wonder why that is.
GreenHornet1970
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
I'm gonna go out on a limb here and say Hoffa had the "working mans" best interest at heart.
Who are we kidding, old Hoffa just hopes to expand membership dues and reap the rewards. The working man is just another tool in his box to achieve his own personal goals. One of the problems I have with the union is that its "leadership" openly affiliates themselves with those that follow ans support socialist and communist ideologies and nobody questions it. The general membership has very little if any influence in the undertakings of the leadership. Take a close look at the functioning of the unions and you will get a glimpse of what it is to live under the thumb of the elites that run a socialist or communist government.
You follow and support them or else..........no thanks, you can keep that
There was a resolution brought out by the Hoffa administration regarding the organization of FedEx during the convention. That being said, the Teamster's were already in the middle of an organizing campaign on the west coast. Those workers approached the Union, not the other way around. FedExNuno was handed his termination from uncle Fred just before he took the stage to speak at the convention. Those are facts.
droppingaduece
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
If this is a true statement then why did FedEx offer a 90% discount for 90 days? The very same program that prompted the wage cuts for management and erased our bonus for that quarter and many more to come. Our labor cost didn't go up or was out of line with other carriers at the time. Wait was that when they tried to drive the final nail in yrc's coffin to finally run then out of business. This same discount I was told by a regional managing director that was the worst move we could have made because of the lasting effects on the whole company and was the reason for the merge of east and west and eventually brought national into the mix. Naw that couldn't have been it.
What you just stated goes hand in hand with my post of cutting too deep. Poor management.
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
I can only speculate as to why they made the 90 for 90 decision....I have my assumptions just as you but that's all they are, assumptions.
I'll have to disagree with your source as far as the "worst move" and the "lasting effects" comment. The East/West merger was in the works long before the 90 for 90 discount and the Watkins/National purchase was destined for a merger due to the incompetent management that couldn't conform to Freight's operating systems. The collapse of the economy was final determining factor for the merger of National/Freight.
Incompetent Mgmt at Watkins?? They were QUITE competent, before FedEx bought them, for the long haul segment. Then FedExFreight slowly took all their short haul freight away, while NOT giving National ANY of their Long haul freight. It's a very LONG story, with plenty of incompetency to go around, but very little from the Watkins side. That wisdom, coming from an AF guy. There is a lot more to it than just that.
As far as the 90/90 promo, it did occur at the same time that we got weekly updates on the latest turmoil at YRC... Coincidence? Hmmm...
droppingaduece
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
All I can tell you is what I was told by the managing director, tho I don't personally like the man I don't know for sure if he was lying or not, and since he is a company man I figured you would accept it at face value, but apparently you didn't. I didn't make any assumptions just passed on what I was told. Your the one assuming.
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
We we are a regional carrier, we're NOT in the long haul business. We didn't buy Watkins for their short or long haul service....but I'm assuming you already knew that. And yes, our management spent months over there "trying" to teach them how "we" operate to no avail, I still remember them telling the horror stories. That's why they were "given" the economy frt......and the couldn't even get that right!
Again, it was the collapse in the economy, along with their incompetence, that eventually brought everything under one roof.
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
I wasn't assuming, just speculating.
droppingaduece
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
This is just speculation, but I believe that when they bought Watkins it was for the Canadian authority and that is when the plan was hatched to put the economy freight on rails. That wasn't just a fly by the seat of your pants decision. It takes time to put that kind of plan together and implement it. Since I didn't work at Watkins/national I can't comment on their management.
Sent from my SCH-I535 using Tapatalk
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
It was my understanding that the "putting the economy freight on rails" debacle had nothing to do with Watkins/National but rather an attempt at cutting cost due to the collapsed economy....but that's another topic for another day.
Yes, the Watkins purchase was about their Mexican/Canadian authority, it had NOTHING to do with the freight they hauled...short or long haul.
Yes, the Watkins purchase was about their Mexican/Canadian authority, it had NOTHING to do with the freight they hauled...short or long haul.
Grassisgreen
TB Lurker
- Credits
- 0
I'm confused. I thought the teamsters were going to unionize and save the industry. Why all the no votes ?
Man, I hate to have to say it but you are incorrect, on this. I don't have the time right now, as it's not the biggest issue on our plate. But rest assured, I will get back to you. When I do it will be with with proof,and it will be from FedEx's own statements. NObody pays 780 million for Canadian authority... Stay tuned for truth.
OK, here are a few excerpts to prove the primary purpose of the "acquisition", which, unlike AF and Viking, was an "asset only" acquisition. Not the purchase of the entire company. Yes Canadian authority was a piece of it, but never the sole (or primary) reason to spend 787 million.
Now, your assertion that "our management spent months over there "trying" to teach them how "we" operate to no avail", shows a lack of understanding that Watkins operated on a completely different model. One that, in some ways, was actually superior, given it's intended purpose. Watkins was quite successful before FedEx came along. AF operational tactics prevailed because AF was the dominant force within the Freight segment.
As far a National being "given" economy freight, again you are ignorant of many facts. Facts like FXFE "took" most of the short haul freight from FXNL without "giving" any of their long haul freight to National. Also during this same time, FXFE pushed their procedures, logistics, and most importantly, inferior technologies. into an operation that is was not designed for. Completely different (and successful) systems, NOT better or WORSE, just entirely different.
Now if you look at it logically, with the FXFE system forcing higher costs onto FXFN, while reducing the available revenue, and an economic downturn, you can see the magnitude of the difficulty. Not to mention the confusion caused to customers with regard to who got the shipments,FXFE or FXNL. City guys will remember this, when going to make a pickup, only to find it was supposed to be FXFN, but we (FXFE) could "take" it... So "take it" we did, contributing to the demise of National.
Oh, and for us AF guys that think we've taken a beating under FedEx, the former Watkins guys REALLY took a beating, and their's was sadly much more swift.
That should be plenty of info for this topic, BUT if you want to further question the fiasco that was... I'll try to help you understand what really happened. Mismanagement of the acquisition from day one.
See above post #196... And I thought you might like to know the source for the excerpts: http://www.fedex.com/us/investorrelations/downloads/annualreport/2007annualreport.pdf
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
Really? Did you really expect FedEx to say why they "really" made a the acquisitions they made, would this not have cast a negative light on the company?OK, here are a few excerpts to prove the primary purpose of the "acquisition", which, unlike AF and Viking, was an "asset only" acquisition. Not the purchase of the entire company. Yes Canadian authority was a piece of it, but never the sole (or primary) reason to spend 787 million.
Now, your assertion that "our management spent months over there "trying" to teach them how "we" operate to no avail", shows a lack of understanding that Watkins operated on a completely different model. One that, in some ways, was actually superior, given it's intended purpose. Watkins was quite successful before FedEx came along. AF operational tactics prevailed because AF was the dominant force within the Freight segment.
As far a National being "given" economy freight, again you are ignorant of many facts. Facts like FXFE "took" most of the short haul freight from FXNL without "giving" any of their long haul freight to National. Also during this same time, FXFE pushed their procedures, logistics, and most importantly, inferior technologies. into an operation that is was not designed for. Completely different (and successful) systems, NOT better or WORSE, just entirely different.
Now if you look at it logically, with the FXFE system forcing higher costs onto FXFN, while reducing the available revenue, and an economic downturn, you can see the magnitude of the difficulty. Not to mention the confusion caused to customers with regard to who got the shipments,FXFE or FXNL. City guys will remember this, when going to make a pickup, only to find it was supposed to be FXFN, but we (FXFE) could "take" it... So "take it" we did, contributing to the demise of National.
Oh, and for us AF guys that think we've taken a beating under FedEx, the former Watkins guys REALLY took a beating, and their's was sadly much more swift.
That should be plenty of info for this topic, BUT if you want to further question the fiasco that was... I'll try to help you understand what really happened. Mismanagement of the acquisition from day one.
I understood how the Watkins model worked, I was employed there in my younger days. Yes, for what "they" did, long haul LTL, it worked....but we're mainly a regional carrier, we're not in the long haul LTL business...not then and not now. If I'm not mistaken, we sold all of our sleeper units! Yes, their operating systems were different than ours and yes, our managers that were supposed to spend a couple of weeks training them on our system turned into, in some occasions, months...I saw it first hand. It's almost like the union lifers on here that know nothing more than the union way, they couldn't comprehend something different.
Yes, FXFE "took" their short haul frt, short haul "regional" frt is what we do! With what little long haul we have, it didn't make since to "give" to them, we made service on that frt faster than they could. Do you not realize that we NEVER had economy frt until the purchase of Watkins? Economy is a service that was created in order to try to make FXNL successful. One would think that by giving them two weeks to service the frt, they would succeed....I guess not. Also, during these times, I can remember passing and talking to National drivers on the radio coming from Knox to CLT while we were on our way to Knox. They would pull empties to CLT, sit around for a few hours, then pull those same empties back to Knox! It was a running joke on the radio...daily. I would say their demise was due to "their" mismanagement.
I wasn't in the city during these times but I do remember the confusion with our drivers during pickups. Did the National drivers not also pickup our frt? I'm sure it wasn't as one sided as you make it sound....but then again, since they spent hours at one customer waiting to pickup frt, I could see how it may have been lopsided.
Can't speak for the beating they took b/c I wasn't employed there at the time, but that's usually what happens during a merger.....maybe Watkins should've bought us.
As far as my info, I don't need links, I lived it!
1)Why would FedEx lie on their annual report as to the purpose of the acquisition? How would gaining Canadian authority cast a negative light? In fact that very topic is addressed on page 15, of the 2007 annual report, if you'd care to read it http://www.fedex.com/us/investorrelations/downloads/annualreport/2007annualreport.pdf
2) When the Watkins system was altered (dismantled), in order to more closely match the AF, they were actually incompatible, it caused lots of problems, like you state.
3)The cause for the lopsided nature of who took who's freight, was the ratio of FXFE to FXNL. They had limited chances to get to a customer before we did. We were encouraged to pick up "something"(if possible), have customer change it to Freight, to make out numbers and justify the stop. National, may have been under more moral instruction, and told not to.. THAT, I do not know. Any National City guys out there?
Redracer3136
BANNED
- Credits
- 0
1) Did you really just ask if FedEx, or any company for that matter, would lie on any report, including their annual report, as to the purpose of an acquisition? Dude, you just may be even more naive than I originally thought. Can I prove my accusations, no, but companies do it all the time....it's not rocket science.
2) Agreed...but it caused problems b/c they were mainly a long haul LTL carrier, we're a short haul, regional LTL carrier. We didn't buy them to get into the long haul LTL business.
3) Yes, we had more local drivers than they did I would imagine but their lack of efficiency was probably the biggest contributing factor as to why we picked up more of their frt. I saw it first hand back when I ran local. As to changing it to Freight, that was a daily occurrence for me back in the JOM days, had nothing to do with justifying a stop. If my memory serves me correctly, Hootowl and myself routinely won JOM awards almost every quarter! If you consider "more moral instruction" to include sitting at a customer's dock to wait on the frt regardless of how long it took, thus causing them to miss out on their own frt, then yes, I'd say they had more. Where did that get them?