What's new

FedEx Freight | My experience with Teamsters Local 71

Been reading all the goings on her DD and have to say I am sorry to hear of your treatment by the local. As for Fred X not surprised one bit.
Hoping that another door will open with a much better employer for you and your family.
The local should have found you some work at one of the company's they have under contract. I know my local would bend over backwards to help out a person in your predicament.
Maybe time to climb the ladder a bit TDU ( I am not TDU ) would be a good place to start.
 
Dick Dastardly said:
Well I've actually been told in the past by dispatch to leave freight and hand write in the name. I had them send a message to my handheld computer to cover my rear. That's a pretty common thing to happen at Fedex.
Click to expand...

Never happened at my center I wouldn't do it anyways if they told me too. For one it's illegal second it's against our policy. I hope you learned a valuable lesson from this all in the end the driver is always responsible for their actions and equipment.
 
Dick Dastardly said:
We won our election in November of 2014. The election is being contested by FedEx in Circuit court. The official results were 110 Yes to 97 No
Click to expand...
The official results were 110 yes, 99 no...the two votes that were contested by the union (a driver/dispatcher and a driver/trainer) were eventually counted and added to the total, not that it matters now.
 
Dick Dastardly said:
Its a paper document. As it was explained to me by Fedex Freight: A customer tried filing a claim one month after getting their delivery of newspaper inserts claiming damage. The claim was denied, as they had signed clear a month prior. They then denied signing for the freight and I was accused of falsifying their signature.

Up to this point, with the exception of my union activities, I was a model employee. I was not once ever written up or given any sort of warnings.
Click to expand...

What motivation would you have for signing the bill? You bring the freight to their dock, they either accept or they don't, they don't want to sign for it you bring it back, no skin off your back. It doesn't make sense, which means it probably isn't true.
 
Redracer3136 said:
The official results were 110 yes, 99 no...the two votes that were contested by the union (a driver/dispatcher and a driver/trainer) were eventually counted and added to the total, not that it matters now.
Click to expand...

Did they ever count the two contested by the company? I heard it ended up being 112-99 but I never received confirmation.
 
Dick Dastardly said:
Did they ever count the two contested by the company? I heard it ended up being 112-99 but I never received confirmation.
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure they did and 110-99 was the final tally....223 total drivers and 14 didn't vote. Prior to 2010, those 14 drivers that didn't vote would've been counted as NO votes...again, not that it matters.
 
DD's experience here is an important one for all of you to study. Here's how these things are supposed to work. When someone is brave enough, or stupid enough, to put it on the line for your organization, as the leader of that organization, you know that they do so with the full knowledge that their company might come down on them if they get the opportunity to. Some companies unfortunately go the extra step and target organizers, but I understand that's not what happened here. None the less, the man that put his nuts on the table for you now needs you.

The Teamsters end of that social contract is to have their back. Not have their back ONLY if he was not guilty, but to have their back. No. Matter. What.

I get it. They cannot get his job back. IMO, this isn't the fault of Local 71. But having someone's back is so much more than getting his job back. There is so much more that they are morally obligated to do for him. I've known union leaders (hint) who have had beef/beer benefits for their organizers who paid the price, 50/50's at union meetings, got that fired soldier another job in the local, Give them your own money, paint the G/D union hall if they had to. You cannot leave your army behind. You MUST make sure that they are able to feed their family. It doesn't matter if that person is a royal PITA, you have to take care of them without fail. This is what leadership entails.

Local 71 did none of this. No job. No money, No benefits. In fact, they couldn't be bothered to answer his calls. They're just letting him sink, and now i'm watching all of the bullies attack him here because he's finally and publicly calling them out on their hypocrisy. What's wrong with the labor movement today can be summed up in local 71's treatment of a man who went to bat for them. Pretty disgusting excuse for a "brotherhood"!

DD, I have some advice for you. You'll learn your next lesson on the teamsters as soon as you apply for a job somewhere in the local. It's called "black-balling." This is where the President of the local calls potential employers and tells them NOT to hire you. It's an old tradition. The advice? When you get your next job, if you decide to shine a spotlight on yourself, just make sure your fly is up. Good luck!
 
Jim Carville said:
DD's experience here is an important one for all of you to study. Here's how these things are supposed to work. When someone is brave enough, or stupid enough, to put it on the line for your organization, as the leader of that organization, you know that they do so with the full knowledge that their company might come down on them if they get the opportunity to. Some companies unfortunately go the extra step and target organizers, but I understand that's not what happened here. None the less, the man that put his nuts on the table for you now needs you.

The Teamsters end of that social contract is to have their back. Not have their back ONLY if he was not guilty, but to have their back. No. Matter. What.

I get it. They cannot get his job back. IMO, this isn't the fault of Local 71. But having someone's back is so much more than getting his job back. There is so much more that they are morally obligated to do for him. I've known union leaders (hint) who have had beef/beer benefits for their organizers who paid the price, 50/50's at union meetings, got that fired soldier another job in the local, Give them your own money, paint the G/D union hall if they had to. You cannot leave your army behind. You MUST make sure that they are able to feed their family. It doesn't matter if that person is a royal PITA, you have to take care of them without fail. This is what leadership entails.

Local 71 did none of this. No job. No money, No benefits. In fact, they couldn't be bothered to answer his calls. They're just letting him sink, and now i'm watching all of the bullies attack him here because he's finally and publicly calling them out on their hypocrisy. What's wrong with the labor movement today can be summed up in local 71's treatment of a man who went to bat for them. Pretty disgusting excuse for a "brotherhood"!

DD, I have some advice for you. You'll learn your next lesson on the teamsters as soon as you apply for a job somewhere in the local. It's called "black-balling." This is where the President of the local calls potential employers and tells them NOT to hire you. It's an old tradition. The advice? When you get your next job, if you decide to shine a spotlight on yourself, just make sure your fly is up. Good luck!
Click to expand...

Only hearing one side of the story your making some big assumptions. I hear there is alot more to this story a Paul Harvy version if you will. Do I think the local handled it right no I do not, but now that I know the rest of story he is fighting a loosing battle IMO.
 
ABFer said:
I would expect that drivers have forged customer names on DR's but most times it goes unchecked. If ever it had happened before and they were not discharged and you had that evidence it would be monumental to your case. Far fetched notion but, you never know, someone might have some experience with it.
Click to expand...
I sometimes would leave freight on a customers dock if no one was there or didn't come in a timely manner but I always signed "Customer Release" . That gave everybody an out.
 
Redracer3136 said:
I think everyone is missing the point here, the title of this thread should've read "Broken Promises!!"

I don't look at what DD did or didn't do to get terminated but rather how time and time again during his time campaigning on the local's behalf, he was told he would be taken care of multiple times by multiple people...from the Pres of the local to Ken Hall himself, the man was told/promised he would be protected/taken care of!!! Surprise surprise, when :dispirited: hit the fan he was hung out to dry!! All of the hard work this man did, on their behalf, and they said "thanks" as they hung up the phone....wow!!! Where was the local when he needed them the most?? He was there for them, where were they?? Broken promises!!

Now on to my second observation....I noticed once he posted his opinion, on several social outlets, his own "brothers" came out of the woodworks to attack him...Wow, again!!!!
If this is the kind of "brotherhood" that this local or the IBT themselves are selling (I and many others see their "you're either with us or you're against us" attitudes daily), it's no shocker why no one else in the LTL industry wants anything to do with them!!! With "brothers" like this, who needs enemies!!???!!
Click to expand...
Talk about sharks in the water?? Way earlier post you talk about the Teamsters protecting bad employees and now you want to twist this to fit your anti agenda! Funny man Red!! Forging a document makes it hard to defend anyone, admitting it??? Well even you get the just of it I'm sure!!
 
Last edited:
Look, essentially the bottom line is this... Whether it was the signature thing or not, they would have found a way to give you the boot, such as not locking your door, getting out of the cab wrong ect... They evidently wanted you gone.
Many folks are going to have short term memories of what occurred a couple short years ago which led to the beer hall putsch over at FedEx. Lest you forgot the implementation of punitive point infractions from everything from not wearing your seatbelt, to getting out of your cab incorrectly. It was increasingly becoming a hostile work environment as some of you know and thanks to the putsch, things have improved dramatically, but my concern is that in a year or two when this thing blows over, things will slowly return to what once was.
 
SuperCourse said:
Dick, when FedEx Freight had you in the office browbeating you did they show you a copy of the bill in question? If so, did they give you a copy of it?
Click to expand...

No. The security man held up a bill from across the room. He never once allowed me to see it. No one did. That's in my NLRB report.
 
Dick Dastardly said:
No. The security man held up a bill from across the room. He never once allowed me to see it. No one did. That's in my NLRB report.
Click to expand...

Sounds very suspect. Did they offer you some kind of deal, like admit you signed it and we'll give you a good reference? You might as well because we're going to fire you either way.
 
Getoverit said:
Talk about sharks in the water?? Way earlier post you talk about the Teamsters protecting bad employees and now you want to twist this to fit your anti agenda! Funny man Red!! Forging a document makes it hard to defend anyone, admitting it??? Well even you get the just of it I'm sure!!
Click to expand...
Again, it's not about what DD did or didn't do, it's about how local 71 went back on their empty promises and failed to do what they promised the man they would do...period!!
Did I expect him to get his job back, no, but I DID expect local 71 to help him try....they didn't even do that!!! Did they try to help him find other employment, or help to pay his bills, etc... in exchange for everything they did for him, nope!! They wouldn't even take his calls or texts and the Pres of the local had to be begged by other drivers to even reach out to him....after they promised to protect him!!!
I guess this local, along with Ken Hall, should've told him they'd promise to protect him or anyone else as long as it fits within their agenda...if not, they're on their own, atleast he would've known that upfront instead of having a false sense of security that never existed!!
Pathetic!!!
 
Redracer3136 said:
Again, it's not about what DD did or didn't do, it's about how local 71 went back on their empty promises and failed to do what they promised the man they would do...period!!
Did I expect him to get his job back, no, but I DID expect local 71 to help him try....they didn't even do that!!! Did they try to help him find other employment, or help to pay his bills, etc... in exchange for everything they did for him, nope!! They wouldn't even take his calls or texts and the Pres of the local had to be begged by other drivers to even reach out to him....after they promised to protect him!!!
I guess this local, along with Ken Hall, should've told him they'd promise to protect him or anyone else as long as it fits within their agenda...if not, they're on their own, atleast he would've known that upfront instead of having a false sense of security that never existed!!
Pathetic!!!
Click to expand...

First of all Ken Hall never said he would protect us don't know where he got that from i was at that meeting he said no such thing. Furthermore the NLRB is the only group who can protect an employee from being singled out for union activity but in this case he wasn't singled out for union activity he broke a rule that would have gotten anyone fired. We had a strong supporter up here break a rule not to long ago he claimed he was singled out, I told him no you weren't you broke a rule that will get anyone in trouble simple as that. It doesn't matter who you are if you break the rules you get punished. I for one am very careful, im not going to give them a reason to fire me over something stupid. The local should have told him upfront they couldn't help him but with one aspect of his case the wiengarten rights deal but then again he shouldn't have declared wiengarten right's and spilled his guts. It would be like pleading the 5th and then talking another screw up on his part. As far as the local helping him did he go there and ask for help or did he just call? Someone that is serious about wanting help would have went to the local and demanded they help him especially if they wouldn't call him back.
 
Dick Dastardly said:
It's all a brotherhood until someone disagrees. You then all come out like a pack of wolves and attack. After all I've done for you all and this is the thanks I get. Excuse me for posting the truth about Local 71. I see your true colors now. I'm even further pleased with my decision to out Local 71.

When my case is decided in Washington at the NLRB you can read the decision here. I'll post it for everyone.
Click to expand...

You committed fraud and now you're blaming the Teamsters for not helping you....smh Don't want to pile on, but at some point you're gonna have to own this as your own f***up. We all make mistakes, you'll get thru this. In the meantime, you still have a family to feed. If you want to make decent scratch, hit up the energy companies(crude oil and fracking), they're still hiring drivers all over the country. Good luck..
 
Crazy Trucker said:
Never happened at my center I wouldn't do it anyways if they told me too. For one it's illegal second it's against our policy. I hope you learned a valuable lesson from this all in the end the driver is always responsible for their actions and equipment.
Click to expand...

There are too many variables in this topic, not knowing all of the details. If told to deliver without actual consignee signature, that should be noted, as well as "per name of dispatcher". This is NOT unheard of. Also,all messages sent/received on the handheld (intermec) are permanent and can be accessed to prove one's case. A paper trail, in essence. When we make our own decisions on topics of a questionable nature, even if normally harmless, we become solely responsible. The motive, whether it is efficiency, convenience, or whatever, even if for the Company benefit, becomes irrelevant.

The burden, it seems, will be to find/provide the evidence that similar actions were either accepted, common, or less harshly punished when applied to a non (Union) activist individual, at that location. The key, IMHO, is to uncover that evidence. The Company will want/need to prove that the opposite is true.

Having said all of that, The Union has a duty to represent, all the way to the ultimate conclusion, IMHO.
 
BoatRocker said:
You committed fraud and now you're blaming the Teamsters for not helping you....smh Don't want to pile on, but at some point you're gonna have to own this as your own f***up. We all make mistakes, you'll get thru this. In the meantime, you still have a family to feed. If you want to make decent scratch, hit up the energy companies(crude oil and fracking), they're still hiring drivers all over the country. Good luck..
Click to expand...

It seems some of you can't see the forest for the trees.

It's not about right or wrong. The NLRB will decide that. It's about broken promises
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top