What's new

FedEx Freight | The Union Debate Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
SwampRatt said:
FedEx Annual Shareowners Meeting

Listen if you like. You can skip to the 42 min mark to hear some of our drivers speak.

http://s1.q4cdn.com/714383399/files/doc_events/2016/2016-Shareowners_normalled.mp3
Click to expand...
I've been lurking in the shadows waiting on something to peak my interest and although this topic doesn't because I see it for the epic failure of a PR stunt that it is, overwhelming support for me to respond has me feeling obligated to do so, so here goes...

First, let's all see this for what it is, a PR stunt that failed by epic proportions!! Is a shareholder's meeting, where 99% of those in attendance aren't even employed by FedEx, the proper platform to discuss your unhappiness with the company....not hardly. The investors in attendance could care less if you're unhappy with your healthcare, your pension, or even what the company fed you for dinner, they're only interested in how much of a return they're going to get on their investment. Investors understand there's disgruntled employees at every company, hell, they probably work with some themselves, but they didn't attend the meeting to hear about ours, nor do they care!!

Second, if you're going to challenge the Chairman with the "tough questions", you should atleast challenge him with correct facts!! NEWS FLASH: he didn't found the company and become CEO and Chairman by being uninformed, he knows his facts and he proved that by making a mockery of those who tried to challenge him!! My suggestion to anyone who attempts to repeat this PR stunt, do your homework before speaking, perhaps you'll save yourself the embarrassment of being the laughing stock of the company!!

Third, did anyone else notice how the IBT led their sheep blindly into the slaughter house?? The IBT has previously attempted this same PR stunt with numerous companies only to be slaughtered in the same fashion and now they've sent their sheep into our slaughter house knowing full well what the outcome would be and the sheep blindly walked in seeking an unattainable outcome!!
One has to ask themselves, if the IBT would do this to their most loyal sheep, what would they do to you??!!

In closing, I've noticed the sheep have now made another video complaining about being disrespected "by the top"....common sense tells most of us that if you walk into the Chairman's house and **** on his floor, he's not going to roll out the red carpet for ya!! Respect has to be earned and attempting to challenge the Chairman in his own house is not my idea of earning it, nor did it sound like it was his idea as well...just sayin'!!
 
Redracer3136 said:
I've been lurking in the shadows waiting on something to peak my interest and although this topic doesn't because I see it for the epic failure of a PR stunt that it is, overwhelming support for me to respond has me feeling obligated to do so, so here goes...

First, let's all see this for what it is, a PR stunt that failed by epic proportions!! Is a shareholder's meeting, where 99% of those in attendance aren't even employed by FedEx, the proper platform to discuss your unhappiness with the company....not hardly. The investors in attendance could care less if you're unhappy with your healthcare, your pension, or even what the company fed you for dinner, they're only interested in how much of a return they're going to get on their investment. Investors understand there's disgruntled employees at every company, hell, they probably work with some themselves, but they didn't attend the meeting to hear about ours, nor do they care!!

Second, if you're going to challenge the Chairman with the "tough questions", you should atleast challenge him with correct facts!! NEWS FLASH: he didn't found the company and become CEO and Chairman by being uninformed, he knows his facts and he proved that by making a mockery of those who tried to challenge him!! My suggestion to anyone who attempts to repeat this PR stunt, do your homework before speaking, perhaps you'll save yourself the embarrassment of being the laughing stock of the company!!

Third, did anyone else notice how the IBT led their sheep blindly into the slaughter house?? The IBT has previously attempted this same PR stunt with numerous companies only to be slaughtered in the same fashion and now they've sent their sheep into our slaughter house knowing full well what the outcome would be and the sheep blindly walked in seeking an unattainable outcome!!
One has to ask themselves, if the IBT would do this to their most loyal sheep, what would they do to you??!!

In closing, I've noticed the sheep have now made another video complaining about being disrespected "by the top"....common sense tells most of us that if you walk into the Chairman's house and **** on his floor, he's not going to roll out the red carpet for ya!! Respect has to be earned and attempting to challenge the Chairman in his own house is not my idea of earning it, nor did it sound like it was his idea as well...just sayin'!!
Click to expand...
Good to see that anger management timeout worked....lol.... Just messing with you red....
 
Redracer3136 said:
I've been lurking in the shadows waiting on something to peak my interest...
Click to expand...
Even though, your return lacks substance, I'll play briefly, as a welcome back of sorts...:chairshot:

Redracer3136 said:
...and although this topic doesn't because I see it for the epic failure of a PR stunt that it is, overwhelming support for me to respond has me feeling obligated to do so, so here goes...

First, let's all see this for what it is, a PR stunt that failed by epic proportions!!
Click to expand...

You mean like that theatrical decert petition that was immediately rejected as inappropriate? Oh, I see...

Redracer3136 said:
The investors in attendance could care less if you're unhappy with your healthcare, your pension, or even what the company fed you for dinner, they're only interested in how much of a return they're going to get on their investment. Investors understand there's disgruntled employees at every company, hell, they probably work with some themselves, but they didn't attend the meeting to hear about ours, nor do they care!!

Second, if you're going to challenge the Chairman with the "tough questions", you should atleast challenge him with correct facts!! NEWS FLASH: he didn't found the company and become CEO and Chairman by being uninformed, he knows his facts and he proved that by making a mockery of those who tried to challenge him!! My suggestion to anyone who attempts to repeat this PR stunt, do your homework before speaking, perhaps you'll save yourself the embarrassment of being the laughing stock of the company!!

Third, did anyone else notice how the IBT led their sheep blindly into the slaughter house?? The IBT has previously attempted this same PR stunt with numerous companies only to be slaughtered in the same fashion and now they've sent their sheep into our slaughter house knowing full well what the outcome would be and the sheep blindly walked in seeking an unattainable outcome!!
One has to ask themselves, if the IBT would do this to their most loyal sheep, what would they do to you??!!

In closing, I've noticed the sheep have now made another video complaining about being disrespected "by the top"....common sense tells most of us that if you walk into the Chairman's house and **** on his floor, he's not going to roll out the red carpet for ya!! Respect has to be earned and attempting to challenge the Chairman in his own house is not my idea of earning it, nor did it sound like it was his idea as well...just sayin'!!
Click to expand...

More errors, Red.

First, Many investors do care about the wholesomeness of the companies they invest in. Oh yes. Environmental, social, even political positions can and do come into play. The only question is to what extent that matters.

Second,The shareholders meeting is not Fred's house, as you say. That would be the Owners house. The Owners who are are in fact the SHAREHOLDERS.

As far as being led to slaughter, you're being just a little dramatic, no? They were there to do what they could under the rules. 2 minutes to speak. Not a debate format, or a presentation of evidence.

Other than that, welcome back.:grin:
 
SwampRatt said:
Even though, your return lacks substance, I'll play briefly, as a welcome back of sorts...:chairshot:
Click to expand...
Yet another weak attempt to defend the indefensible, I see nothing has changed!!


SwampRatt said:
You mean like that theatrical decert petition that was immediately rejected as inappropriate? Oh, I see...
Click to expand...
Our previous decert effort garnered many positive results, what has this failed PR stunt done except to give the masses something to laugh about?? Do you consider this failed PR stunt to be "appropriate"??


SwampRatt said:
More errors, Red.

First, Many investors do care about the wholesomeness of the companies they invest in. Oh yes. Environmental, social, even political positions can and do come into play. The only question is to what extent that matters.
Click to expand...
Yes, investors do care about the wholesomeness of the company but they could care less about how a few employees are unhappy and/or disgruntled, every company has disgruntled employees. When we factor in the political statements made by a few were filled with inaccurate info and how they were made a mockery of by the Chairman, I'm sure it only solidified to the investors that their money is in good hands!!

SwampRatt said:
Second,The shareholders meeting is not Fred's house, as you say. That would be the Owners house. The Owners who are are in fact the SHAREHOLDERS.
Click to expand...
Semantics....really?? The White House is owned by the people but it's the President's house...the company is owned by the shareholders but it's the Chairman's "house".

SwampRatt said:
As far as being led to slaughter, you're being just a little dramatic, no? They were there to do what they could under the rules. 2 minutes to speak. Not a debate format, or a presentation of evidence.
Click to expand...
Which again leads us back to "was the shareholders meeting the proper platform...not hardly!! Again, the IBT has traveled this road and suffered the same fate. They knew the rules beforehand and they STILL led their most loyal sheep into the slaughter house to be slaughtered...shameful!!
 
Redracer3136 said:
Yet another weak attempt to defend the indefensible, I see nothing has changed!!



Our previous decert effort garnered many positive results, what has this failed PR stunt done except to give the masses something to laugh about?? Do you consider this failed PR stunt to be "appropriate"??



Yes, investors do care about the wholesomeness of the company but they could care less about how a few employees are unhappy and/or disgruntled, every company has disgruntled employees. When we factor in the political statements made by a few were filled with inaccurate info and how they were made a mockery of by the Chairman, I'm sure it only solidified to the investors that their money is in good hands!!


Semantics....really?? The White House is owned by the people but it's the President's house...the company is owned by the shareholders but it's the Chairman's "house".


Which again leads us back to "was the shareholders meeting the proper platform...not hardly!! Again, the IBT has traveled this road and suffered the same fate. They knew the rules beforehand and they STILL led their most loyal sheep into the slaughter house to be slaughtered...shameful!!
Click to expand...

You are the only laughing stock around here. Tell the fail gang i said hello.
 
SwampRatt said:
FedEx Annual Shareowners Meeting

Listen if you like. You can skip to the 42 min mark to hear some of our drivers speak.

http://s1.q4cdn.com/714383399/files/doc_events/2016/2016-Shareowners_normalled.mp3
Click to expand...

I just now had a chance to listen to this and here are my thoughts. I think they caught Mr Smith off guard, he said if we want better healthcare we need to generate more revenue trying to justify the tnt acquisition, but what does more revenue have to do with our healthcare? Just because we generate more revenue doesn't mean they will give us better health care it means they will have more money to waste on rebranding the whole company for no reason or waste more on advertising. Also what does all this new technology he speaks of have to do with helping us out one bit with our benefits? What does the cadillac tax going into effect in 2020 have to do with our healthcare not going up last year and having a increase this year? We are no where near the cadillac threshold by about 13 thousand for each employee. Mr Smith also spoke about our pension and said the driver who asked the question was a isolated case that he was going to receive 242 dollars a month from the pension plan. I guess we all must be an isolated case because we all have low numbers from that pension he says is good and well funded, even though it is underfunded by billions. He mentioned central states several times, but our pension is no different.
 
Crazy Trucker said:
I just now had a chance to listen to this and here are my thoughts. I think they caught Mr Smith off guard, he said if we want better healthcare we need to generate more revenue trying to justify the tnt acquisition, but what does more revenue have to do with our healthcare? Just because we generate more revenue doesn't mean they will give us better health care it means they will have more money to waste on rebranding the whole company for no reason or waste more on advertising. Also what does all this new technology he speaks of have to do with helping us out one bit with our benefits? What does the cadillac tax going into effect in 2020 have to do with our healthcare not going up last year and having a increase this year? We are no where near the cadillac threshold by about 13 thousand for each employee. Mr Smith also spoke about our pension and said the driver who asked the question was a isolated case that he was going to receive 242 dollars a month from the pension plan. I guess we all must be an isolated case because we all have low numbers from that pension he says is good and well funded, even though it is underfunded by billions. He mentioned central states several times, but our pension is no different.
Click to expand...

Well a couple things, advertising isn't a waste of money rebranding might be but advertising pays off. I've heard you and others claim your pension will be almost nothing then others say it will be a decent amount, since you have a tenuous relationship with the truth I remain suspicious of your claim. Third you pension is nothing like Central states and I have on many occasions explained why but sense it flys in the face of you premise you ignore it and continue to make the nonsense claim.
 
johndeere4020 said:
Well a couple things, advertising isn't a waste of money rebranding might be but advertising pays off. I've heard you and others claim your pension will be almost nothing then others say it will be a decent amount, since you have a tenuous relationship with the truth I remain suspicious of your claim. Third you pension is nothing like Central states and I have on many occasions explained why but sense it flys in the face of you premise you ignore it and continue to make the nonsense claim.
Click to expand...
On my last pension update it said if I retired right now I could draw just a tad over $200 a month, I don't know what anyone else is going to make or what it will be when I do retire, but I don't expect it to be to much more than that IF it is even around at that point which I don't really expect it to be. Also I wonder just what kind of health insurance Ole Freddie boy has and if it could be considered a Cadillac plan.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top