We were asked to add a link for our "UNINSURED" employees. This will make a statement to our show management
that the people who lost benefits are not just a number. These employees had their benifits ripped out from underneath them. This is also for the employees who wish to
support the "UNINSURED" employees by wearing them.
http://www.uninsuredwristband.com/
Thank to www.ltlboards.com for this link.
The FedEx Watch Dogs
Saturday, June 27, 2009
Wednesday, June 24, 2009
Friday, June 19, 2009
A Letter To Congress And U.S Senate From Rep.Linda Sanchez
Dear Colleague,
In December 2008, I proudly served on a Blue Ribbon Commission Panel convened to hear
testimony on the struggle to keep FedEx jobs in the Los Angeles area in the middle class. What I
learned from workers, economic experts, clergy, and community leaders was that FedEx has
systematically eroded its workers wages, insurance and retirement benefits to the point where
workers are now on the brink of falling out of the middle class.
The Blue Ribbon Commission Panel learned of how difficult it is for a FedEx worker employed
full-time to pay for health coverage costs for his family. The costs go up while the coverage
goes down. We learned that FedEx changed worker retirement plans which resulted in
individual losses of hundreds of thousands of dollars in retirement income to many workers.
Even if employees work longer and retire later, they will still end up with less money. We
learned that FedEx routinely retaliates against and intimidates its workers who are attempting to
form a union. We learned how FedEx manipulated federal law in 1996 to strip the FedEx
Express workers of their right to freedom of association and make it harder for the workers to
orgamze.
After hearing and compiling all of the compelling testimony, the Blue Ribbon Commission Panel
is now issuing this report with our recommendations on how to keep FedEx jobs in Los Angeles
in the middle class. Our recommended course of action includes calling on FedEx to become
neutral and allow the workers to unionize if they so choose and for Congress to approve
legislation that would return the FedEx workers rights to freedom of association by eliminating
the 1996 "FedEx Special Deal" so workers may exercise their rights to unionize ifthey want to.
I believe this report will be as eye-opening to you as the testimony was to us, and I encourage
you to take some time during the upcoming weeks to read it.
Sincerely,
Linda T. Sanchez
Member of Congress
The Full Blue Ribbon Report Click Here
In December 2008, I proudly served on a Blue Ribbon Commission Panel convened to hear
testimony on the struggle to keep FedEx jobs in the Los Angeles area in the middle class. What I
learned from workers, economic experts, clergy, and community leaders was that FedEx has
systematically eroded its workers wages, insurance and retirement benefits to the point where
workers are now on the brink of falling out of the middle class.
The Blue Ribbon Commission Panel learned of how difficult it is for a FedEx worker employed
full-time to pay for health coverage costs for his family. The costs go up while the coverage
goes down. We learned that FedEx changed worker retirement plans which resulted in
individual losses of hundreds of thousands of dollars in retirement income to many workers.
Even if employees work longer and retire later, they will still end up with less money. We
learned that FedEx routinely retaliates against and intimidates its workers who are attempting to
form a union. We learned how FedEx manipulated federal law in 1996 to strip the FedEx
Express workers of their right to freedom of association and make it harder for the workers to
orgamze.
After hearing and compiling all of the compelling testimony, the Blue Ribbon Commission Panel
is now issuing this report with our recommendations on how to keep FedEx jobs in Los Angeles
in the middle class. Our recommended course of action includes calling on FedEx to become
neutral and allow the workers to unionize if they so choose and for Congress to approve
legislation that would return the FedEx workers rights to freedom of association by eliminating
the 1996 "FedEx Special Deal" so workers may exercise their rights to unionize ifthey want to.
I believe this report will be as eye-opening to you as the testimony was to us, and I encourage
you to take some time during the upcoming weeks to read it.
Sincerely,
Linda T. Sanchez
Member of Congress
The Full Blue Ribbon Report Click Here
Wednesday, June 17, 2009
You Asked For An Answer...
"Could you please explain how the central states fund is doing? How much money is left? Who's hand is in the cookie jar?"
Thanks
3rd Floor
If you have any questions about the finances of the Teamsters Central States Pension Fund, I would recommend that you read the quarterly reports of the Independent Special Counsel that monitors the fund’s activities under the Fitzimmons consent decree. Here’s a link for the most recent report:
https://www.centralstatesfunds.org/CSF/Pdf/Arbitration_Letters/6-1-2009-1st2009.pdf
On page 4 of this report, the independent special counsel noted that the “…vast majority of the Fund’s active members were covered by collective bargaining agreements that have come into compliance with the Fund’s rehabilitation plan. Almost all of the compliant employers and bargaining units have agreed to adopt the rehabilitation plan’s Primary Schedule (generally requiring 7-8%annual contribution increases for five years and maintaining current benefit levels.)
On page 5, he notes that, “Although it thus appears the Pension Fund has reported progress in securing increased employer contributions and controlling benefits as required of “critical status” plans under the PPA, (the Pension Protection Act of 2006) the financial information presented below also makes clear that the Fund has suffered serious investment losses in the general stock market and economic downturn that occurred during 2008 and the first quarter of 2009.”
Finally, the response to your question is on page 8: “The financial report prepared by Fund staff for the three months ending March 31, 2009 shows net assets as of that date of $15,664,384,000.
It is clear to anybody who doesn’t have an ax to grind that there is no criminal “hand is in the cookie jar.” The CSPF is certainly in financial trouble, like many multi-employer Taft-Hartley benefit funds. But the trustees who direct its investments are complying with all legal requirements to protect the pensions of workers.
THE FEDEX WATCH DOGS
Thanks
3rd Floor
If you have any questions about the finances of the Teamsters Central States Pension Fund, I would recommend that you read the quarterly reports of the Independent Special Counsel that monitors the fund’s activities under the Fitzimmons consent decree. Here’s a link for the most recent report:
https://www.centralstatesfunds.org/CSF/Pdf/Arbitration_Letters/6-1-2009-1st2009.pdf
On page 4 of this report, the independent special counsel noted that the “…vast majority of the Fund’s active members were covered by collective bargaining agreements that have come into compliance with the Fund’s rehabilitation plan. Almost all of the compliant employers and bargaining units have agreed to adopt the rehabilitation plan’s Primary Schedule (generally requiring 7-8%annual contribution increases for five years and maintaining current benefit levels.)
On page 5, he notes that, “Although it thus appears the Pension Fund has reported progress in securing increased employer contributions and controlling benefits as required of “critical status” plans under the PPA, (the Pension Protection Act of 2006) the financial information presented below also makes clear that the Fund has suffered serious investment losses in the general stock market and economic downturn that occurred during 2008 and the first quarter of 2009.”
Finally, the response to your question is on page 8: “The financial report prepared by Fund staff for the three months ending March 31, 2009 shows net assets as of that date of $15,664,384,000.
It is clear to anybody who doesn’t have an ax to grind that there is no criminal “hand is in the cookie jar.” The CSPF is certainly in financial trouble, like many multi-employer Taft-Hartley benefit funds. But the trustees who direct its investments are complying with all legal requirements to protect the pensions of workers.
THE FEDEX WATCH DOGS
Thursday, June 11, 2009
Campaign Against Rival Could Haunt FedEx
June 10, 2009
By Stephanie Clifford, NY Times
The word bailout has gone from descriptive to derogatory.
The FedEx-sponsored Web site
BrownBailout.com
(brown is both U.P.S.’s color and nickname) says that U.P.S. is “quietly seeking a Congressional bailout designed to limit competition for overnight deliveries.” Along with a “bailout-o-meter” showing U.P.S.’s revenue, and a spoof of a U.P.S. commercial, the site includes statements like, “This is a bailout, plain and simple, and the American people won’t stand for it.
The real issue here is not government-supplied cash for U.P.S., but the labor laws under which U.P.S. and FedEx are classified.
The House recently approved a bill that reclassified a FedEx division, making it easier for unions to form there, and FedEx is fighting that legislation as it goes to the Senate. In effect, FedEx is claiming that passage of the bill would be a bailout for U.P.S. by hampering a competitor.
FedEx’s casting of a labor-law dispute as a bailout has raised ire at U.P.S. and at the Teamsters union, which said on Tuesday that it planned to respond with its own public relations campaign.
Some advertising experts said FedEx was putting its own brand at risk by so aggressively attacking a competitor and accusing U.P.S. of taking a federal bailout.
“Hinging so much of this — even the site itself and the URL name — to a bailout brings some pretty significant risks,” said Scott Elser, a partner in LaunchPad Advertising, which is not working with either company. “It’s arguably one of the most controversial terms that you can define in politics today. They draw you there based on that, and you don’t have to surf very long to realize that this is clearly not a bailout as most consumers and business people would define it, which is writing a check to a troubled business.”
“It’s a little bit of a bait and switch,” Mr. Elser said, which “has the ability to potentially harm their brand.”
FedEx is objecting to a provision in a Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill that the House passed in May. The legislation would classify nonairline employees from FedEx’s Express division, which makes overnight deliveries, under the National Labor Relations Act rather than the Railway Labor Act, which currently governs Express as well as airlines and railroads. The reclassification would make it easier to unionize the division, since N.L.R.A. unions are allowed to form at a company’s individual sites; under the railway act, unions need national support from a majority of a company’s workers.
U.P.S., which is heavily unionized, is governed under the N.L.R.A. And it has been lobbying to get its competitor’s Express division classified under that act.
“FedEx is appearing to spend millions of dollars to try to convince Congress that a FedEx driver delivering a package is different from a U.P.S. driver delivering a package,” said Malcolm Berkley, a U.P.S. spokesman.
Mr. Berkley said it was a competitive issue for U.P.S. “FedEx Express uses the fact of the labor law it is currently under inappropriately as a lever when talking to U.P.S. customers, particularly when we’re negotiating our contracts,” he said.
FedEx’s labeling of the legislation as a bailout was wrong, he said.
“There’s clearly no way we’re seeking a bailout. In fact, what we’re doing is working to eliminate an earmark that has been given to FedEx for some years,” he said.
Executives from the Teamsters, which represents 240,000 U.P.S. workers, also said the bailout campaign was misleading.
“It is just the height of hypocrisy for them to allege that there is a bailout of their competitor, when in fact, it’s the company, it’s FedEx, who has benefited from this misclassification of their workers,” said Ken Hall, international vice president and director of the package division at the Teamsters. “It’s laughable to think that they would portray this as some bailout. This is simply leveling the playing field.”
While Mr. Berkley said U.P.S. was not planning a campaign in response, the Teamsters would, Mr. Hall said.
“Particularly, it’s going to be a grass-roots and an educational program to make sure that those folks in Congress truly understand the issue.”
FedEx, meanwhile, has been arguing that the different classification makes sense, since its roots and ways of doing business are different from those of U.P.S. “Our company and U.P.S. are fundamentally different companies,” said Maury Lane, director of communications at FedEx. “They aren’t and shouldn’t be regulated the same way.”
As for the bailout characterization, “that piece of legislation only helps one company while hurting a main competitor — if that’s not a bailout, we’re going to have to redefine the word,” he said.
Late last year, FedEx’s chief executive, Frederick W. Smith, signaled the company would fight hard against any potential legislation.
“We’ve said repeatedly that it is extremely bad public policy,” Mr. Smith said in a conference call with investors. “We would hope that provision would not see the light of day.”
Labor experts differed on the companies’ positions. Karen E. Boroff, the dean of the Stillman School of Business at Seton Hall University, said she found FedEx’s arguments persuasive. “FedEx absolutely has a right to be concerned about tiny little bargaining units interrupting the flow of their delivery,” she said. And, she said, workers doing similar jobs were often classified under different labor laws. But James J. Brudney, a law professor at the Moritz College of Law at the Ohio State University, said that FedEx Express’s classification was “a historical anomaly.”
“From the workers’ point of view, it seems unfair,” he said.
Advertising executives who reviewed the Web site said that it did some things very well.
“I give them credit for inventiveness,” said Steve Centrillo, a principal at A-Team Advisors, a consultant to advertising agencies that is based in New York.
Pinning the problems on U.P.S. rather than on unionization helped FedEx avoid sticky labor relations questions, he said.
But, Mr. Centrillo said, the use of bailout was “the most questionably ethical thing on the site.
“It’s taking a word that is extremely loaded right now, and implying that somehow, the government is writing a check to U.P.S., which is clearly not the case.”
By Stephanie Clifford, NY Times
The word bailout has gone from descriptive to derogatory.
The FedEx-sponsored Web site
BrownBailout.com
(brown is both U.P.S.’s color and nickname) says that U.P.S. is “quietly seeking a Congressional bailout designed to limit competition for overnight deliveries.” Along with a “bailout-o-meter” showing U.P.S.’s revenue, and a spoof of a U.P.S. commercial, the site includes statements like, “This is a bailout, plain and simple, and the American people won’t stand for it.
The real issue here is not government-supplied cash for U.P.S., but the labor laws under which U.P.S. and FedEx are classified.
The House recently approved a bill that reclassified a FedEx division, making it easier for unions to form there, and FedEx is fighting that legislation as it goes to the Senate. In effect, FedEx is claiming that passage of the bill would be a bailout for U.P.S. by hampering a competitor.
FedEx’s casting of a labor-law dispute as a bailout has raised ire at U.P.S. and at the Teamsters union, which said on Tuesday that it planned to respond with its own public relations campaign.
Some advertising experts said FedEx was putting its own brand at risk by so aggressively attacking a competitor and accusing U.P.S. of taking a federal bailout.
“Hinging so much of this — even the site itself and the URL name — to a bailout brings some pretty significant risks,” said Scott Elser, a partner in LaunchPad Advertising, which is not working with either company. “It’s arguably one of the most controversial terms that you can define in politics today. They draw you there based on that, and you don’t have to surf very long to realize that this is clearly not a bailout as most consumers and business people would define it, which is writing a check to a troubled business.”
“It’s a little bit of a bait and switch,” Mr. Elser said, which “has the ability to potentially harm their brand.”
FedEx is objecting to a provision in a Federal Aviation Administration reauthorization bill that the House passed in May. The legislation would classify nonairline employees from FedEx’s Express division, which makes overnight deliveries, under the National Labor Relations Act rather than the Railway Labor Act, which currently governs Express as well as airlines and railroads. The reclassification would make it easier to unionize the division, since N.L.R.A. unions are allowed to form at a company’s individual sites; under the railway act, unions need national support from a majority of a company’s workers.
U.P.S., which is heavily unionized, is governed under the N.L.R.A. And it has been lobbying to get its competitor’s Express division classified under that act.
“FedEx is appearing to spend millions of dollars to try to convince Congress that a FedEx driver delivering a package is different from a U.P.S. driver delivering a package,” said Malcolm Berkley, a U.P.S. spokesman.
Mr. Berkley said it was a competitive issue for U.P.S. “FedEx Express uses the fact of the labor law it is currently under inappropriately as a lever when talking to U.P.S. customers, particularly when we’re negotiating our contracts,” he said.
FedEx’s labeling of the legislation as a bailout was wrong, he said.
“There’s clearly no way we’re seeking a bailout. In fact, what we’re doing is working to eliminate an earmark that has been given to FedEx for some years,” he said.
Executives from the Teamsters, which represents 240,000 U.P.S. workers, also said the bailout campaign was misleading.
“It is just the height of hypocrisy for them to allege that there is a bailout of their competitor, when in fact, it’s the company, it’s FedEx, who has benefited from this misclassification of their workers,” said Ken Hall, international vice president and director of the package division at the Teamsters. “It’s laughable to think that they would portray this as some bailout. This is simply leveling the playing field.”
While Mr. Berkley said U.P.S. was not planning a campaign in response, the Teamsters would, Mr. Hall said.
“Particularly, it’s going to be a grass-roots and an educational program to make sure that those folks in Congress truly understand the issue.”
FedEx, meanwhile, has been arguing that the different classification makes sense, since its roots and ways of doing business are different from those of U.P.S. “Our company and U.P.S. are fundamentally different companies,” said Maury Lane, director of communications at FedEx. “They aren’t and shouldn’t be regulated the same way.”
As for the bailout characterization, “that piece of legislation only helps one company while hurting a main competitor — if that’s not a bailout, we’re going to have to redefine the word,” he said.
Late last year, FedEx’s chief executive, Frederick W. Smith, signaled the company would fight hard against any potential legislation.
“We’ve said repeatedly that it is extremely bad public policy,” Mr. Smith said in a conference call with investors. “We would hope that provision would not see the light of day.”
Labor experts differed on the companies’ positions. Karen E. Boroff, the dean of the Stillman School of Business at Seton Hall University, said she found FedEx’s arguments persuasive. “FedEx absolutely has a right to be concerned about tiny little bargaining units interrupting the flow of their delivery,” she said. And, she said, workers doing similar jobs were often classified under different labor laws. But James J. Brudney, a law professor at the Moritz College of Law at the Ohio State University, said that FedEx Express’s classification was “a historical anomaly.”
“From the workers’ point of view, it seems unfair,” he said.
Advertising executives who reviewed the Web site said that it did some things very well.
“I give them credit for inventiveness,” said Steve Centrillo, a principal at A-Team Advisors, a consultant to advertising agencies that is based in New York.
Pinning the problems on U.P.S. rather than on unionization helped FedEx avoid sticky labor relations questions, he said.
But, Mr. Centrillo said, the use of bailout was “the most questionably ethical thing on the site.
“It’s taking a word that is extremely loaded right now, and implying that somehow, the government is writing a check to U.P.S., which is clearly not the case.”
Wednesday, June 10, 2009
Tell Your Senators to Support the Express Carrier Employee Protection Provision
What Is FedEx So Afraid Of?
"I'm going to destroy them." That is the threat from FedEx's chief spokesman, Maury Lane, when asked by U.S. News and World Report about his company's soon-to-be launched multi-million dollar ad against the Express Carrier Employee Protection provision.
Lane's words mean that FedEx Express will stop at nothing to preserve its status as the ONLY freight and package-delivery company in the United States to classify all its workers under the Railway Labor Act. The RLA applies to only aircraft and railroad workers.
FedEx does not want its special status taken away because they know it would make organizing easier for its workers. This legislation is so important because it will restore fairness to the freight and package delivery industry. This loophole has allowed FedEx to have an unfair competitive advantage and deprive its workers of the right to secure union representation.
With your help, the House recently voted to pass the FAA Reauthorization Bill and with it came the passage of the Express Carrier provision. Passing this bill shows first hand that hard work and perseverance can pay off. The new administration is on our side, and together we are making changes in Washington to better our Union and the lives of working Americans across the country.
Thank you for your help in passing this important legislation in the House. Although the Express Carrier Employee Protection provision has passed the House, the Senate has not yet voted on this issue. We must continue our hard work to ensure our voices are heard.
Please contact your senators today and let them know you support the Express Carrier legislation.
CALL CONGRESS NOW!
"I'm going to destroy them." That is the threat from FedEx's chief spokesman, Maury Lane, when asked by U.S. News and World Report about his company's soon-to-be launched multi-million dollar ad against the Express Carrier Employee Protection provision.
Lane's words mean that FedEx Express will stop at nothing to preserve its status as the ONLY freight and package-delivery company in the United States to classify all its workers under the Railway Labor Act. The RLA applies to only aircraft and railroad workers.
FedEx does not want its special status taken away because they know it would make organizing easier for its workers. This legislation is so important because it will restore fairness to the freight and package delivery industry. This loophole has allowed FedEx to have an unfair competitive advantage and deprive its workers of the right to secure union representation.
With your help, the House recently voted to pass the FAA Reauthorization Bill and with it came the passage of the Express Carrier provision. Passing this bill shows first hand that hard work and perseverance can pay off. The new administration is on our side, and together we are making changes in Washington to better our Union and the lives of working Americans across the country.
Thank you for your help in passing this important legislation in the House. Although the Express Carrier Employee Protection provision has passed the House, the Senate has not yet voted on this issue. We must continue our hard work to ensure our voices are heard.
Please contact your senators today and let them know you support the Express Carrier legislation.
CALL CONGRESS NOW!
Saturday, June 6, 2009
Not Cool, FedEx
By Rich Smith (TMF Ditty)
June 4, 2009 | Comments (1)
Call me a cynic, but I wonder: If FedEx (NYSE: FDX) had suddenly discovered $1 billion in windfall profits -- from, I dunno, finding an unclaimed cargo-hold full of gold bullion in one of its airplanes -- would it have kept the news to itself, or shouted it from the rooftops?
And if it's the latter -- as I strongly suspect it would be -- then I also wonder: When FedEx actually discovered that it was going to have to write down its assets by $1.2 billion this quarter, why did I find out about it in a quietly tucked-away SEC filing rather than in a press release?
Full Article CLICK HERE
June 4, 2009 | Comments (1)
Call me a cynic, but I wonder: If FedEx (NYSE: FDX) had suddenly discovered $1 billion in windfall profits -- from, I dunno, finding an unclaimed cargo-hold full of gold bullion in one of its airplanes -- would it have kept the news to itself, or shouted it from the rooftops?
And if it's the latter -- as I strongly suspect it would be -- then I also wonder: When FedEx actually discovered that it was going to have to write down its assets by $1.2 billion this quarter, why did I find out about it in a quietly tucked-away SEC filing rather than in a press release?
Full Article CLICK HERE
Wednesday, June 3, 2009
F.Y.I.
Howard Shultz founder and C.E.O of Starbucks Coffee, Howard is also sponsoring millions of dollars for Employees Free Choice Act not to pass, why because Starbucks employees are organizing to unionize with IWW. The employees of Starbucks are also working minimum hours, why are they working 6 hours only? So Howard Shultz doesn't have to provide fringe benefits for his employees, and the only fringe benefits provided are to the store managers! Shame on you Howard, how do you sleep at night? Knowing you use your employees back to get filthy rich, and not only your employees but you dig deeply into the public (customers) pockets too, by charging those outrageous prices, just for coffee. Now brothers and sisters of FedEx Freight does this not sound familiar to us? To the brothers and sisters of our docks and hostlers of 10, 15, 20 years of service to part time, pure Corporate GREED.
So support the Employees of Starbucks by not purchasing any products of Starbucks, and support your local communities by buying your coffee from your local mom and pop donut shop. Please also support the Employees Free Choice Act, by calling or writing to your state senators to support this act, and remind them who votes and pays their salaries The Tax Payers of their state! So Howard Shultz why am I participating in this union drive? Because I am part of the Change to Win coalition group and I am helping out the union communities to save and restored our middle class in America and the American Dream in America. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!
Joe Nuño, Rudy Hernandez and FedEx Watchdogs.
So support the Employees of Starbucks by not purchasing any products of Starbucks, and support your local communities by buying your coffee from your local mom and pop donut shop. Please also support the Employees Free Choice Act, by calling or writing to your state senators to support this act, and remind them who votes and pays their salaries The Tax Payers of their state! So Howard Shultz why am I participating in this union drive? Because I am part of the Change to Win coalition group and I am helping out the union communities to save and restored our middle class in America and the American Dream in America. GOD BLESS AMERICA!!!
Joe Nuño, Rudy Hernandez and FedEx Watchdogs.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)