Thursday, December 30, 2010
Wednesday, December 29, 2010
Beijing city to raise minimum wage 21%
28 Dec 2010 12:47pm
Beijing city to raise minimum wage 21%
By Jamil Anderlini in Beijing and Rahul Jacob in Hong Kong
Beijing city is to raise its minimum wage 21 per cent next year, the second such rise in barely six months, amid rising inflationary pressure and growing concern over China's widening wealth gap.
The increase, which will come into effect on New Year's day, raises the statutory minimum monthly wage in the Chinese capital to Rmb1,160 ($175) and the hourly rate to Rmb6.7. It follows a 20 per cent rise in June.
Every province and municipality in China has announced a rise in its minimum wage this year, with increases ranging from 12 per cent to Beijing's rise.
The official measure of annual consumer price inflation in China hit 5.1 per cent in November, up from 4.4 per cent in October, with food prices rising 11.7 per cent in November from a year earlier.
The government is worried about the disproportionate burden of rising food costs on low-income households, which spend a larger share of their income on basic necessities. It also fears that persistent price rises could stoke social unrest, as they often have in the past.
"While China's living standards have dramatically risen over the past 30 years, the gap between rich and poor has sharply widened," Yu Yongding, an influential former adviser to China's central bank, wrote in a newspaper article last week. "With the contrast between the opulent lifestyles of the rich and the slow improvement of basic living conditions for the poor fomenting social tension, a serious backlash is brewing."
Nationwide increases in minimum wages are part of the government's plan to reduce income disparity and the Chinese economy's heavy reliance on investment and promote greater consumption by middle- and low-income households.
But with many businesses already being squeezed by rising input costs, wage increases come at a difficult time and are likely to lead to higher overall inflation.
"In just the last three months we've already had to raise entry-level starting wages 60 per cent just to get people to come to a job interview," said Jade Gray, chief executive of Gung Ho Pizza, a Beijing-based gourmet pizza delivery service. "With rising rents, the much higher cost of ingredients and now wage inflation, many businesses in the services industries are going to find it impossible not to pass on much higher costs to consumers."
With its latest wage increase Beijing now has the highest minimum wage in the country, ahead of Shanghai on Rmb1,120 per month but other cities and provinces, including the manufacturing hub of Guangdong, are already eyeing further increases early in the new year.
The government estimates that Beijing's minimum wage rise will benefit nearly 3m people.
In the separately-ruled Chinese territory of Hong Kong, legislators in November set the city's first-ever minimum wage at HK$28 an hour. The new wage, which takes effect in May 2011, followed months of public consultation and debate amid growing concern in the city about widening income disparities.
Beijing city to raise minimum wage 21%
By Jamil Anderlini in Beijing and Rahul Jacob in Hong Kong
Beijing city is to raise its minimum wage 21 per cent next year, the second such rise in barely six months, amid rising inflationary pressure and growing concern over China's widening wealth gap.
The increase, which will come into effect on New Year's day, raises the statutory minimum monthly wage in the Chinese capital to Rmb1,160 ($175) and the hourly rate to Rmb6.7. It follows a 20 per cent rise in June.
Every province and municipality in China has announced a rise in its minimum wage this year, with increases ranging from 12 per cent to Beijing's rise.
The official measure of annual consumer price inflation in China hit 5.1 per cent in November, up from 4.4 per cent in October, with food prices rising 11.7 per cent in November from a year earlier.
The government is worried about the disproportionate burden of rising food costs on low-income households, which spend a larger share of their income on basic necessities. It also fears that persistent price rises could stoke social unrest, as they often have in the past.
"While China's living standards have dramatically risen over the past 30 years, the gap between rich and poor has sharply widened," Yu Yongding, an influential former adviser to China's central bank, wrote in a newspaper article last week. "With the contrast between the opulent lifestyles of the rich and the slow improvement of basic living conditions for the poor fomenting social tension, a serious backlash is brewing."
Nationwide increases in minimum wages are part of the government's plan to reduce income disparity and the Chinese economy's heavy reliance on investment and promote greater consumption by middle- and low-income households.
But with many businesses already being squeezed by rising input costs, wage increases come at a difficult time and are likely to lead to higher overall inflation.
"In just the last three months we've already had to raise entry-level starting wages 60 per cent just to get people to come to a job interview," said Jade Gray, chief executive of Gung Ho Pizza, a Beijing-based gourmet pizza delivery service. "With rising rents, the much higher cost of ingredients and now wage inflation, many businesses in the services industries are going to find it impossible not to pass on much higher costs to consumers."
With its latest wage increase Beijing now has the highest minimum wage in the country, ahead of Shanghai on Rmb1,120 per month but other cities and provinces, including the manufacturing hub of Guangdong, are already eyeing further increases early in the new year.
The government estimates that Beijing's minimum wage rise will benefit nearly 3m people.
In the separately-ruled Chinese territory of Hong Kong, legislators in November set the city's first-ever minimum wage at HK$28 an hour. The new wage, which takes effect in May 2011, followed months of public consultation and debate amid growing concern in the city about widening income disparities.
Friday, December 17, 2010
Wednesday, December 15, 2010
A Simple Guide For Talking Unions This Holiday Season
A simple guide for talking unions this holiday season
.
by Zoe Bridges-Curry on December 14, 2010
.
It’s no secret: Not everyone sees unions as key to rebuilding America and the middle class. It’s easy to tune out the misinformation about unions and the workers who make them strong when you hear it on the news, but what should you do when the same misinformation comes from your friends and family? We’re here to help with some simple facts so you can speak up the next time you encounter someone attacking unions, and help shed light on what unions are really all about!
MYTH: Unions are run by big, overpaid bosses.
FACT: Unions are run by workers.
A union is simply a group of employees who join together to address workplace issues, so they can improve their working conditions and have a fair shot at a better life for themselves and their families.
Unions are democratic institutions. At the local, state, and national level, all union leadership is elected by majority votes—just like elections for public office.
MYTH: Unions only care about their members.
FACT: Unions are fighting to improve the lives of all workers.
It’s easy to forget that we have unions to thank for a lot of things we take for granted today in today’s workplaces: the minimum wage, the 8-hour work day, child labor laws, health and safety standards, and even the weekend.
Today, unions across the country are on the frontlines advocating for basic workplace reforms like increases in the minimum wage, and pushing lawmakers to require paid sick leave.
Studies show that a large union presence in an industry or region can raise wages even for non-union workers. That means more consumer spending, and a stronger economy for us all.
So it’s no wonder that most Americans (61%) believe that “labor unions are necessary to protect the working person,” according to Pew’s most recent values survey.
MYTH: Union workers are lazy, and unions are bad for business.
FACT: Unions and profitability go hand in hand.
Actually, unions make the workplace more efficient – despite the stereotype that we all hear.
Unions raise productivity on average by up to 24% in manufacturing, 16% in hospitals, and 38% in the construction. Union workers have higher professional standards because unions increase opportunities for worker training. Many even offer their own training programs.
Union workers are employed in some of the most respected professions. They’re nurses, firefighters, teachers, day care providers, engineers, and NASA scientists. Union members are responsible for building nuclear subs, the space shuttle, The Smithsonian, the Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge, and even the American flag.
Even small business owners think that unions are good for workers—and the economy. In fact, over 80% agree “strong unions make the free market system stronger.” They’re right. Unions exist at some of the most successful companies out there, including AT&T, Costco, UPS, and Southwest.
MYTH: Unions ask for too much. In this economy, people should be thankful for any job.
FACT: Good jobs mean a stronger economy, and that means more jobs.
This idea is coming straight from the same corporations that ran our economy into the ground. Now they’re taking advantage of our financial worries to grab an even bigger slice of the pie.
It’s just plain wrong to make working Americans foot the bill for Wall Street’s party. And it’s also bad for the economy. Because when workers can’t afford the products they produce, consumer spending takes a serious hit, and the economy does, too.
But when workers can bargain for family-sustaining pay and benefits, consumer spending increases. The result is a stronger economy—one that creates jobs and enables people to work their way into the middle class.
MYTH: Public employees are to blame for our budget woes.
FACT: Public employees earn less than private-sector workers in similar jobs.
You’re going to hear this a lot more soon. But we can’t afford to have extremist policymakers get away with scapegoating civil servants like teachers, fire fighters, and police officers.
Private-sector workers should be angry about the inadequate benefits they receive, but the solution isn’t to take hope away from the public sector workers who keep our communities strong. We have to make the economy work for everyone.
Recent studies show that public employees make significantly less than private-sector workers with comparable education and experience, even when you factor in benefits. And according to Nobel laureate economist Paul Krugman, state and local employees’ pensions make up only 6 percent of non-federal public sector spending.
Still not convinced? It turns out that what’s bad for public workers is bad for the economy, too. The Center for Economic Policy Research reports that freezing federal workers’ pay will mean a loss of $2.5 billion in consumption by 2012—18,000 private sector workers stand to lose their jobs as a result.
And don’t forget, it was Wall Street’s recklessness that caused budget shortfalls in states across the country—not public service workers. Making public service workers pay for Wall Street’s wrongdoing won’t create jobs, and it won’t save the public services we all depend on.
.
by Zoe Bridges-Curry on December 14, 2010
.
It’s no secret: Not everyone sees unions as key to rebuilding America and the middle class. It’s easy to tune out the misinformation about unions and the workers who make them strong when you hear it on the news, but what should you do when the same misinformation comes from your friends and family? We’re here to help with some simple facts so you can speak up the next time you encounter someone attacking unions, and help shed light on what unions are really all about!
MYTH: Unions are run by big, overpaid bosses.
FACT: Unions are run by workers.
A union is simply a group of employees who join together to address workplace issues, so they can improve their working conditions and have a fair shot at a better life for themselves and their families.
Unions are democratic institutions. At the local, state, and national level, all union leadership is elected by majority votes—just like elections for public office.
MYTH: Unions only care about their members.
FACT: Unions are fighting to improve the lives of all workers.
It’s easy to forget that we have unions to thank for a lot of things we take for granted today in today’s workplaces: the minimum wage, the 8-hour work day, child labor laws, health and safety standards, and even the weekend.
Today, unions across the country are on the frontlines advocating for basic workplace reforms like increases in the minimum wage, and pushing lawmakers to require paid sick leave.
Studies show that a large union presence in an industry or region can raise wages even for non-union workers. That means more consumer spending, and a stronger economy for us all.
So it’s no wonder that most Americans (61%) believe that “labor unions are necessary to protect the working person,” according to Pew’s most recent values survey.
MYTH: Union workers are lazy, and unions are bad for business.
FACT: Unions and profitability go hand in hand.
Actually, unions make the workplace more efficient – despite the stereotype that we all hear.
Unions raise productivity on average by up to 24% in manufacturing, 16% in hospitals, and 38% in the construction. Union workers have higher professional standards because unions increase opportunities for worker training. Many even offer their own training programs.
Union workers are employed in some of the most respected professions. They’re nurses, firefighters, teachers, day care providers, engineers, and NASA scientists. Union members are responsible for building nuclear subs, the space shuttle, The Smithsonian, the Hoover Dam Bypass Bridge, and even the American flag.
Even small business owners think that unions are good for workers—and the economy. In fact, over 80% agree “strong unions make the free market system stronger.” They’re right. Unions exist at some of the most successful companies out there, including AT&T, Costco, UPS, and Southwest.
MYTH: Unions ask for too much. In this economy, people should be thankful for any job.
FACT: Good jobs mean a stronger economy, and that means more jobs.
This idea is coming straight from the same corporations that ran our economy into the ground. Now they’re taking advantage of our financial worries to grab an even bigger slice of the pie.
It’s just plain wrong to make working Americans foot the bill for Wall Street’s party. And it’s also bad for the economy. Because when workers can’t afford the products they produce, consumer spending takes a serious hit, and the economy does, too.
But when workers can bargain for family-sustaining pay and benefits, consumer spending increases. The result is a stronger economy—one that creates jobs and enables people to work their way into the middle class.
MYTH: Public employees are to blame for our budget woes.
FACT: Public employees earn less than private-sector workers in similar jobs.
You’re going to hear this a lot more soon. But we can’t afford to have extremist policymakers get away with scapegoating civil servants like teachers, fire fighters, and police officers.
Private-sector workers should be angry about the inadequate benefits they receive, but the solution isn’t to take hope away from the public sector workers who keep our communities strong. We have to make the economy work for everyone.
Recent studies show that public employees make significantly less than private-sector workers with comparable education and experience, even when you factor in benefits. And according to Nobel laureate economist Paul Krugman, state and local employees’ pensions make up only 6 percent of non-federal public sector spending.
Still not convinced? It turns out that what’s bad for public workers is bad for the economy, too. The Center for Economic Policy Research reports that freezing federal workers’ pay will mean a loss of $2.5 billion in consumption by 2012—18,000 private sector workers stand to lose their jobs as a result.
And don’t forget, it was Wall Street’s recklessness that caused budget shortfalls in states across the country—not public service workers. Making public service workers pay for Wall Street’s wrongdoing won’t create jobs, and it won’t save the public services we all depend on.
Monday, December 13, 2010
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
Thursday, December 2, 2010
Wednesday, December 1, 2010
The Republican Platform For 1956
Taken from their party platform. My, how far they have fallen.
We believe that basic to governmental integrity are unimpeachable ethical standards and irreproachable personal conduct by all people in government. We shall continue our insistence on honesty as an indispensable requirement of public service. We shall continue to root out corruption whenever and wherever it appears.
We are proud of and shall continue our far-reaching and sound advances in matters of basic human needs—expansion of social security—broadened coverage in unemployment insurance —improved housing—and better health protection for all our people. We are determined that our government remain warmly responsive to the urgent social and economic problems of our people.
We shall continue vigorously to support the United Nations.
We also propose:
Legislation to enable closer Federal scrutiny of mergers which have a significant or potential monopolistic connotations;
Procedural changes in the antitrust laws to facilitate their enforcement;
Continuance of the vigorous SEC policies which are providing maximum protection to the investor and maximum opportunity for the financing of small business without costly red tape.
Under the Republican Administration, as our country has prospered, so have its people. This is as it should be, for as President Eisenhower said: "Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
The record of performance of the Republican Administration on behalf of our working men and women goes still further. The Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen's compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal employees.
Stimulate improved job safety of our workers, through assistance to the States, employees and employers;
Continue and further perfect its programs of assistance to the millions of workers with special employment problems, such as older workers, handicapped workers, members of minority groups, and migratory workers;
Republican action created the Department of Health, Education and Welfare as the first new Federal department in 40 years, to raise the continuing consideration of these problems for the first time to the highest council of Government, the President's Cabinet.
To safeguard our precious soil and water resources for generations yet unborn;
To bring sympathetic and understanding relief promptly to farm and ranch families hard hit with problems of drought, flood or other natural disaster, or economic disaster, and to maintain the integrity of these programs by terminating them when the emergency is over;
We believe that working for the Government is not a right but a privilege. Based on that principle we will continue a security program to make certain that all people employed by our Government are of unquestioned loyalty and trustworthiness. The Republican Party will, realistically and in conformity with constitutional safeguards for the individual, continue to protect our national security by enforcing our laws fairly, vigorously, and with certainty. We will act through the new division established to this end in the Department of Justice, and by close coordination among the intelligence services.
We condemn illegal lobbying for any cause and improper use of money in political activities, including the use of funds collected by compulsion for political purposes contrary to the personal desires of the individual.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=25838
That is only a small list. So what happened?
We believe that basic to governmental integrity are unimpeachable ethical standards and irreproachable personal conduct by all people in government. We shall continue our insistence on honesty as an indispensable requirement of public service. We shall continue to root out corruption whenever and wherever it appears.
We are proud of and shall continue our far-reaching and sound advances in matters of basic human needs—expansion of social security—broadened coverage in unemployment insurance —improved housing—and better health protection for all our people. We are determined that our government remain warmly responsive to the urgent social and economic problems of our people.
We shall continue vigorously to support the United Nations.
We also propose:
Legislation to enable closer Federal scrutiny of mergers which have a significant or potential monopolistic connotations;
Procedural changes in the antitrust laws to facilitate their enforcement;
Continuance of the vigorous SEC policies which are providing maximum protection to the investor and maximum opportunity for the financing of small business without costly red tape.
Under the Republican Administration, as our country has prospered, so have its people. This is as it should be, for as President Eisenhower said: "Labor is the United States. The men and women, who with their minds, their hearts and hands, create the wealth that is shared in this country—they are America."
The record of performance of the Republican Administration on behalf of our working men and women goes still further. The Federal minimum wage has been raised for more than 2 million workers. Social Security has been extended to an additional 10 million workers and the benefits raised for 6 1/2 million. The protection of unemployment insurance has been brought to 4 million additional workers. There have been increased workmen's compensation benefits for longshoremen and harbor workers, increased retirement benefits for railroad employees, and wage increases and improved welfare and pension plans for federal employees.
Stimulate improved job safety of our workers, through assistance to the States, employees and employers;
Continue and further perfect its programs of assistance to the millions of workers with special employment problems, such as older workers, handicapped workers, members of minority groups, and migratory workers;
Republican action created the Department of Health, Education and Welfare as the first new Federal department in 40 years, to raise the continuing consideration of these problems for the first time to the highest council of Government, the President's Cabinet.
To safeguard our precious soil and water resources for generations yet unborn;
To bring sympathetic and understanding relief promptly to farm and ranch families hard hit with problems of drought, flood or other natural disaster, or economic disaster, and to maintain the integrity of these programs by terminating them when the emergency is over;
We believe that working for the Government is not a right but a privilege. Based on that principle we will continue a security program to make certain that all people employed by our Government are of unquestioned loyalty and trustworthiness. The Republican Party will, realistically and in conformity with constitutional safeguards for the individual, continue to protect our national security by enforcing our laws fairly, vigorously, and with certainty. We will act through the new division established to this end in the Department of Justice, and by close coordination among the intelligence services.
We condemn illegal lobbying for any cause and improper use of money in political activities, including the use of funds collected by compulsion for political purposes contrary to the personal desires of the individual.
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/ws/print.php?pid=25838
That is only a small list. So what happened?
Tuesday, November 30, 2010
From Our Brothers in Canada
View full HTML message
(PROTECT YOURSELF AGAINST A NON-UNION TO UNION MERGER)
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO MY SENIORITY IF FEDEX CANADA MERGES WITH PUROLATOR??
If you belong to a unionized FedEx station your seniority would carry over
and be dovetailed with the appropriate Purolator seniority list.
If you belong to a non-union FedEx station your seniority would start at the
time of the merger and be placed in order under the appropriate Purolator
seniority list.
WITH A POSSIBILITY OF A MERGER WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO KEEP YOUR SENIORITY????
Unionize your station today and protect yourself!!
www.fedexworkers.org
(PROTECT YOURSELF AGAINST A NON-UNION TO UNION MERGER)
WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO MY SENIORITY IF FEDEX CANADA MERGES WITH PUROLATOR??
If you belong to a unionized FedEx station your seniority would carry over
and be dovetailed with the appropriate Purolator seniority list.
If you belong to a non-union FedEx station your seniority would start at the
time of the merger and be placed in order under the appropriate Purolator
seniority list.
WITH A POSSIBILITY OF A MERGER WOULDN'T YOU WANT TO KEEP YOUR SENIORITY????
Unionize your station today and protect yourself!!
www.fedexworkers.org
Tuesday, November 23, 2010
Labor board rules in favor of MARB worker
Here is a good example if you decide to organize with us at FedEx Freight. There are laws in this country that protect employee's who organize its workforce. As long as you follow the rules, do your job correctly and don't threaten anyone, especially management, you will be fine.
We had an employee in Georgia,who made a remark," don't be surprise if this place burns down"' and Fedex fired him for making a "Terrorist Threat". Not for being pro-union, which he said there should be one here at FedEx. But for the threat!
Get educated on how to organize.Know what you can do and what you cannot do!
Rudy,
Organizer at FedEx Freight in
San Bernandino Ca.
Labor board rules in favor of MARB worker
09:08 PM PST on Friday, November
19, 2010
By JACK KATZANEK
The Press-Enterprise
The National Labor Relations Board has upheld a judge's 2009 decision that found in favor of a March Air Reserve Base worker who was fired after fallout from a union organizing campaign.
The case stemmed from an effort to organize workers at Satellite Services Inc., a Marquette, Mich.-based contractor that provided maintenance and operational support at the Riverside base.
Employee Raul "Rudy" Trejo had been attempting to convince his fellow workers to join the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
Trejo was fired in October 2008, several months after he was admonished by his bosses for distributing union material on the base. He was also accused of using obscene language and misusing a government vehicle in the process.
Last year federal Administrative Law Judge Lana Parke ruled that Trejo's actions were legal under the National Labor Relations Act, which gives workers the right to talk about and join a union.
Also, Parke found that Satellite Services did not investigate thoroughly enough to prove that the incidents involving foul language and abusing a vehicle, which allegedly involved spinning its wheels so violently it sprayed gravel, ever happened.
The judge, following a hearing held in Riverside in July 2009, ordered Trejo made whole for the discharge, meaning either he'd be reinstated with back pay or receive back pay if he doesn't want to be rehired.
Late last month, three members of the labor board sitting in Washington issued an opinion that upheld the judge's decision.
We had an employee in Georgia,who made a remark," don't be surprise if this place burns down"' and Fedex fired him for making a "Terrorist Threat". Not for being pro-union, which he said there should be one here at FedEx. But for the threat!
Get educated on how to organize.Know what you can do and what you cannot do!
Rudy,
Organizer at FedEx Freight in
San Bernandino Ca.
Labor board rules in favor of MARB worker
09:08 PM PST on Friday, November
19, 2010
By JACK KATZANEK
The Press-Enterprise
The National Labor Relations Board has upheld a judge's 2009 decision that found in favor of a March Air Reserve Base worker who was fired after fallout from a union organizing campaign.
The case stemmed from an effort to organize workers at Satellite Services Inc., a Marquette, Mich.-based contractor that provided maintenance and operational support at the Riverside base.
Employee Raul "Rudy" Trejo had been attempting to convince his fellow workers to join the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers.
Trejo was fired in October 2008, several months after he was admonished by his bosses for distributing union material on the base. He was also accused of using obscene language and misusing a government vehicle in the process.
Last year federal Administrative Law Judge Lana Parke ruled that Trejo's actions were legal under the National Labor Relations Act, which gives workers the right to talk about and join a union.
Also, Parke found that Satellite Services did not investigate thoroughly enough to prove that the incidents involving foul language and abusing a vehicle, which allegedly involved spinning its wheels so violently it sprayed gravel, ever happened.
The judge, following a hearing held in Riverside in July 2009, ordered Trejo made whole for the discharge, meaning either he'd be reinstated with back pay or receive back pay if he doesn't want to be rehired.
Late last month, three members of the labor board sitting in Washington issued an opinion that upheld the judge's decision.
Buffett says rich people should pay higher taxes
By Juliann Neher
Bloomberg News
WASHINGTON — Billionaire Warren Buffett said that rich people should pay more in taxes and that Bush-era tax cuts for top earners should be allowed to expire at the end of December.
"If anything, taxes for the lower and middle class and maybe even the upper middle class should even probably be cut further," Buffett said in an interview on ABC's This Week With Christiane Amanpour that is scheduled to air next Sunday. "But I think that people at the high end — people like myself — should be paying a lot more in taxes. We have it better than we've ever had it."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to take up President Barack Obama's plan to extend some of the tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush when the House returns after Thanksgiving. The legislation would retain lower tax rates and increased credits that apply only to the first $250,000 of a married couple's gross income or $200,000 of a single person's.
Unless Congress acts, income tax rates will rise across the board, tax credits that benefit families will be slashed, and tax rates on capital gains and dividends will increase.
"The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you," Buffett, chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in the interview. "But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on."
House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer didn't rule out backing a temporary extension of the Bush tax cuts for households earning more than $250,000 a year. He said Sunday he plans to discuss the matter with Obama.
"I'm certainly going to talk to him about how we move the ball forward," Hoyer said on the CBS Face the Nation program.
Bloomberg News
WASHINGTON — Billionaire Warren Buffett said that rich people should pay more in taxes and that Bush-era tax cuts for top earners should be allowed to expire at the end of December.
"If anything, taxes for the lower and middle class and maybe even the upper middle class should even probably be cut further," Buffett said in an interview on ABC's This Week With Christiane Amanpour that is scheduled to air next Sunday. "But I think that people at the high end — people like myself — should be paying a lot more in taxes. We have it better than we've ever had it."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi plans to take up President Barack Obama's plan to extend some of the tax cuts enacted under President George W. Bush when the House returns after Thanksgiving. The legislation would retain lower tax rates and increased credits that apply only to the first $250,000 of a married couple's gross income or $200,000 of a single person's.
Unless Congress acts, income tax rates will rise across the board, tax credits that benefit families will be slashed, and tax rates on capital gains and dividends will increase.
"The rich are always going to say that, you know, just give us more money and we'll go out and spend more and then it will all trickle down to the rest of you," Buffett, chief executive officer of Berkshire Hathaway Inc., said in the interview. "But that has not worked the last 10 years, and I hope the American public is catching on."
House Democratic Leader Steny Hoyer didn't rule out backing a temporary extension of the Bush tax cuts for households earning more than $250,000 a year. He said Sunday he plans to discuss the matter with Obama.
"I'm certainly going to talk to him about how we move the ball forward," Hoyer said on the CBS Face the Nation program.
Monday, November 22, 2010
Thursday, November 18, 2010
Sunday, November 14, 2010
False equivalency watch: Union versus corporate spending
Written by Allison Kilkenny
October 28th, 2010 at 9:56 am
I overheard CNN’s John Roberts worrying his pretty, neatly-coiffed anchor head about the vast amount of cash being pumped into this election cycle from outside entities. He’s right to be concerned. So far, $4 billion has been spent on the midterms, which according to Open Secrets, is enough cash to “run the city of Pittsburgh for two years, [b]uy every resident of Topeka a nice used car, [o]r treat each and every American to a Big Mac and fries.”
Have I mentioned one in eight Americans is on food stamps? Mm’k.
But the strange part happened when Roberts appeared to draw a false equivalency between unions and corporate spending. He kept lumping the two sources together as though unions were spending just as much on the midterms as outside corporate influences. That’s all shades of wrong.
Election 2010 to Shatter Spending Records as Republicans Benefit from Late Cash Surge
This outside money, made considerably easier to raise and spend by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision primarily purchases television, radio and print advertisements. Sometimes, these messages promote a candidate.
But often, they attack politicos. And of this spending, about $176.5 million has come from non-party-committee conservative organizations, through Wednesday. That compares to $81.6 million from non-party-committee liberal organizations. In four U.S. Senate races, outside groups have spent more than the candidates themselves through mid-October.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce ($34 million), American Action Network ($22.1 million), the Karl Rove-backed American Crossroads ($19.9 million) and Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies ($16.2 million) and ranked one, two, three and four among outside organizations spending money on independent expenditures, electioneering communications and other political communication costs through Wednesday. All are overtly conservative organizations.
They’re followed in fifth and sixth place by two liberal labor unions – Service Employees International Union ($15.5 million) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees ($11.8 million).
So the outside corporate influences (Chamber, AAN, American Crossroads -which discloses its donors- and Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies, which does not,) have thus far spent a total of some $92.2 million dollars on the midterm elections, while unions have spent $27.3 million, less than a third of corporate spending.
Certainly, $27.3 million isn’t chump change, but it’s important to keep these things in perspective. Outside corporate groups are spending way, way, way more than labor unions. Most importantly, while unions must disclose their donors, groups like Crossroads GPS can use virtually unlimited funds from anonymous sources for the sole purpose of undermining the public sector, which of course includes things like federal workers and unions.
This is the first election after the Citizens United ruling, and we’re beginning to see the effect of SCOTUS’s decision. Unfortunately, private business will always be able to outspend labor unions, which is partially why the labor movement has been diminishing over the past few decades. But now the process is really accelerating. Consider these figures from Open Secrets:
In 2006, the federal midterm election cost $2.85 billion, while in 2002, it cost $2.18 billion. The 1998 election cost just $1.61 billion. Races during the 2004 presidential election cycle are tallied at $4.14 billion – only a small fraction more than the predicted cost of the 2010 midterm cycle. The 2008 presidential election cycle, at nearly $5.3 billion, remains the most expensive overall.
Now we’re talking about $4 billion on a mid-term election, a large chunk of it from outside, sometimes anonymous, sources. There’s just no way small, individual donors can compete with that cash machine.
In a democracy, every vote is supposed to have equal weight. But in hyper-Capitalistic America, the rich can buy influence, and the rest of us get left behind. That’s what’s happening here. To frame it as “both unions and corporations” hijacking the democratic process is really misleading. By far, it is corporate spending which has corrupted the political system.
October 28th, 2010 at 9:56 am
I overheard CNN’s John Roberts worrying his pretty, neatly-coiffed anchor head about the vast amount of cash being pumped into this election cycle from outside entities. He’s right to be concerned. So far, $4 billion has been spent on the midterms, which according to Open Secrets, is enough cash to “run the city of Pittsburgh for two years, [b]uy every resident of Topeka a nice used car, [o]r treat each and every American to a Big Mac and fries.”
Have I mentioned one in eight Americans is on food stamps? Mm’k.
But the strange part happened when Roberts appeared to draw a false equivalency between unions and corporate spending. He kept lumping the two sources together as though unions were spending just as much on the midterms as outside corporate influences. That’s all shades of wrong.
Election 2010 to Shatter Spending Records as Republicans Benefit from Late Cash Surge
This outside money, made considerably easier to raise and spend by the Supreme Court’s Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decision primarily purchases television, radio and print advertisements. Sometimes, these messages promote a candidate.
But often, they attack politicos. And of this spending, about $176.5 million has come from non-party-committee conservative organizations, through Wednesday. That compares to $81.6 million from non-party-committee liberal organizations. In four U.S. Senate races, outside groups have spent more than the candidates themselves through mid-October.
The U.S. Chamber of Commerce ($34 million), American Action Network ($22.1 million), the Karl Rove-backed American Crossroads ($19.9 million) and Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies ($16.2 million) and ranked one, two, three and four among outside organizations spending money on independent expenditures, electioneering communications and other political communication costs through Wednesday. All are overtly conservative organizations.
They’re followed in fifth and sixth place by two liberal labor unions – Service Employees International Union ($15.5 million) and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees ($11.8 million).
So the outside corporate influences (Chamber, AAN, American Crossroads -which discloses its donors- and Crossroads Grassroots Policy Strategies, which does not,) have thus far spent a total of some $92.2 million dollars on the midterm elections, while unions have spent $27.3 million, less than a third of corporate spending.
Certainly, $27.3 million isn’t chump change, but it’s important to keep these things in perspective. Outside corporate groups are spending way, way, way more than labor unions. Most importantly, while unions must disclose their donors, groups like Crossroads GPS can use virtually unlimited funds from anonymous sources for the sole purpose of undermining the public sector, which of course includes things like federal workers and unions.
This is the first election after the Citizens United ruling, and we’re beginning to see the effect of SCOTUS’s decision. Unfortunately, private business will always be able to outspend labor unions, which is partially why the labor movement has been diminishing over the past few decades. But now the process is really accelerating. Consider these figures from Open Secrets:
In 2006, the federal midterm election cost $2.85 billion, while in 2002, it cost $2.18 billion. The 1998 election cost just $1.61 billion. Races during the 2004 presidential election cycle are tallied at $4.14 billion – only a small fraction more than the predicted cost of the 2010 midterm cycle. The 2008 presidential election cycle, at nearly $5.3 billion, remains the most expensive overall.
Now we’re talking about $4 billion on a mid-term election, a large chunk of it from outside, sometimes anonymous, sources. There’s just no way small, individual donors can compete with that cash machine.
In a democracy, every vote is supposed to have equal weight. But in hyper-Capitalistic America, the rich can buy influence, and the rest of us get left behind. That’s what’s happening here. To frame it as “both unions and corporations” hijacking the democratic process is really misleading. By far, it is corporate spending which has corrupted the political system.
Thursday, November 11, 2010
James Hoffa Interview on The Ed Schulz Show 11-9-10
Joining me now is James Hoffa, the president of the Teamsters Union.
Mr. Hoffa, good to have you with us tonight.
JAMES HOFFA, PRESIDENT, TEAMSTERS UNION: How are you doing, Ed? Good to be here.
SCHULTZ: I‘m doing great, sir.
The 50,000 jobs that the president is talking about that are going to be created because of our trade dealings with India, do you buy that? And where are these jobs?
HOFFA: It‘s a drop in the bucket. Let‘s look at the entire picture that you have been talking about.
We‘re losing millions of jobs. It is not 50,000 jobs. We have lost millions of jobs to Mexico, India, China, and it continues today.
Last month, Whirlpool closed down a plant, 1,300 Americans laid off in Indiana, and they moved it to Mexico. It‘s going on as we speak right now. It hasn‘t stopped.
And when we talk about outsourcing, that‘s an easy word. It sounds—
“outsourcing,” it sounds like it doesn‘t hurt anybody. We‘re closing down plants of workers in America.
Your fellow Americans are losing their jobs. They‘ve worked there 30 years. They‘re closing the plant down, most of the time taking all of the equipment and moving it to Mexico, or somewhere else.
We‘ve got to stop this hemorrhaging. Jobs, jobs, jobs. And the jobs that are leaving America are the good jobs, the high-paying jobs, the manufacturing jobs, the union jobs, where people make good wages, they have good health care, they have pensions.
Those are the jobs that are being shipped out of this country. We‘ve got to stop this.
You know, when the president ran, he talked about renegotiating NAFTA.
That was a great issue.
When you go in front of workers as you have—you‘ve done town halls, I do it, too—you talk about, NAFTA‘s bad, NAFTA‘s cost jobs. Everybody can say that‘s right. We‘ve got to make sure that trade agreements open up and create jobs, not lose jobs. And what‘s happened is that the previous administrations going back to Bill Clinton have lost their way when it comes to trade, when it comes to NAFTA, CAFTA, China PNTR.
These have been terrible mistakes that have basically cost us millions of jobs, and we continue to hemorrhage jobs. The jobs aren‘t coming here, the jobs are going there. And every time they buy a company, they close it down, they put everything on a boat, and they take it back to China, or it goes on a railroad car to Mexico.
So, if we want to talk about jobs, let‘s talk about stopping this hole. Let‘s talk about negotiating good trade agreements that are ones that create jobs, instead of sending jobs overseas.
Take Korea right now. Korea basically is one of the most walled-off countries right now. They won‘t let American cars in, they won‘t listen, you can‘t let different types of products, agricultural products, because they‘re a closed economy.
But what do they do to our country? They‘re shipping Hyundais over here, all kinds of cars are filling our highways. And they get away with it. We can‘t send one car there.
That is wrong, and we have to have people that will stand up for the American worker and have good trade agreements that, when you go over there, you‘re going to say you‘re going to open up your economy and you‘re going to be able to buy American products. That‘s the solution.
SCHULTZ: Mr. Hoffa, has your expectation and has labor‘s expectations been diminished with this president and the Democratic Party? I mean, the only people that can change trade agreements and push change at this point are the people in charge and the people in power, and it was not a good day at the office one week ago tonight for wage earners in this country.
What are your expectations right now?
HOFFA: Well, the answer is it‘s obviously a lot darker now because we have lost so many Democrats that were standing up for the American worker. Now, we‘ve got the Republicans you talked about that can hardly wait to send more jobs overseas. They are pawns of big business.
So they are basically eager to send these jobs overseas. So it‘s going to be harder. But I want you to know that organized labor are the ones that are standing up and saying, no, we are going to make sure that we don‘t pass these trade bills that send American jobs overseas.
You know, the idea is, with this administration and other administrations, any trade deal—a trade deal is good. Well, that‘s not true. A trade deal that sends American jobs overseas and, basically, ,we don‘t get any access to their markets, that‘s not a good trade agreement. And nobody can get that through their head in Washington.
SCHULTZ: Mr. Hoffa, thanks for speaking up tonight. It‘s a story that we are just not going to let go, and because this is going to go on.
And I‘m afraid that the Democrats are fallen prey to the corporations and the right wing of this country that can‘t get enough of getting rid of jobs in this country. It‘s who we are, it‘s where we are as a country now. It is an identity crisis when it comes to how we feel and how we view the importance of American workers.
Thanks, James. I appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.
HOFFA: Thank you
Mr. Hoffa, good to have you with us tonight.
JAMES HOFFA, PRESIDENT, TEAMSTERS UNION: How are you doing, Ed? Good to be here.
SCHULTZ: I‘m doing great, sir.
The 50,000 jobs that the president is talking about that are going to be created because of our trade dealings with India, do you buy that? And where are these jobs?
HOFFA: It‘s a drop in the bucket. Let‘s look at the entire picture that you have been talking about.
We‘re losing millions of jobs. It is not 50,000 jobs. We have lost millions of jobs to Mexico, India, China, and it continues today.
Last month, Whirlpool closed down a plant, 1,300 Americans laid off in Indiana, and they moved it to Mexico. It‘s going on as we speak right now. It hasn‘t stopped.
And when we talk about outsourcing, that‘s an easy word. It sounds—
“outsourcing,” it sounds like it doesn‘t hurt anybody. We‘re closing down plants of workers in America.
Your fellow Americans are losing their jobs. They‘ve worked there 30 years. They‘re closing the plant down, most of the time taking all of the equipment and moving it to Mexico, or somewhere else.
We‘ve got to stop this hemorrhaging. Jobs, jobs, jobs. And the jobs that are leaving America are the good jobs, the high-paying jobs, the manufacturing jobs, the union jobs, where people make good wages, they have good health care, they have pensions.
Those are the jobs that are being shipped out of this country. We‘ve got to stop this.
You know, when the president ran, he talked about renegotiating NAFTA.
That was a great issue.
When you go in front of workers as you have—you‘ve done town halls, I do it, too—you talk about, NAFTA‘s bad, NAFTA‘s cost jobs. Everybody can say that‘s right. We‘ve got to make sure that trade agreements open up and create jobs, not lose jobs. And what‘s happened is that the previous administrations going back to Bill Clinton have lost their way when it comes to trade, when it comes to NAFTA, CAFTA, China PNTR.
These have been terrible mistakes that have basically cost us millions of jobs, and we continue to hemorrhage jobs. The jobs aren‘t coming here, the jobs are going there. And every time they buy a company, they close it down, they put everything on a boat, and they take it back to China, or it goes on a railroad car to Mexico.
So, if we want to talk about jobs, let‘s talk about stopping this hole. Let‘s talk about negotiating good trade agreements that are ones that create jobs, instead of sending jobs overseas.
Take Korea right now. Korea basically is one of the most walled-off countries right now. They won‘t let American cars in, they won‘t listen, you can‘t let different types of products, agricultural products, because they‘re a closed economy.
But what do they do to our country? They‘re shipping Hyundais over here, all kinds of cars are filling our highways. And they get away with it. We can‘t send one car there.
That is wrong, and we have to have people that will stand up for the American worker and have good trade agreements that, when you go over there, you‘re going to say you‘re going to open up your economy and you‘re going to be able to buy American products. That‘s the solution.
SCHULTZ: Mr. Hoffa, has your expectation and has labor‘s expectations been diminished with this president and the Democratic Party? I mean, the only people that can change trade agreements and push change at this point are the people in charge and the people in power, and it was not a good day at the office one week ago tonight for wage earners in this country.
What are your expectations right now?
HOFFA: Well, the answer is it‘s obviously a lot darker now because we have lost so many Democrats that were standing up for the American worker. Now, we‘ve got the Republicans you talked about that can hardly wait to send more jobs overseas. They are pawns of big business.
So they are basically eager to send these jobs overseas. So it‘s going to be harder. But I want you to know that organized labor are the ones that are standing up and saying, no, we are going to make sure that we don‘t pass these trade bills that send American jobs overseas.
You know, the idea is, with this administration and other administrations, any trade deal—a trade deal is good. Well, that‘s not true. A trade deal that sends American jobs overseas and, basically, ,we don‘t get any access to their markets, that‘s not a good trade agreement. And nobody can get that through their head in Washington.
SCHULTZ: Mr. Hoffa, thanks for speaking up tonight. It‘s a story that we are just not going to let go, and because this is going to go on.
And I‘m afraid that the Democrats are fallen prey to the corporations and the right wing of this country that can‘t get enough of getting rid of jobs in this country. It‘s who we are, it‘s where we are as a country now. It is an identity crisis when it comes to how we feel and how we view the importance of American workers.
Thanks, James. I appreciate your time tonight. Thank you.
HOFFA: Thank you
Sunday, November 7, 2010
Organizing Meeting At Local 952
Organizing Meeting At Local 952
DATE: SUNDAY, November 14,2010
TIME: 8:30-11:00 A.M.
PLACE: TEAMSTERS LOCAL 952
140 S. MARKS WAY, ORANGE
THE TIME TO ORGANIZE IS NOW!
Bring a co-worker to their first meeting or a spouse and
even an LTL,Express or Ground employee!
DATE: SUNDAY, November 14,2010
TIME: 8:30-11:00 A.M.
PLACE: TEAMSTERS LOCAL 952
140 S. MARKS WAY, ORANGE
THE TIME TO ORGANIZE IS NOW!
Bring a co-worker to their first meeting or a spouse and
even an LTL,Express or Ground employee!
Saturday, November 6, 2010
F.Y.I. Russ
YRC Worldwide CEO Indicates Co. May Counter Sue ABF Freight.
By Bob Sechler, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
YRC Worldwide Inc. (YRCW) Chief Executive Bill Zollars called a legal challenge to the struggling trucking company's critical new labor concessions meritless on Friday, saying YRC likely will counter sue in the case.
ABF Freight System Inc., the largest subsidiary of YRC Worldwide rival Arkansas Best Corp. (ABFS), filed a lawsuit this week against YRC and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. ABF contends YRC's latest union concessions, as well as two previous rounds of concessions, violate the collective bargaining agreement governing the bulk of employees at unionized U.S. trucking companies, tilting the playing field in YRC's favor in terms of costs.
"There's a very high likelihood" that YRC will sue ABF Freight as part of its response, Zollars said in an interview. "We think the suit is completely without merit, and we're approaching it on that basis as we defend ourselves here."
YRC said ABF isn't a party to YRC's labor contract and the suit "is in direct contradiction to laws governing labor contracts." The Teamsters have called the complaint frivolous.
Zollars downplayed the prospect that ABF's complaint could become a significant new obstacle in YRC's recovery effort.
YRC, struggling under a heavy debt load, has said the latest concessions will save it $350 million annually.
"We're talking to our lenders, and they understand the situation" and are supportive, Zollars said, although he added that it's unclear how long it will take for the issue to play out.
YRC shares were off 54 cents, or 11.3%, in recent trading, at $4.22, after the company reported a third-quarter loss that slightly exceeded Wall Street expectations. As of Thursday's close, the stock has fallen 77% this year on a split-adjusted basis.
Meanwhile, Zollars said the company's search for his replacement is focusing primarily on outside candidates. Zollars announced in September that he plans to retire, although he said he will stay until YRC's recovery plan is in place.
"We have a few things to get done here before a new CEO steps in," Zollars said Friday. He said it's "hard to tell" at this point if he will remain past Dec. 31.
-By Bob Sechler, Dow Jones Newswires; 512-258-1690; bob.sechler@dowjones.co
By Bob Sechler, Of DOW JONES NEWSWIRES
YRC Worldwide Inc. (YRCW) Chief Executive Bill Zollars called a legal challenge to the struggling trucking company's critical new labor concessions meritless on Friday, saying YRC likely will counter sue in the case.
ABF Freight System Inc., the largest subsidiary of YRC Worldwide rival Arkansas Best Corp. (ABFS), filed a lawsuit this week against YRC and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters. ABF contends YRC's latest union concessions, as well as two previous rounds of concessions, violate the collective bargaining agreement governing the bulk of employees at unionized U.S. trucking companies, tilting the playing field in YRC's favor in terms of costs.
"There's a very high likelihood" that YRC will sue ABF Freight as part of its response, Zollars said in an interview. "We think the suit is completely without merit, and we're approaching it on that basis as we defend ourselves here."
YRC said ABF isn't a party to YRC's labor contract and the suit "is in direct contradiction to laws governing labor contracts." The Teamsters have called the complaint frivolous.
Zollars downplayed the prospect that ABF's complaint could become a significant new obstacle in YRC's recovery effort.
YRC, struggling under a heavy debt load, has said the latest concessions will save it $350 million annually.
"We're talking to our lenders, and they understand the situation" and are supportive, Zollars said, although he added that it's unclear how long it will take for the issue to play out.
YRC shares were off 54 cents, or 11.3%, in recent trading, at $4.22, after the company reported a third-quarter loss that slightly exceeded Wall Street expectations. As of Thursday's close, the stock has fallen 77% this year on a split-adjusted basis.
Meanwhile, Zollars said the company's search for his replacement is focusing primarily on outside candidates. Zollars announced in September that he plans to retire, although he said he will stay until YRC's recovery plan is in place.
"We have a few things to get done here before a new CEO steps in," Zollars said Friday. He said it's "hard to tell" at this point if he will remain past Dec. 31.
-By Bob Sechler, Dow Jones Newswires; 512-258-1690; bob.sechler@dowjones.co
Friday, November 5, 2010
SBO Management Still Talking YRC and Anti-Union Tactiics
Russ ask me how I liked the new teamster contract and I told him it was good. He gave me a funny look like I was crazy or stupid. I had to explain to him that it was good the teamsters are willing to take concession's and keep a company in business. I had to remind him about when Roadway purchased Viking and then started buying other companies that were losers and almost bankrupted them. That's the same thing that is happening now to YRC. I said it sounds like they have a bad management team.
Thursday, November 4, 2010
Wednesday, November 3, 2010
Teamsters Ratification of Labor Contract Accomplishes Key YRC Worldwide Objective
October 30, 2010
Teamsters Ratification of Labor Contract Accomplishes Key YRC Worldwide Objective
- Extends Labor Contract through March 31, 2015 - Changes Designed to Drive Cost Reductions and Service Enhancements
OVERLAND PARK, Kan., Oct 30, 2010 /PRNewswire via COMTEX News Network/ -- YRC Worldwide Inc. (Nasdaq: YRCW) announced today an important step in the company's comprehensive recovery plan, with a majority of its employees represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters voting '"yes" to ratify a modified labor agreement. The new labor contract extends the previous agreement, slated to expire in 2013, until March 31, 2015. Importantly, the new labor contract addresses the company's competitiveness, re-entry into multi-employer pension funds and progress toward long-term growth.
"This new labor contract positions our company for improved performance by providing a long-term market competitive cost structure as well as enhanced efficiency to meet the demands of today's transportation and supply chain customers," said Mike Smid, President of YRC Inc. and Chief Operations Officer of YRC Worldwide. "Given the progress we have made over the last two quarters, this new labor agreement provides a strong foundation for long-term growth."
Forward-Looking Statements
This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The words "designed," "positions" and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. It is important to note that the company's actual future results could differ materially from those projected in such forward-looking statements because of a number of factors, including (among others) whether multi-employer pension funds to which we contribute approve our re-entry into the funds and the terms and conditions of any re-entry, our ability to generate sufficient cash flows and liquidity to fund operations, which raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, inflation, inclement weather, price and availability of fuel, sudden changes in the cost of fuel or the index upon which the company bases its fuel surcharge, competitor pricing activity, expense volatility, including (without limitation) expense volatility due to changes in rail service or pricing for rail service, ability to capture cost reductions, changes in equity and debt markets, a downturn in general or regional economic activity, effects of a terrorist attack, labor relations, including (without limitation) the impact of work rules, work stoppages, strikes or other disruptions, any obligations to multi-employer health, welfare and pension plans, wage requirements and employee satisfaction, and the risk factors that are from time to time included in the company's reports filed with the SEC.
The company's expectations regarding the benefits from the new labor contract are only its expectations regarding this matter. The wage, benefit and work rule concessions in the new labor contract may cease if a committee representing the Teamsters ("TNFINC") exercises its rights in the new labor contract described below.
•TNFINC was given the right to approve certain changes of control applicable to the company. If TNFINC approval is not received, TNFINC may declare the wage, benefit and work rule concessions null and void on a prospective basis.
•In the event of a bankruptcy of the company, TNFINC may declare the wage, benefit and work rule concessions null and void.
•The company expects to begin discussions to restructure the debt under its credit agreement, which may include additional capital investment (debt and/or equity) by third parties in a recapitalization. The new labor contract provides the following:
◦TNFINC would have the right to approve the various transactions comprising the restructuring/recapitalization.
◦If TNFINC's approval is not obtained, TNFINC may declare the wage, benefit and work rule concessions null and void on a prospective basis, and the company would owe its Teamster employees an amount equal to the concessions that in fact benefited the company prior to the termination.
◦TNFINC would have significant rights to participate in the restructuring/recapitalization discussions.
◦In deciding whether to give its approval to a restructuring/recapitalization, TNFINC could demand on behalf of Teamster represented employees of the company's subsidiaries additional compensation if negotiated performance triggers are met, equity participation, specified terms in the restructuring, specified indebtedness levels resulting from the transactions, governance rights and financial viability criteria.
◦The company is required to enter into definitive agreements to effect the restructuring/ recapitalization by December 31, 2010 and close those transactions by March 31, 2011, or in each case, such later date as TNFINC would agree and, in each case, on terms and conditions that TNFINC approves.
Teamsters Ratification of Labor Contract Accomplishes Key YRC Worldwide Objective
- Extends Labor Contract through March 31, 2015 - Changes Designed to Drive Cost Reductions and Service Enhancements
OVERLAND PARK, Kan., Oct 30, 2010 /PRNewswire via COMTEX News Network/ -- YRC Worldwide Inc. (Nasdaq: YRCW) announced today an important step in the company's comprehensive recovery plan, with a majority of its employees represented by the International Brotherhood of Teamsters voting '"yes" to ratify a modified labor agreement. The new labor contract extends the previous agreement, slated to expire in 2013, until March 31, 2015. Importantly, the new labor contract addresses the company's competitiveness, re-entry into multi-employer pension funds and progress toward long-term growth.
"This new labor contract positions our company for improved performance by providing a long-term market competitive cost structure as well as enhanced efficiency to meet the demands of today's transportation and supply chain customers," said Mike Smid, President of YRC Inc. and Chief Operations Officer of YRC Worldwide. "Given the progress we have made over the last two quarters, this new labor agreement provides a strong foundation for long-term growth."
Forward-Looking Statements
This news release contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. The words "designed," "positions" and similar expressions are intended to identify forward-looking statements. It is important to note that the company's actual future results could differ materially from those projected in such forward-looking statements because of a number of factors, including (among others) whether multi-employer pension funds to which we contribute approve our re-entry into the funds and the terms and conditions of any re-entry, our ability to generate sufficient cash flows and liquidity to fund operations, which raises substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern, inflation, inclement weather, price and availability of fuel, sudden changes in the cost of fuel or the index upon which the company bases its fuel surcharge, competitor pricing activity, expense volatility, including (without limitation) expense volatility due to changes in rail service or pricing for rail service, ability to capture cost reductions, changes in equity and debt markets, a downturn in general or regional economic activity, effects of a terrorist attack, labor relations, including (without limitation) the impact of work rules, work stoppages, strikes or other disruptions, any obligations to multi-employer health, welfare and pension plans, wage requirements and employee satisfaction, and the risk factors that are from time to time included in the company's reports filed with the SEC.
The company's expectations regarding the benefits from the new labor contract are only its expectations regarding this matter. The wage, benefit and work rule concessions in the new labor contract may cease if a committee representing the Teamsters ("TNFINC") exercises its rights in the new labor contract described below.
•TNFINC was given the right to approve certain changes of control applicable to the company. If TNFINC approval is not received, TNFINC may declare the wage, benefit and work rule concessions null and void on a prospective basis.
•In the event of a bankruptcy of the company, TNFINC may declare the wage, benefit and work rule concessions null and void.
•The company expects to begin discussions to restructure the debt under its credit agreement, which may include additional capital investment (debt and/or equity) by third parties in a recapitalization. The new labor contract provides the following:
◦TNFINC would have the right to approve the various transactions comprising the restructuring/recapitalization.
◦If TNFINC's approval is not obtained, TNFINC may declare the wage, benefit and work rule concessions null and void on a prospective basis, and the company would owe its Teamster employees an amount equal to the concessions that in fact benefited the company prior to the termination.
◦TNFINC would have significant rights to participate in the restructuring/recapitalization discussions.
◦In deciding whether to give its approval to a restructuring/recapitalization, TNFINC could demand on behalf of Teamster represented employees of the company's subsidiaries additional compensation if negotiated performance triggers are met, equity participation, specified terms in the restructuring, specified indebtedness levels resulting from the transactions, governance rights and financial viability criteria.
◦The company is required to enter into definitive agreements to effect the restructuring/ recapitalization by December 31, 2010 and close those transactions by March 31, 2011, or in each case, such later date as TNFINC would agree and, in each case, on terms and conditions that TNFINC approves.
Tuesday, November 2, 2010
Thursday, October 28, 2010
From Thom Hartman's Blog
Welcome to third world America, Germany's cheap labor depot..
.Just how bad has it gotten for workers in our country? Imagine foreign nations outsourcing jobs to the US for, you guessed it, cheap labor. German automaker BMW announced they are opening a factory in the US and they need laborers. Answering the call are a crowd of skilled workers with advanced degrees who have now been squeezed out of the American workforce thanks to the Chamber's outsourcing death grip on our economy. BMW is paying these workers $15 an hour. In Germany, the same worker would make twice that. Welcome to third world America, Germany's cheap labor depot.
-Thom
.Just how bad has it gotten for workers in our country? Imagine foreign nations outsourcing jobs to the US for, you guessed it, cheap labor. German automaker BMW announced they are opening a factory in the US and they need laborers. Answering the call are a crowd of skilled workers with advanced degrees who have now been squeezed out of the American workforce thanks to the Chamber's outsourcing death grip on our economy. BMW is paying these workers $15 an hour. In Germany, the same worker would make twice that. Welcome to third world America, Germany's cheap labor depot.
-Thom
Tuesday, October 26, 2010
The Tea Party Movement: Deluded and Inspired by Billionaires
By funding numerous rightwing organisations, the mega-rich Koch brothers have duped millions into supporting big business
by George Monbiot
The Tea Party movement is remarkable in two respects. It is one of the biggest exercises in false consciousness the world has seen – and the biggest Astroturf operation in history. These accomplishments are closely related.
An Astroturf campaign is a fake grassroots movement: it purports to be a spontaneous uprising of concerned citizens, but in reality it is founded and funded by elite interests. Some Astroturf campaigns have no grassroots component at all. Others catalyse and direct real mobilisations. The Tea Party belongs in the second category. It is mostly composed of passionate, well-meaning people who think they are fighting elite power, unaware that they have been organised by the very interests they believe they are confronting. We now have powerful evidence that the movement was established and has been guided with the help of money from billionaires and big business. Much of this money, as well as much of the strategy and staffing, were provided by two brothers who run what they call "the biggest company you've never heard of".
READ FULL STORY
by George Monbiot
The Tea Party movement is remarkable in two respects. It is one of the biggest exercises in false consciousness the world has seen – and the biggest Astroturf operation in history. These accomplishments are closely related.
An Astroturf campaign is a fake grassroots movement: it purports to be a spontaneous uprising of concerned citizens, but in reality it is founded and funded by elite interests. Some Astroturf campaigns have no grassroots component at all. Others catalyse and direct real mobilisations. The Tea Party belongs in the second category. It is mostly composed of passionate, well-meaning people who think they are fighting elite power, unaware that they have been organised by the very interests they believe they are confronting. We now have powerful evidence that the movement was established and has been guided with the help of money from billionaires and big business. Much of this money, as well as much of the strategy and staffing, were provided by two brothers who run what they call "the biggest company you've never heard of".
READ FULL STORY
Oregon School Bus Workers Choose Teamsters Union
Press Contact
Galen Munroe
gmunroe@teamster.org
202-624-6904
(Washington, D.C.)
School bus workers with First Student in Woodburn, Oregon have voted by a 2-1 margin to become members of Teamsters Local 324 in Salem. There are 44 drivers, mechanics, oil checkers and lot maintenance workers in the bargaining unit.
“I thought the vote went great,” said Sabrina Conaway, a driver. “We work with children, which is important, but we are not treated very well. We joined the Teamsters so we can have representation and protection.”
“The organizing committee of workers took control and did great work. It was a team effort, from the workers, the International Union, Joint Council 37 and Local 324, that led to this overwhelming success,” said Chris Muhs, Secretary-Treasurer of Teamsters Local 324.
The victory is the latest in an effort to organize private school bus and transit workers across the country. Drive Up Standards is a national campaign to improve safety, service and work standards in the private school bus and transit industry.
Since the campaign began in 2006, more than 29,100 drivers, monitors, aides, mechanics and attendants have become Teamsters.
Galen Munroe
gmunroe@teamster.org
202-624-6904
(Washington, D.C.)
School bus workers with First Student in Woodburn, Oregon have voted by a 2-1 margin to become members of Teamsters Local 324 in Salem. There are 44 drivers, mechanics, oil checkers and lot maintenance workers in the bargaining unit.
“I thought the vote went great,” said Sabrina Conaway, a driver. “We work with children, which is important, but we are not treated very well. We joined the Teamsters so we can have representation and protection.”
“The organizing committee of workers took control and did great work. It was a team effort, from the workers, the International Union, Joint Council 37 and Local 324, that led to this overwhelming success,” said Chris Muhs, Secretary-Treasurer of Teamsters Local 324.
The victory is the latest in an effort to organize private school bus and transit workers across the country. Drive Up Standards is a national campaign to improve safety, service and work standards in the private school bus and transit industry.
Since the campaign began in 2006, more than 29,100 drivers, monitors, aides, mechanics and attendants have become Teamsters.
More Than 1,100 School Bus Workers Become Teamsters
October 25, 2010
More than 1,100 school bus workers with First Student and Durham nationwide are now Teamsters, after overwhelming votes in favor of Teamster representation.
In Wichita, Kansas, First Student school bus drivers and monitors voted 415-53 in favor of joining Teamsters Local 795, while in Woodburn, Oregon, First Student drivers, mechanics, oil checkers and lot maintenance workers voted 25-12 to become members of Teamsters Local 324.
Durham school bus drivers and attendants celebrated their 209-93 vote for Teamster representation in Jacksonville, Florida, becoming the newest members of Teamsters Local 512.
There are a total of 1,172 school bus workers at the three First Student and Durham locations. The workers voted seeking fairness, respect and dignity on the job.
READ MORE
More than 1,100 school bus workers with First Student and Durham nationwide are now Teamsters, after overwhelming votes in favor of Teamster representation.
In Wichita, Kansas, First Student school bus drivers and monitors voted 415-53 in favor of joining Teamsters Local 795, while in Woodburn, Oregon, First Student drivers, mechanics, oil checkers and lot maintenance workers voted 25-12 to become members of Teamsters Local 324.
Durham school bus drivers and attendants celebrated their 209-93 vote for Teamster representation in Jacksonville, Florida, becoming the newest members of Teamsters Local 512.
There are a total of 1,172 school bus workers at the three First Student and Durham locations. The workers voted seeking fairness, respect and dignity on the job.
READ MORE
Friday, October 22, 2010
Monday, October 18, 2010
Don’t Let the Chamber and Big Biz Gut Workers’ Say on CEO Pay
With trillions of dollars in pension funds, the collective power of working people’s money can begin to rein in the out-of-control CEO pay that is hurting shareholders and the economy as a whole. But a new law to hold the financial industry accountable is already in danger.
According to the AFL-CIO Executive PayWatch, a CEO of a Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 index company was paid, on average, $9.25 million in total compensation in 2009. At the same time, millions of workers lost their jobs, their homes and their retirement savings in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
The Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and other Big Business groups are lobbying hard for changes that would protect that exorbitant CEO pay by gutting the new law’s “say on pay” provisions, before they even begin.
The Business Roundtable has asked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to give corporations more control over the proxy voting system, which is how most shareholders would cast votes on CEO pay. The Chamber wants to give Big Banks and Wall Street brokers power to vote on behalf of shareholders—knowing they’ll almost always vote to rubber-stamp excessive CEO pay.
Take action now to help stop their proposals in their tracks by sending a public comment to the SEC. Don’t let these groups representing Big Business sneak through these seemingly “technical” changes while nobody’s paying attention. Submit a public comment now here. But hurry, the comment period ends Wednesday, Oct. 20.
According to the AFL-CIO Executive PayWatch, a CEO of a Standard & Poor’s (S&P) 500 index company was paid, on average, $9.25 million in total compensation in 2009. At the same time, millions of workers lost their jobs, their homes and their retirement savings in the worst financial crisis since the Great Depression.
The Chamber of Commerce, the Business Roundtable and other Big Business groups are lobbying hard for changes that would protect that exorbitant CEO pay by gutting the new law’s “say on pay” provisions, before they even begin.
The Business Roundtable has asked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to give corporations more control over the proxy voting system, which is how most shareholders would cast votes on CEO pay. The Chamber wants to give Big Banks and Wall Street brokers power to vote on behalf of shareholders—knowing they’ll almost always vote to rubber-stamp excessive CEO pay.
Take action now to help stop their proposals in their tracks by sending a public comment to the SEC. Don’t let these groups representing Big Business sneak through these seemingly “technical” changes while nobody’s paying attention. Submit a public comment now here. But hurry, the comment period ends Wednesday, Oct. 20.
Friday, October 15, 2010
The 'Little Guy' Is Losing In American Politics
By Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa
Published By The Detroit News on October 13, 2010
If you understand politics as a battle between liberal and conservative, then you don't understand politics at all. The central political battle today is between the corporate billionaires on one side and the little guy on the other. The fight is about whether the government should protect corporate power to enrich a few billionaires, or restrict corporate power to protect the liberty and property of the average American.
I'll tell you who is winning: It isn't the little guy.
Corporate power explains why the U.S. hasn't made the transformation to renewable energy. It's why we can't trust our food, drugs or toys to be safe. It's why we're struggling to develop new industries. It's why workers' wages have stagnated or fallen over the past decade and why so many families are losing their homes.
It's why so many jobs moved offshore so quickly. U.S. multinationals now employ one-third of their work force overseas.
Here's an example of corporate power at work: FedEx has held up a funding bill for the Federal Aviation Administration. The company's billionaire chief executive, Fred Smith, hates a provision that would put FedEx back under the same labor law as his competitors. So he has held up funding for the entire agency that runs the nation's airspace.
Fred Smith is devious about masking his agenda. He claims his competitor is seeking a bailout — when it's FedEx that has long enjoyed special government treatment.
Similarly, corporations have been wily about disguising their plans to further concentrate their wealth and influence. They're adept at creating phony populist groups that claim to support individual freedom.
To understand how corporate billionaires do it, just turn on Fox News, owned by multi-billionaire Rupert Murdoch. Everything those talking heads on Fox advocate would be good for Rupert Murdoch: fewer taxes for the rich, less government regulation, weaker bargaining power for workers. You can bet most of those talking heads are getting fat paychecks from billionaire-funded think tanks and nonprofits. And yet Fox claims to be "fair and balanced."
For all those tea partiers who believe in individual freedom and smaller government, I have a message for you. Concentration of wealth in too few hands will lead to extraordinary abuses of power and the destruction of your property and liberty.
It's the banks, not the government, that are taking people's homes away from them without even making sure they have the right to foreclose on them. Last month, Jason Grodensky paid cash for a home in Florida, only to have the bank sell it out from under him in a foreclosure "mistake."
Just the other day, Nancy Jacobini was alone inside her Florida home when she heard someone breaking into her front door. She locked herself in the bathroom and called 911. It turns out the intruder was someone who worked for JP Morgan Chase. He was changing the locks on her home, something he had no legal right to do.
The corporate billionaires will say the banks can correct their own behavior. The little guy will say the government needs to make sure they don't do it again. It makes no sense to describe one as "liberal" and the other as "conservative." It's the many of us vs. the few of them.
We'll see which side prevails on Nov. 2.
TEAMSTER.ORG
Published By The Detroit News on October 13, 2010
If you understand politics as a battle between liberal and conservative, then you don't understand politics at all. The central political battle today is between the corporate billionaires on one side and the little guy on the other. The fight is about whether the government should protect corporate power to enrich a few billionaires, or restrict corporate power to protect the liberty and property of the average American.
I'll tell you who is winning: It isn't the little guy.
Corporate power explains why the U.S. hasn't made the transformation to renewable energy. It's why we can't trust our food, drugs or toys to be safe. It's why we're struggling to develop new industries. It's why workers' wages have stagnated or fallen over the past decade and why so many families are losing their homes.
It's why so many jobs moved offshore so quickly. U.S. multinationals now employ one-third of their work force overseas.
Here's an example of corporate power at work: FedEx has held up a funding bill for the Federal Aviation Administration. The company's billionaire chief executive, Fred Smith, hates a provision that would put FedEx back under the same labor law as his competitors. So he has held up funding for the entire agency that runs the nation's airspace.
Fred Smith is devious about masking his agenda. He claims his competitor is seeking a bailout — when it's FedEx that has long enjoyed special government treatment.
Similarly, corporations have been wily about disguising their plans to further concentrate their wealth and influence. They're adept at creating phony populist groups that claim to support individual freedom.
To understand how corporate billionaires do it, just turn on Fox News, owned by multi-billionaire Rupert Murdoch. Everything those talking heads on Fox advocate would be good for Rupert Murdoch: fewer taxes for the rich, less government regulation, weaker bargaining power for workers. You can bet most of those talking heads are getting fat paychecks from billionaire-funded think tanks and nonprofits. And yet Fox claims to be "fair and balanced."
For all those tea partiers who believe in individual freedom and smaller government, I have a message for you. Concentration of wealth in too few hands will lead to extraordinary abuses of power and the destruction of your property and liberty.
It's the banks, not the government, that are taking people's homes away from them without even making sure they have the right to foreclose on them. Last month, Jason Grodensky paid cash for a home in Florida, only to have the bank sell it out from under him in a foreclosure "mistake."
Just the other day, Nancy Jacobini was alone inside her Florida home when she heard someone breaking into her front door. She locked herself in the bathroom and called 911. It turns out the intruder was someone who worked for JP Morgan Chase. He was changing the locks on her home, something he had no legal right to do.
The corporate billionaires will say the banks can correct their own behavior. The little guy will say the government needs to make sure they don't do it again. It makes no sense to describe one as "liberal" and the other as "conservative." It's the many of us vs. the few of them.
We'll see which side prevails on Nov. 2.
TEAMSTER.ORG
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Tuesday, October 12, 2010
Examples of Employer Conduct Which Violate the NLRA Are:
•Threatening employees with loss of jobs or benefits if they join or vote for a union or engage in protected concerted activity.
•Threatening to close the plant if employees select a union to represent them.
•Questioning employees about their union sympathies or activities in circumstances that tend to interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their rights under the Act.
•Promising benefits to employees to discourage their union support.
•Transferring, laying off, terminating, assigning employees more difficult work tasks, or otherwise punishing employees because they engaged in union or protected concerted activity.
•Transferring, laying off, terminating, assigning employees more difficult work tasks, or otherwise punishing employees because they filed unfair labor practice charges or participated in an investigation conducted by NLRB.
Examples of Your Rights As An Employee Under the NLRA Are:
•Forming, or attempting to form, a union among the employees of your employer.
•Joining a union whether the union is recognized by your employer or not.
•Assisting a union in organizing your fellow employees.
•Engaging in protected concerted activities. Generally, "protected concerted activity" is group activity which seeks to modify wages or working conditions.
•Refusing to do any or all of these things. However, the union and employer, in a State where such agreements are permitted, may enter into a lawful union-security clause requiring employees to pay union dues and fees.
The NLRA forbids employers from interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of rights relating to organizing, forming, joining or assisting a labor organization for collective bargaining purposes, or engaging in protected concerted activities, or refraining from any such activity.
•Threatening to close the plant if employees select a union to represent them.
•Questioning employees about their union sympathies or activities in circumstances that tend to interfere with, restrain or coerce employees in the exercise of their rights under the Act.
•Promising benefits to employees to discourage their union support.
•Transferring, laying off, terminating, assigning employees more difficult work tasks, or otherwise punishing employees because they engaged in union or protected concerted activity.
•Transferring, laying off, terminating, assigning employees more difficult work tasks, or otherwise punishing employees because they filed unfair labor practice charges or participated in an investigation conducted by NLRB.
Examples of Your Rights As An Employee Under the NLRA Are:
•Forming, or attempting to form, a union among the employees of your employer.
•Joining a union whether the union is recognized by your employer or not.
•Assisting a union in organizing your fellow employees.
•Engaging in protected concerted activities. Generally, "protected concerted activity" is group activity which seeks to modify wages or working conditions.
•Refusing to do any or all of these things. However, the union and employer, in a State where such agreements are permitted, may enter into a lawful union-security clause requiring employees to pay union dues and fees.
The NLRA forbids employers from interfering with, restraining, or coercing employees in the exercise of rights relating to organizing, forming, joining or assisting a labor organization for collective bargaining purposes, or engaging in protected concerted activities, or refraining from any such activity.
Sunday, October 10, 2010
Teamster Teleconference about the YRCW Restructuring Plan held on October 5.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Carl Barelli, USF Holland, Chief Steward
And a 30-year member, LU41, Kansas City, MO following is a transcript of comments made by Brother Barelli during the
Teamster Teleconference about the YRCW Restructuring Plan held on October 5.
“Thank you Tyson. The reason I wanted to talk to everyone tonight, I don’t want to talk to you as a
Union brother but as a family man. Ultimately the important decision we have to make will affect
Our family and way of life and our ability to keep them safe and secure!
“For 30 years I have been fortunate enough to work under union contracts. Not only have I had
Superior wages and benefits but the most important thing I’ve had is a voice in the work place. I
Can tell you after working under union contracts I would hate to have it any other way.
“Everybody knows that for 2 ½ years, FedEx, Conway and all the other non-union carriers through
Predatory pricing and the rumors of bankruptcy have tried to destroy us. Somebody needs to tell
Them we are still here.
“I want to share with you a story about the meetings we had over the weekend. While we were
Having our stewards meetings Friday to discuss the presentations we were having over the weekend
A delivery came to our local. It was a rug that the President of our Local ordered for the office the
Rug got there it was a 5x5 black rug with gold teamsters on the rug. Nothing was wrong with the rug,
The problem was that FedEx delivered the rug and I can’t tell you when he told them to take it back,
I’ve never been more proud of him because he did the right thing.
“Our leaders in Washington are doing the right thing. They are putting their careers on the line to
Do what are right by the membership and for that General President Hoffa, Tyson Johnson, and Gordon
Sweeten, I have to say thank you. I think all of our Local leaders around the country need to take
This example and put it to use.
“Right now is not the time for division. We need to rally the troops and we need to dig in. The old
Timers that raised me would in no way understand anybody wanting to vote no. Think about it. A
No vote would put the power into the hands of FedEx, Conway and all those companies that tried
To destroy us exactly what they wanted and I say if they want it they need to fight harder than that.
“I went through this 7 or 8 years ago maybe 9 years ago with Consolidated Freightways and I can
Tell you when the rug gets pulled out from underneath of you and you lose the way to take care of
Your family and you have no chance in saving that job it is the most gut wrenching experience that
You would ever go through and I would not wish it only worst enemy.
“I can tell you this. We are fortunate. Because of the strength of the teamsters we have an opportunity,
Not just to save YRC but to save the legacy of the Teamsters, the freight division. When you
Think of the Teamsters you think of trucking. That’s what this union was built on, on the back of
All of us, all those that came before us! We need to remember that.
“We need to honor the old timers by doing the right thing and voting yes. You vote yes you
Honor their memory. We need to vote yes so we can preserve our jobs and we need to vote yes so
That anyone behind us will have a better way of life. Having said that, I would like to thank you
For the opportunity to talk to everyone. God bless you and God bless our Union.”
Carl Barelli, USF Holland, Chief Steward
And a 30-year member, LU41, Kansas City, MO following is a transcript of comments made by Brother Barelli during the
Teamster Teleconference about the YRCW Restructuring Plan held on October 5.
“Thank you Tyson. The reason I wanted to talk to everyone tonight, I don’t want to talk to you as a
Union brother but as a family man. Ultimately the important decision we have to make will affect
Our family and way of life and our ability to keep them safe and secure!
“For 30 years I have been fortunate enough to work under union contracts. Not only have I had
Superior wages and benefits but the most important thing I’ve had is a voice in the work place. I
Can tell you after working under union contracts I would hate to have it any other way.
“Everybody knows that for 2 ½ years, FedEx, Conway and all the other non-union carriers through
Predatory pricing and the rumors of bankruptcy have tried to destroy us. Somebody needs to tell
Them we are still here.
“I want to share with you a story about the meetings we had over the weekend. While we were
Having our stewards meetings Friday to discuss the presentations we were having over the weekend
A delivery came to our local. It was a rug that the President of our Local ordered for the office the
Rug got there it was a 5x5 black rug with gold teamsters on the rug. Nothing was wrong with the rug,
The problem was that FedEx delivered the rug and I can’t tell you when he told them to take it back,
I’ve never been more proud of him because he did the right thing.
“Our leaders in Washington are doing the right thing. They are putting their careers on the line to
Do what are right by the membership and for that General President Hoffa, Tyson Johnson, and Gordon
Sweeten, I have to say thank you. I think all of our Local leaders around the country need to take
This example and put it to use.
“Right now is not the time for division. We need to rally the troops and we need to dig in. The old
Timers that raised me would in no way understand anybody wanting to vote no. Think about it. A
No vote would put the power into the hands of FedEx, Conway and all those companies that tried
To destroy us exactly what they wanted and I say if they want it they need to fight harder than that.
“I went through this 7 or 8 years ago maybe 9 years ago with Consolidated Freightways and I can
Tell you when the rug gets pulled out from underneath of you and you lose the way to take care of
Your family and you have no chance in saving that job it is the most gut wrenching experience that
You would ever go through and I would not wish it only worst enemy.
“I can tell you this. We are fortunate. Because of the strength of the teamsters we have an opportunity,
Not just to save YRC but to save the legacy of the Teamsters, the freight division. When you
Think of the Teamsters you think of trucking. That’s what this union was built on, on the back of
All of us, all those that came before us! We need to remember that.
“We need to honor the old timers by doing the right thing and voting yes. You vote yes you
Honor their memory. We need to vote yes so we can preserve our jobs and we need to vote yes so
That anyone behind us will have a better way of life. Having said that, I would like to thank you
For the opportunity to talk to everyone. God bless you and God bless our Union.”
Thursday, October 7, 2010
Young and Worried About Retirement
By Mike Hall On October 7, 2010 (2:50 pm) In Economy, Legislation & Politic
Melissa, a college senior, says she never thought about retirement until she saw her parents dip into their retirement savings to help make ends meet after her father lost his job. Now it’s one of her top worries.
Melissa told her story at Retirement USA, where an online survey finds that 83 percent of respondents say younger workers will fare worse in retirement than current retirees. There are some real good reasons for this pessimism, too.
First off, Social Security—which is even more vital than ever for younger workers, most of whom don’t participate in any kind of retirement plan—is under attack. Even though Social Security does not contribute a cent to the nation’s budget deficit, the federal budget deficit commission has it in their sights and there are reports...
Article taken from AFL-CIO NOW BLOG - http://blog.aflcio.org
URL to article: http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/10/07/young-and-worried-about-retirement/
Melissa, a college senior, says she never thought about retirement until she saw her parents dip into their retirement savings to help make ends meet after her father lost his job. Now it’s one of her top worries.
Melissa told her story at Retirement USA, where an online survey finds that 83 percent of respondents say younger workers will fare worse in retirement than current retirees. There are some real good reasons for this pessimism, too.
First off, Social Security—which is even more vital than ever for younger workers, most of whom don’t participate in any kind of retirement plan—is under attack. Even though Social Security does not contribute a cent to the nation’s budget deficit, the federal budget deficit commission has it in their sights and there are reports...
Article taken from AFL-CIO NOW BLOG - http://blog.aflcio.org
URL to article: http://blog.aflcio.org/2010/10/07/young-and-worried-about-retirement/
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GROCERY RATIFICATION RESULTS FOR ALL LOCALS INVOLVED
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA GROCERY RATIFICATION RESULTS FOR ALL LOCALS INVOLVED
1,975 YES
78 NO
WITH A 96% APPROVAL
Congratulations to all Teamsters.
1,975 YES
78 NO
WITH A 96% APPROVAL
Congratulations to all Teamsters.
FedEx Canada News
More dates have been established before the Federal Labour Board. The next dates are Nov. 2, 2010 and Nov. 16 through the 19th, 2010.
The purpose of these hearings is to determine if automatic certification should be granted to the two groups (Admin and Pkg Handlers) at the FedEx Ground hub in Mississauga Ontario.
The purpose of these hearings is to determine if automatic certification should be granted to the two groups (Admin and Pkg Handlers) at the FedEx Ground hub in Mississauga Ontario.
Tuesday, October 5, 2010
The Daily News of Memphis
If you look at FedEx’s history, they have demonstrated that,” Sterling said. “Particularly in their Express segment, and I see tremendous opportunity for growth through earnings per share and then the marginal expansion will come as they put more freight through their network.”
It came as no surprise, however, that FedEx Freight workers are apprehensive about their job security. Two employees attended the meeting and questioned the company’s efforts to look after its employees.
“Unfortunately, try as we might, we cannot pay people when we have no work for them to do,” Smith said in response.
FedEx is estimating a cost of $150 million to $200 million related to the move for things such as employee severance costs and lease terminations.
Bill Logue, CEO of FedEx Freight, said a strong, healthy company is the right future for all its employees long-term.
“We’ve worked very hard to make sure we’ve done the right thing for our employees on the front side,” Logue said. “Our goal is to reduce the 1,700 losses because our objective is to impact as few employees as possible.”
It came as no surprise, however, that FedEx Freight workers are apprehensive about their job security. Two employees attended the meeting and questioned the company’s efforts to look after its employees.
“Unfortunately, try as we might, we cannot pay people when we have no work for them to do,” Smith said in response.
FedEx is estimating a cost of $150 million to $200 million related to the move for things such as employee severance costs and lease terminations.
Bill Logue, CEO of FedEx Freight, said a strong, healthy company is the right future for all its employees long-term.
“We’ve worked very hard to make sure we’ve done the right thing for our employees on the front side,” Logue said. “Our goal is to reduce the 1,700 losses because our objective is to impact as few employees as possible.”
Saturday, September 25, 2010
Congress Must Stand Up to FedEx and Pass FAA ReauthorizationCongress
Congress Must Stand Up to FedEx and Pass FAA ReauthorizationCongress has voted to extend the Federal Aviation Administration Reauthorization Bill for another three months, delaying important job creation and safety provisions and a key measure to close the FedEx loophole giving the company special status.
Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa is urging Congress to stand up to FedEx, which has been blocking passage of the legislation. The extension, to December 31, was passed by the House and Senate on Thursday.
“Congress must address the issue of fairness when it comes to FedEx’s special treatment that allows it to treat its truck drivers as airline workers,” Hoffa said.
The two senators from Tennessee, at the behest of Memphis-based FedEx (NYSE:FDX), have been threatening a filibuster to block the provision in the bill closing the FedEx loophole.
“Congress cannot bow to the wishes of one company and hold up this legislation because FedEx wants to keep its special status,” said Teamsters Package Division Director and International Vice President Ken Hall.
The Express Carrier Employee Protection Act in the FAA Reauthorization Bill will end the special treatment that FedEx lobbyists won in 1996. The measure would establish one set of rules for all package delivery companies. The provision is in the House-passed version of the FAA Reauthorization Bill, which also includes important safety measures for the traveling public and the industry, and would create more than 125,000 new jobs each year.
FedEx Express is the only freight and package delivery company in the United States allowed to classify truck drivers, sorters, loaders and unloaders as airline workers. More than 90,000 FedEx Express employees who never even touch an airplane are treated as airline workers under the Railway Labor Act. Truck drivers, sorters, loaders and unloaders at small businesses, UPS and every other freight and package delivery company in the United States are under the National Labor Relations Act.
Go to
www.FedExDriversArentPilots.com to get the facts.
Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa is urging Congress to stand up to FedEx, which has been blocking passage of the legislation. The extension, to December 31, was passed by the House and Senate on Thursday.
“Congress must address the issue of fairness when it comes to FedEx’s special treatment that allows it to treat its truck drivers as airline workers,” Hoffa said.
The two senators from Tennessee, at the behest of Memphis-based FedEx (NYSE:FDX), have been threatening a filibuster to block the provision in the bill closing the FedEx loophole.
“Congress cannot bow to the wishes of one company and hold up this legislation because FedEx wants to keep its special status,” said Teamsters Package Division Director and International Vice President Ken Hall.
The Express Carrier Employee Protection Act in the FAA Reauthorization Bill will end the special treatment that FedEx lobbyists won in 1996. The measure would establish one set of rules for all package delivery companies. The provision is in the House-passed version of the FAA Reauthorization Bill, which also includes important safety measures for the traveling public and the industry, and would create more than 125,000 new jobs each year.
FedEx Express is the only freight and package delivery company in the United States allowed to classify truck drivers, sorters, loaders and unloaders as airline workers. More than 90,000 FedEx Express employees who never even touch an airplane are treated as airline workers under the Railway Labor Act. Truck drivers, sorters, loaders and unloaders at small businesses, UPS and every other freight and package delivery company in the United States are under the National Labor Relations Act.
Go to
www.FedExDriversArentPilots.com to get the facts.
Friday, September 24, 2010
Management May Have Forgotten But The Watch Dogs Haven't
NATIONAL TRUCK DRIVER
APPRECIATION WEEK
September 19-25, 2010
The FedEx Watch Dog would like to tell every employee of FedEx Freight and National that they are the Best in this Industry and no one can take that away from us!
God Bless You All and be strong through these rough " Changes"
APPRECIATION WEEK
September 19-25, 2010
The FedEx Watch Dog would like to tell every employee of FedEx Freight and National that they are the Best in this Industry and no one can take that away from us!
God Bless You All and be strong through these rough " Changes"
Sunday, September 19, 2010
Teamsters Canada President Bob Bouvier talks to all FedEx workers about the new UPS contract
Teamsters Canada President Bob Bouvier talks to all FedEx Workers in this new video.
Friday, September 17, 2010
Thursday, September 16, 2010
Sunday, September 12, 2010
Thursday, September 9, 2010
Know Your Rights
FedEx Freight has access to a wide variety of anti-union material from many sources. The typical anti-union campaign of secret identity of pretend employees on blog site creating activities where you can expect confusion, coercion and intimidation to keep you from becoming a union. Lies are usually out front. FedEx will use anti-union consultants or employees to tell flat-out lies and put out misinformation and statements about the Teamsters every step of the way to try and convince you that forming a union is a bad deal for you. Or have you heard this one? "We'll have to close down and move elsewhere if the union gets in here" or "We will no longer afford to be in business". The list goes on with what coerce employee tell other employees. All this rhetoric, while FedEx rake in millions of dollars in profits. FedEx corporate will go to extraordinary lengths to make sure you stay " union free". When was the last time FedEx corporate cared so much about your well-being except when you decided to look into forming a union? There have been numerous cases where some service centers will go to the edge or break the law just to prevent you from forming a union. Know your rights and keep good notes and copies of company propaganda and threats. Good documentation is very helpful if you and your co-workers need to file Unfair Labor Practices (ULP) against the employer for unlawful activity. One last thing do not stay under the radar, is better to stand up for your rights to form a union, if you stay under the radar you do not have protection under the National Labor Relation Act.
Sincerely
Joe Nuño
Sincerely
Joe Nuño
Monday, September 6, 2010
Express Misclassification
David Bensman and Molly Greenberg | September 6, 2010
FedEx offers another example where the Obama administration's effort to improve job quality is being undermined by an executive agency -- in this case, the Department of Defense. While a joint task force made up of the Labor Department and the Internal Revenue Service has been established to crack down on worker misclassification, a practice of which the FedEx Ground division has been repeatedly found guilty, the Department of Defense continues to award FedEx huge contracts.
For years, FedEx's ground-delivery system has saved money and resisted unionization by disguising its drivers as contractors or temps -- something that is illegal under labor law. In the most recent court decision against FedEx, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Miller found in May that delivery drivers were employees under the Illinois Wage Act in everything but name. They were required to buy or lease trucks that met company specifications, pay for the company logo to be painted on their trucks, and dress in company uniforms, down to the color of their socks and shoes. They made pickups and deliveries on routes assigned by the company, were barred from using their trucks to haul loads for other companies, and had to park their trucks in company-assigned spaces.
The court found that FedEx Ground misclassified its drivers as independent contractors as an illegal means to avoid paying state unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance. Judge Miller's ruling was significant because it is the first in a multidistrict class-action suit filed on behalf of 27,000 current and former FedEx Ground drivers in 20 states. Rulings on additional suits are expected later this year. The ruling follows a 2008 decision by the California Supreme Court, which upheld a trial-court decision in Estrada v. Fedex Ground Systems, Incorporated, finding that FedEx Ground drivers were employees, not independent contractors. In denying FedEx's appeal, the California court found that "the drivers look like FedEx employees, act like FedEx employees, are paid like FedEx employees, and receive many employee benefits."
Court rulings like these would seem to make FedEx a prime example of the worker misclassification on which the Obama administration promised to crack down when it created a joint IRS-Labor Department task force that will audit 6,000 companies over the next three years to determine whether they are illegally misclassifying their employees as independent contractors, and, in the process, failing to pay Social Security, unemployment-insurance, and workers' compensation taxes as well as denying workers the protection of federal and state labor laws.
Yet according to the Federal Procurement Data System, in 2009, FedEx received $1.5 billion in contracts from the Department of Defense for "Charter Programs Team Arrangement." Why is the Obama administration rewarding the very companies that are defying its efforts to enforce labor law?
Using Legislation and Executive Authority
Read the full article
FedEx offers another example where the Obama administration's effort to improve job quality is being undermined by an executive agency -- in this case, the Department of Defense. While a joint task force made up of the Labor Department and the Internal Revenue Service has been established to crack down on worker misclassification, a practice of which the FedEx Ground division has been repeatedly found guilty, the Department of Defense continues to award FedEx huge contracts.
For years, FedEx's ground-delivery system has saved money and resisted unionization by disguising its drivers as contractors or temps -- something that is illegal under labor law. In the most recent court decision against FedEx, U.S. District Court Judge Robert Miller found in May that delivery drivers were employees under the Illinois Wage Act in everything but name. They were required to buy or lease trucks that met company specifications, pay for the company logo to be painted on their trucks, and dress in company uniforms, down to the color of their socks and shoes. They made pickups and deliveries on routes assigned by the company, were barred from using their trucks to haul loads for other companies, and had to park their trucks in company-assigned spaces.
The court found that FedEx Ground misclassified its drivers as independent contractors as an illegal means to avoid paying state unemployment insurance and workers' compensation insurance. Judge Miller's ruling was significant because it is the first in a multidistrict class-action suit filed on behalf of 27,000 current and former FedEx Ground drivers in 20 states. Rulings on additional suits are expected later this year. The ruling follows a 2008 decision by the California Supreme Court, which upheld a trial-court decision in Estrada v. Fedex Ground Systems, Incorporated, finding that FedEx Ground drivers were employees, not independent contractors. In denying FedEx's appeal, the California court found that "the drivers look like FedEx employees, act like FedEx employees, are paid like FedEx employees, and receive many employee benefits."
Court rulings like these would seem to make FedEx a prime example of the worker misclassification on which the Obama administration promised to crack down when it created a joint IRS-Labor Department task force that will audit 6,000 companies over the next three years to determine whether they are illegally misclassifying their employees as independent contractors, and, in the process, failing to pay Social Security, unemployment-insurance, and workers' compensation taxes as well as denying workers the protection of federal and state labor laws.
Yet according to the Federal Procurement Data System, in 2009, FedEx received $1.5 billion in contracts from the Department of Defense for "Charter Programs Team Arrangement." Why is the Obama administration rewarding the very companies that are defying its efforts to enforce labor law?
Using Legislation and Executive Authority
Read the full article
The History of Labor Day
Labor Day: How it Came About; What it Means
Labor Day, the first Monday in September, is a creation of the labor movement and is dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers. It constitutes a yearly national tribute to the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country.
Founder of Labor Day
More than 100 years after the first Labor Day observance, there is still some doubt as to who first proposed the holiday for workers.
Some records show that Peter J. McGuire, general secretary of the Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners and a co founder of the American Federation of Labor, was first in suggesting a day to honor those "who from rude nature have delved and carved all the grandeur we behold."
But Peter McGuire's place in Labor Day history has not gone unchallenged. Many believe that Matthew Maguire, a machinist, not Peter McGuire, founded the holiday. Recent research seems to support the contention that Matthew Maguire, later the secretary of Local 344 of the International Association of Machinists in Paterson, N.J., proposed the holiday in 1882 while serving as secretary of the Central Labor Union in New York. What is clear is that the Central Labor Union adopted a Labor Day proposal and appointed a committee to plan a demonstration and picnic.
The First Labor Day
The first Labor Day holiday was celebrated on Tuesday, September 5, 1882, in New York City, in accordance with the plans of the Central Labor Union. The Central Labor Union held its second Labor Day holiday just a year later, on September 5, 1883.
In 1884 the first Monday in September was selected as the holiday, as originally proposed, and the Central Labor Union urged similar organizations in other cities to follow the example of New York and celebrate a "working men's holiday" on that date. The idea spread with the growth of labor organizations, and in 1885 Labor Day was celebrated in many industrial centers of the country.
It is appropriate, therefore, that the nation pay tribute on Labor Day to the creator of so much of the nation's strength, freedom, and leadership — the American worker.
Resource: U.S. Department of Labor at, www.dol.gov
Labor Day, the first Monday in September, is a creation of the labor movement and is dedicated to the social and economic achievements of American workers. It constitutes a yearly national tribute to the contributions workers have made to the strength, prosperity, and well-being of our country.
Founder of Labor Day
More than 100 years after the first Labor Day observance, there is still some doubt as to who first proposed the holiday for workers.
Some records show that Peter J. McGuire, general secretary of the Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners and a co founder of the American Federation of Labor, was first in suggesting a day to honor those "who from rude nature have delved and carved all the grandeur we behold."
But Peter McGuire's place in Labor Day history has not gone unchallenged. Many believe that Matthew Maguire, a machinist, not Peter McGuire, founded the holiday. Recent research seems to support the contention that Matthew Maguire, later the secretary of Local 344 of the International Association of Machinists in Paterson, N.J., proposed the holiday in 1882 while serving as secretary of the Central Labor Union in New York. What is clear is that the Central Labor Union adopted a Labor Day proposal and appointed a committee to plan a demonstration and picnic.
The First Labor Day
The first Labor Day holiday was celebrated on Tuesday, September 5, 1882, in New York City, in accordance with the plans of the Central Labor Union. The Central Labor Union held its second Labor Day holiday just a year later, on September 5, 1883.
In 1884 the first Monday in September was selected as the holiday, as originally proposed, and the Central Labor Union urged similar organizations in other cities to follow the example of New York and celebrate a "working men's holiday" on that date. The idea spread with the growth of labor organizations, and in 1885 Labor Day was celebrated in many industrial centers of the country.
It is appropriate, therefore, that the nation pay tribute on Labor Day to the creator of so much of the nation's strength, freedom, and leadership — the American worker.
Resource: U.S. Department of Labor at, www.dol.gov
Wednesday, September 1, 2010
p CEO'S HAVE CONTRACTS (LET US PAY ATTENTION RED SHIRTS AND PETS)
Top CEO’s have contracts; they have their demands for
the next five years; just like a Teamster contract.
This pass weekend I attended an arbitration class and the
instructor was an arbitrator. I ask some questions
regarding top CEO’s and top managements having labor
contracts; and the teacher said they had to arbitrate
for nonunion high ranking managements violation of
their labor contracts.
So what does this tell us? That they have their set
standards, their demands and no handbooks just a
contract, and when their positions and contracts are
being revised by top CEO’s, The CEO board members
gather up and discuss the demands of a top management
position; and the way the board members agreed on
contract is by voting.
As a future member of the Teamster we ask for a
contract with demands and fairness, a better pension
plan per hour (a Western conference pension plan), a
better medical benefit plan per hour, and medical
retirements.
So why is it o.k for top management to have labor
contracts and arbitration for disputing their
violations of the contract? And also they have
democracy votes, and the employees does not have any
Rights; without a Teamsters contract we stand alone.
__________________
the next five years; just like a Teamster contract.
This pass weekend I attended an arbitration class and the
instructor was an arbitrator. I ask some questions
regarding top CEO’s and top managements having labor
contracts; and the teacher said they had to arbitrate
for nonunion high ranking managements violation of
their labor contracts.
So what does this tell us? That they have their set
standards, their demands and no handbooks just a
contract, and when their positions and contracts are
being revised by top CEO’s, The CEO board members
gather up and discuss the demands of a top management
position; and the way the board members agreed on
contract is by voting.
As a future member of the Teamster we ask for a
contract with demands and fairness, a better pension
plan per hour (a Western conference pension plan), a
better medical benefit plan per hour, and medical
retirements.
So why is it o.k for top management to have labor
contracts and arbitration for disputing their
violations of the contract? And also they have
democracy votes, and the employees does not have any
Rights; without a Teamsters contract we stand alone.
__________________
Monday, August 30, 2010
Who's An "At-Will" Employee Now?
Since we started this campaign, we were always told by management that a union was unnecessary here at FedEx. But with the dismissal of four supervisors last week in Devore, maybe a union could have kept those guys still employed here?
With a Union in placed at a business there would be some monitoring of management, not by the company, but with the Rank And File of employees. Who would call out the in house management to take care of this problem, before corporate would have found out.
But corporate or managers don’t want to regulate itself, they don’t want rules, on themselves! But have no problems having you follow rules!
But who’s under the microscope now? Now who is an at-will employee?
With a Union in placed at a business there would be some monitoring of management, not by the company, but with the Rank And File of employees. Who would call out the in house management to take care of this problem, before corporate would have found out.
But corporate or managers don’t want to regulate itself, they don’t want rules, on themselves! But have no problems having you follow rules!
But who’s under the microscope now? Now who is an at-will employee?
Saturday, August 28, 2010
A Government for the People, Not for Fred Smith
By Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa
Published By The Detroit News on August 11, 2010
In the U.S. free enterprise system, corporations are not supposed to use the government as a weapon to punish their competitors. They certainly aren’t supposed to manipulate federal law so they’re treated differently than every other company in America.
And yet that is exactly what FedEx CEO Fred Smith has been getting away with for 14 years.
In 1996, Smith successfully lobbied for a special exception to a 73-year-old law regulating railway express companies. It’s a legal loophole that gives FedEx an advantage over all of its competitors. The loophole allows FedEx Express to make it almost impossible for its drivers to organize a union, a privilege denied every other large, medium and small package delivery company in America.
The House of Representatives recognizes that Fred Smith’s special exception is not only unfair but contrary to free-market principles. This year, House members voted to take out the loophole. That would restore the law to the way it was when first enacted in 1923.
The House vote was part of a bill authorizing the Federal Aviation Administration’s budget.
In the last three months, Smith spent $7 million to block the FAA budget.
That bill has moved to the Senate, where Fred Smith’s friends from Tennessee are standing in its way. Republicans Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker are thus holding up improvements in air safety, modernization of the air traffic control system and expansion of airports.
Of course Fred Smith doesn’t want people to know how he’s gaming the system. So he’s running a campaign to mislead the American public. You may have seen his “brown bailout” campaign, which accuses his rival, UPS, of asking for special treatment from Congress.
In other words, Smith spent $7 million in three months to preserve a special favor from the government. FedEx employees would prefer that the company spend some of that money on restoring their pensions and improving health care benefits.
Smith’s multi-million-dollar misinformation campaign relies on the fact that most Americans don’t pay close attention to the small details of big spending bills.
News reports 14 years ago tell the real story. According to the New York Times on Oct. 12, 1996, Smith has “one of the most formidable and successful corporate lobbies in the capital.”
FedEx’s lobbying campaign includes “A generous political action committee, the presence of popular former Congressional leaders from both parties on its board, lavish spending on lobbying, and a fleet of corporate jets that ferry dozens of officeholders to political events around the country,” according to the Times article, titled “Federal Express Knows Its Way Around Capital.”
The public is rightfully disgusted by people who use their wealth to undermine the public purpose in favor of their own. In this case, the public purpose is simple fairness. It doesn’t cost billions of dollars to tell the truth.
It’s too bad that Sens. Corker and Alexander are enabling one obsessed rich man to control Congress for his own selfish ends.
Published By The Detroit News on August 11, 2010
In the U.S. free enterprise system, corporations are not supposed to use the government as a weapon to punish their competitors. They certainly aren’t supposed to manipulate federal law so they’re treated differently than every other company in America.
And yet that is exactly what FedEx CEO Fred Smith has been getting away with for 14 years.
In 1996, Smith successfully lobbied for a special exception to a 73-year-old law regulating railway express companies. It’s a legal loophole that gives FedEx an advantage over all of its competitors. The loophole allows FedEx Express to make it almost impossible for its drivers to organize a union, a privilege denied every other large, medium and small package delivery company in America.
The House of Representatives recognizes that Fred Smith’s special exception is not only unfair but contrary to free-market principles. This year, House members voted to take out the loophole. That would restore the law to the way it was when first enacted in 1923.
The House vote was part of a bill authorizing the Federal Aviation Administration’s budget.
In the last three months, Smith spent $7 million to block the FAA budget.
That bill has moved to the Senate, where Fred Smith’s friends from Tennessee are standing in its way. Republicans Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker are thus holding up improvements in air safety, modernization of the air traffic control system and expansion of airports.
Of course Fred Smith doesn’t want people to know how he’s gaming the system. So he’s running a campaign to mislead the American public. You may have seen his “brown bailout” campaign, which accuses his rival, UPS, of asking for special treatment from Congress.
In other words, Smith spent $7 million in three months to preserve a special favor from the government. FedEx employees would prefer that the company spend some of that money on restoring their pensions and improving health care benefits.
Smith’s multi-million-dollar misinformation campaign relies on the fact that most Americans don’t pay close attention to the small details of big spending bills.
News reports 14 years ago tell the real story. According to the New York Times on Oct. 12, 1996, Smith has “one of the most formidable and successful corporate lobbies in the capital.”
FedEx’s lobbying campaign includes “A generous political action committee, the presence of popular former Congressional leaders from both parties on its board, lavish spending on lobbying, and a fleet of corporate jets that ferry dozens of officeholders to political events around the country,” according to the Times article, titled “Federal Express Knows Its Way Around Capital.”
The public is rightfully disgusted by people who use their wealth to undermine the public purpose in favor of their own. In this case, the public purpose is simple fairness. It doesn’t cost billions of dollars to tell the truth.
It’s too bad that Sens. Corker and Alexander are enabling one obsessed rich man to control Congress for his own selfish ends.
Thursday, August 26, 2010
Monday, August 23, 2010
Fw: PT Drivers May Be Pilots
Fedex drivers might not be pilots, but maybe PT drivers are? Ready for blast off. 10,9.8,7....
Tuesday, August 17, 2010
Your Working Money ...
Your working money that was taking away from you...
FedEx Spent $21.1 Million In 15 Months To Preserve Its Ability To Prevent Drivers From Unionizing
Currently, House and Senate negotiators are trying to work out the differences between each chamber’s respective bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration. One key difference between the bills is that the House version corrects an inequity in labor law that allows Federal Express to operate under the Railway Labor Act (RLA), which poses higher barriers to union organizing than the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). FedEx’s competitors, such as the United Parcel Service, are governed by the NLRA. The Senate bill does not contain the change.
FedEx has been waging an intense campaign in order to preserve its special treatment, led by CEO Fred Smith, who was George W. Bush’s fraternity brother and has said that “I don’t intend to recognize any unions at Federal Express.” And according to Roll Call, in 15 months the company spent $21.1 million lobbying Congress:
Last year, it ranked 14th among all groups and companies in lobbying budgets, spending more than oil giant BP and defense contractor Lockheed Martin. The Memphis-based company also has tapped politically connected assistance, contracting with 14 outside lobbying firms that employ a number of former Senators. Not only is the Breaux Lott Leadership Group working for FedEx, but its founders, former Sen. John Breaux (D-La.) and former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), are listed on the lobbying disclosure forms as personally working on the account. FedEx hired the international public relations firm Burson-Marsteller to work specifically on this issue.
FedEx has successfully lobbied multiple times to remain classified as an airline (and thus under the RLA), rather than having its ground operation qualified as such, pulling it under the NLRA. This time around, it has threatened to blunt its own growth and scaremongered about medical supply deliveries being delayed if the change in labor law is made.
Tennessee’s two Republican senators, Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker, have also pledged to defeat the change. But there’s simply no reason for this inequity to remain law. FedEx’s pilots have already unionized, without the dire consequences that Smith warned about. And in the meantime, FedEx’s drivers are subject to a law that makes it all but impossible to organize and collectively bargain, as they would have to unionize literally the entire company (across the entire country), instead of being allowed to organize at the local level.
Last week, the National Mediation Board — which oversees labor-management relations under the RLA — did away with one inequitable aspect of the antiquated RLA, ensuring that uncast votes in union elections no longer count as votes against the union. Congress would do well to keep the ball rolling, enacting the change taking away the unjustified competitive advantage that FedEx now enjoys.
FedEx Spent $21.1 Million In 15 Months To Preserve Its Ability To Prevent Drivers From Unionizing
Currently, House and Senate negotiators are trying to work out the differences between each chamber’s respective bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration. One key difference between the bills is that the House version corrects an inequity in labor law that allows Federal Express to operate under the Railway Labor Act (RLA), which poses higher barriers to union organizing than the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA). FedEx’s competitors, such as the United Parcel Service, are governed by the NLRA. The Senate bill does not contain the change.
FedEx has been waging an intense campaign in order to preserve its special treatment, led by CEO Fred Smith, who was George W. Bush’s fraternity brother and has said that “I don’t intend to recognize any unions at Federal Express.” And according to Roll Call, in 15 months the company spent $21.1 million lobbying Congress:
Last year, it ranked 14th among all groups and companies in lobbying budgets, spending more than oil giant BP and defense contractor Lockheed Martin. The Memphis-based company also has tapped politically connected assistance, contracting with 14 outside lobbying firms that employ a number of former Senators. Not only is the Breaux Lott Leadership Group working for FedEx, but its founders, former Sen. John Breaux (D-La.) and former Senate Majority Leader Trent Lott (R-Miss.), are listed on the lobbying disclosure forms as personally working on the account. FedEx hired the international public relations firm Burson-Marsteller to work specifically on this issue.
FedEx has successfully lobbied multiple times to remain classified as an airline (and thus under the RLA), rather than having its ground operation qualified as such, pulling it under the NLRA. This time around, it has threatened to blunt its own growth and scaremongered about medical supply deliveries being delayed if the change in labor law is made.
Tennessee’s two Republican senators, Lamar Alexander and Bob Corker, have also pledged to defeat the change. But there’s simply no reason for this inequity to remain law. FedEx’s pilots have already unionized, without the dire consequences that Smith warned about. And in the meantime, FedEx’s drivers are subject to a law that makes it all but impossible to organize and collectively bargain, as they would have to unionize literally the entire company (across the entire country), instead of being allowed to organize at the local level.
Last week, the National Mediation Board — which oversees labor-management relations under the RLA — did away with one inequitable aspect of the antiquated RLA, ensuring that uncast votes in union elections no longer count as votes against the union. Congress would do well to keep the ball rolling, enacting the change taking away the unjustified competitive advantage that FedEx now enjoys.
Saturday, August 14, 2010
Tuesday, August 10, 2010
Victor Viking Says
How are we going to fix this mess? I still think unionization isn’t a bad thing in principle. In fact, I have seen it work for me much more than I haven’t. Good unions create a system of checks and balances. However, it’s time for them to really step up their game. Seriously. All of them. Locals need to quit behaving like every day is election day and focus once again on maintaining regular progress for American labor as a whole. Members must abandon entitlement and remember they’re paying for a cause and a contract, not a birth right. Additionally, there are so many ridiculous, legal stipulations for organizing that workers have their hands tied unless there are good programs with proper funding. It’s all possible, but the movement desperately needs some real labor messiahs to lead it in the right direction — brainiacs who care about the future of workers in this nation, who understand tactics beyond the paint thinner and tire slashing stereotypes as well as how to regain public trust intelligently.
FedEx employees have been targeted for unionization for quite some time, and its employees really need to start paying attention now to the impending FUBAR situation. After having read many of the comments on the official FedEx threads, I felt such sadness for their plight. They’re warned not to associate with unions because “all unions want are their money.” Well, duh. Unions want you to pay dues, yes, because people shouldn’t have to work for free. I know how that goes; I paid dues simultaneously to two different unions at one point. One contract was terrible and not enforced properly by the world’s worst agent. The other was beyond amazing. I was happy to dole out dues to both, though, because even in the worse case scenario I was getting a better deal than most. What are you paying for? The negotiation of your future. Your insurance benefits. Your pension. Your raises and rates. Your vacation and option time. Mandated progressive disciplinary programs. Representation. Healthy and non-violent work environment. If that’s not enough, what do you want?
FedEx folks and others have also been frightened by their companies’ claims of corruption within the unions. Oh, THAT again. Thanks, Hollywood. Of course, there’s gonna be corruption. It’s everywhere: churches, school boards, city councils, the Girl scouts, charity groups, tax-evading Joe the Plummers, the Democrats, the Republicans, and so on. I can’t think of anything that could escape potential misconduct without proper effort and enforcement. Members get the leadership they elect. Corruption is a by-product of apathy. If unions weren’t such a huge threat to the wallets of corporate executives, they wouldn’t be regulated as heavily as the pharmaceutical industry. When you get down to it, corruption is not fueled by some guy wanting to fight for the right to leave his work station to use the toilet without fear of being fired. Really.
The good guys are not the ones who want to outsource and offshore labor. They’re not the ones who have to take a five percent cut in pay while their boss makes 32 million dollars. Union evil isn’t the root of corporate failure. Corporate failure is the root of corporate failure. (Read: Don’t blame bail outs on the UAW. Auto workers have been wailing about financial mismanagement for decades.)
FedEx employees have been targeted for unionization for quite some time, and its employees really need to start paying attention now to the impending FUBAR situation. After having read many of the comments on the official FedEx threads, I felt such sadness for their plight. They’re warned not to associate with unions because “all unions want are their money.” Well, duh. Unions want you to pay dues, yes, because people shouldn’t have to work for free. I know how that goes; I paid dues simultaneously to two different unions at one point. One contract was terrible and not enforced properly by the world’s worst agent. The other was beyond amazing. I was happy to dole out dues to both, though, because even in the worse case scenario I was getting a better deal than most. What are you paying for? The negotiation of your future. Your insurance benefits. Your pension. Your raises and rates. Your vacation and option time. Mandated progressive disciplinary programs. Representation. Healthy and non-violent work environment. If that’s not enough, what do you want?
FedEx folks and others have also been frightened by their companies’ claims of corruption within the unions. Oh, THAT again. Thanks, Hollywood. Of course, there’s gonna be corruption. It’s everywhere: churches, school boards, city councils, the Girl scouts, charity groups, tax-evading Joe the Plummers, the Democrats, the Republicans, and so on. I can’t think of anything that could escape potential misconduct without proper effort and enforcement. Members get the leadership they elect. Corruption is a by-product of apathy. If unions weren’t such a huge threat to the wallets of corporate executives, they wouldn’t be regulated as heavily as the pharmaceutical industry. When you get down to it, corruption is not fueled by some guy wanting to fight for the right to leave his work station to use the toilet without fear of being fired. Really.
The good guys are not the ones who want to outsource and offshore labor. They’re not the ones who have to take a five percent cut in pay while their boss makes 32 million dollars. Union evil isn’t the root of corporate failure. Corporate failure is the root of corporate failure. (Read: Don’t blame bail outs on the UAW. Auto workers have been wailing about financial mismanagement for decades.)
Saturday, August 7, 2010
Meet Jackson Lewis , FedEx's Inspiration For "FedEx Workplace Website "?
Jackson Lewis presents itself as a reputable "national workplace law firm," yet under its polished veneer lies a for-profit unionbuster. In fact, Jackson Lewis is one of the oldest and largest union avoidance law firms in the nation. Jackson Lewis counsels businesses on labor relations strategies that prevent unions from entering the workplace. By operating in the shadows of corporate unionbusting campaigns, the firm remains virtually unknown to the general public.
Jackson Lewis capitalizes on ineffective labor laws, the desperation of some employers to remain union free, and the use of scare tactics to portray unions as an enemy to businesses.1 One of the firm's lawyers iterates the modus operandi of Jackson Lewis best: "Jackson Lewis was founded on the concept of preventive labor relations, and we want to help our clients before there's full-blown organizing. We are a full-service law firm. We just don't do the legal stuff-we handle the campaign." As with other unionbusting firms Jackson Lewis profits off manipulation of a weak labor law system to help its clients avoid unions, at all costs.
"Preventive" Labor Relations Practices
Jackson Lewis sells a variety of services to employers to prevent workers from ever considering a union. Here are a few examples of the firm's activities:
* Vulnerability Assessments: The firm provides audits as the first step for employers looking to avoid a union organizing campaign. By assessing an employer's vulnerability through measures such as weaknesses in management-employee communication and levels of workplace satisfaction among employees.2 The assessment aims to create an "issue-free" workplace where management makes clear that their business desires to remain union-free.
* "How To Stay Union Free" Seminars: These two-day intensive workshops are for a "bona-fide management representative" only. Seminars with provocative titles such as "Union Avoidance War Games"3 take place throughout the country and run an employer anywhere from $595 to $1,595. Jackson Lewis promises a "frightening, valuable, and enjoyable" seminar that completely prepares "supervisors to exercise their union-free rights under the law." A 2007 exposé by a journalist who went undercover at one of these union-free workshops revealed how Jackson Lewis encourages employers to skirt the law when it comes to unions. A Jackson Lewis lawyer reasoned that it is acceptable to fire union organizers, as long as one creates a legitimate reason: "Union sympathizers aren't entitled to any more protection than other workers."
* Union-Free Books, Articles, and Pamphlets: Among the anti-union manuals the firm produces are suggestively titled newsletters such as "Union KNOw -a publication devoted to enhancing the union-free status of clients and friends of Jackson Lewis," and books including "Leveling the Playing Field-What New York Charter Schools' Leaders Need to Know About Union Organizing."
Jackson Lewis capitalizes on ineffective labor laws, the desperation of some employers to remain union free, and the use of scare tactics to portray unions as an enemy to businesses.1 One of the firm's lawyers iterates the modus operandi of Jackson Lewis best: "Jackson Lewis was founded on the concept of preventive labor relations, and we want to help our clients before there's full-blown organizing. We are a full-service law firm. We just don't do the legal stuff-we handle the campaign." As with other unionbusting firms Jackson Lewis profits off manipulation of a weak labor law system to help its clients avoid unions, at all costs.
"Preventive" Labor Relations Practices
Jackson Lewis sells a variety of services to employers to prevent workers from ever considering a union. Here are a few examples of the firm's activities:
* Vulnerability Assessments: The firm provides audits as the first step for employers looking to avoid a union organizing campaign. By assessing an employer's vulnerability through measures such as weaknesses in management-employee communication and levels of workplace satisfaction among employees.2 The assessment aims to create an "issue-free" workplace where management makes clear that their business desires to remain union-free.
* "How To Stay Union Free" Seminars: These two-day intensive workshops are for a "bona-fide management representative" only. Seminars with provocative titles such as "Union Avoidance War Games"3 take place throughout the country and run an employer anywhere from $595 to $1,595. Jackson Lewis promises a "frightening, valuable, and enjoyable" seminar that completely prepares "supervisors to exercise their union-free rights under the law." A 2007 exposé by a journalist who went undercover at one of these union-free workshops revealed how Jackson Lewis encourages employers to skirt the law when it comes to unions. A Jackson Lewis lawyer reasoned that it is acceptable to fire union organizers, as long as one creates a legitimate reason: "Union sympathizers aren't entitled to any more protection than other workers."
* Union-Free Books, Articles, and Pamphlets: Among the anti-union manuals the firm produces are suggestively titled newsletters such as "Union KNOw -a publication devoted to enhancing the union-free status of clients and friends of Jackson Lewis," and books including "Leveling the Playing Field-What New York Charter Schools' Leaders Need to Know About Union Organizing."
Thursday, August 5, 2010
Constructive Termination at FedEx Freight ?
The term “constructive termination” describes the situation in which an employer makes job conditions so intolerable that the employee is forced to quit. Those employees may have legal rights to compensation when this happens.
Employers use many methods to force people out their jobs. For example, they might freeze an employee out of important meetings, give the employee demeaning tasks to perform, or increase or decrease work hours to an unacceptable level. They may allow the targeted employee’s co-workers to sexually harass her, or permit her supervisor repeatedly to pass her over for a promotion because she is African-American. Whatever the method, the goal is to make the work environment so miserable that the employee will simply quit.
What Motivates the Employer?
There are many reasons an employer might try to force an employee out of the job, from personality conflicts to dissatisfaction with performance. However, this method of going about discharging an employee can leave the victim confused and angry. Why would a supervisor, upper management or the boss do this? The answer is probably a simple one, such as:
Management is uncomfortable with confrontation and wants to avoid directly disciplining or firing the employee
The manager gets personal satisfaction from being a bully
Management erroneously believes that the company is protected from suit for wrongful termination if the employee leaves “voluntarily"
Damages Available to Victims of Constructive Discharge
Each case of constructive termination is different. When determining what damages are appropriate, the employer’s level of fault and the type of harassment may be weighed against any fault on the part of the employee. Depending upon the facts of your particular case, you may be entitled to recover:
Back pay
Pay that you would have earned in future had you not been forced out
Damages for mental distress brought on by your constructive discharge
Punitive damages; and/or
Attorneys’ fees
When You Are the Victim of Constructive Termination
What can you do when your boss or supervisor uses pressure to force you out of your job?
If you have quit due to your employer’s wrongful actions, don’t despair. Even though you are the one who ended the employment relationship, you have not necessarily let your employer off the hook. Courts may treat an employee’s resignation as a constructive termination if it can be shown that the employer deliberately made working conditions so intolerable that any reasonable employee in that situation would do the same thing.
Don’t let your employer get away with unlawfully taking away the job you trained for and worked hard to get. To find out if your situation entitles you to relief for constructive discharge, talk to an experienced California wrongful termination lawyer. With the advice of an expert employment law attorney, you’ll get the answers you need.
The Angela Alioto Law Group is dedicated to helping people who have been treated unfairly by their employers. Contact our firm at 866-590-6554 to schedule a free consultation with one of our attorneys.
Employers use many methods to force people out their jobs. For example, they might freeze an employee out of important meetings, give the employee demeaning tasks to perform, or increase or decrease work hours to an unacceptable level. They may allow the targeted employee’s co-workers to sexually harass her, or permit her supervisor repeatedly to pass her over for a promotion because she is African-American. Whatever the method, the goal is to make the work environment so miserable that the employee will simply quit.
What Motivates the Employer?
There are many reasons an employer might try to force an employee out of the job, from personality conflicts to dissatisfaction with performance. However, this method of going about discharging an employee can leave the victim confused and angry. Why would a supervisor, upper management or the boss do this? The answer is probably a simple one, such as:
Management is uncomfortable with confrontation and wants to avoid directly disciplining or firing the employee
The manager gets personal satisfaction from being a bully
Management erroneously believes that the company is protected from suit for wrongful termination if the employee leaves “voluntarily"
Damages Available to Victims of Constructive Discharge
Each case of constructive termination is different. When determining what damages are appropriate, the employer’s level of fault and the type of harassment may be weighed against any fault on the part of the employee. Depending upon the facts of your particular case, you may be entitled to recover:
Back pay
Pay that you would have earned in future had you not been forced out
Damages for mental distress brought on by your constructive discharge
Punitive damages; and/or
Attorneys’ fees
When You Are the Victim of Constructive Termination
What can you do when your boss or supervisor uses pressure to force you out of your job?
If you have quit due to your employer’s wrongful actions, don’t despair. Even though you are the one who ended the employment relationship, you have not necessarily let your employer off the hook. Courts may treat an employee’s resignation as a constructive termination if it can be shown that the employer deliberately made working conditions so intolerable that any reasonable employee in that situation would do the same thing.
Don’t let your employer get away with unlawfully taking away the job you trained for and worked hard to get. To find out if your situation entitles you to relief for constructive discharge, talk to an experienced California wrongful termination lawyer. With the advice of an expert employment law attorney, you’ll get the answers you need.
The Angela Alioto Law Group is dedicated to helping people who have been treated unfairly by their employers. Contact our firm at 866-590-6554 to schedule a free consultation with one of our attorneys.
Wednesday, August 4, 2010
Organizing Meeting At Local 952
Organizing Meeting At Local 952
DATE: SUNDAY, August 8,2010
TIME: 8:30-11:00 A.M.
PLACE: TEAMSTERS LOCAL 952
140 S. MARKS WAY, ORANGE
THE TIME TO ORGANIZE IS NOW!
Bring a co-worker to their first meeting or a spouse and
even an LTL,Express or Ground employee!
If Canada FedEx can organize, so can we!
DATE: SUNDAY, August 8,2010
TIME: 8:30-11:00 A.M.
PLACE: TEAMSTERS LOCAL 952
140 S. MARKS WAY, ORANGE
THE TIME TO ORGANIZE IS NOW!
Bring a co-worker to their first meeting or a spouse and
even an LTL,Express or Ground employee!
If Canada FedEx can organize, so can we!
Tuesday, August 3, 2010
Monday, August 2, 2010
Wednesday, July 28, 2010
It's on you (a post from LTL Boards)
A driver gets pulled in for an inspection (true story) and gets a ticket for a chunk of rubber missing from a tire. Pretty common since the SHIT EQUIPMENT we pull has any different number of tires on it, ie, worn drive tires on trailers or on con-gears just to start with. The driver contacts FEDEX and tells them the ticket was written to him, not to FEDEX, FEDEX tells the driver you might have caught that on a proper pre trip. I guess I missed the part in the pre trip dvd that showed moving the unit up a foot or so to check the bottom of the tires. Or maybe it came off during the run somewhere. $ 84.00 ticket. PAY THE F...ING TICKET DON.
Read comments click below
LTL Boards
Read comments click below
LTL Boards
Sunday, July 25, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Monday, July 19, 2010
Friday, July 16, 2010
What About Air Safety?
EDITORIAL OBSERVER
What About Air Safety?
Published: July 16, 2010
Last year's crash of a commuter plane near Buffalo, which killed 50 people, highlighted the need for more stringent pilot training and tougher rules about how long pilots can fly before they are required to rest.
Those reforms have been irresponsibly sidetracked by one of Capitol Hill's nastiest and most expensive lobbying fights over the unrelated issue of unionization rules at the rival delivery companies, FedEx and United Parcel Service.
The complex bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration would require more hours in training for commercial pilots and a closer watch on their flight schedules. The House and Senate have passed versions of the reauthorization with the sensible new safety rules. But the legislation has stalled as the two corporations and their hugely well-paid lobbyists battle over whether the unionization standards for U.P.S. package deliverers should also be applied to FedEx's ground workers.
The nation is fortunate that the standoff has now galvanized a less dollar-driven lobbying force - the families of the victims in last year's tragedy. They are buttonholing lawmakers with a question: What's happening with passenger safety?
The House's aviation bill, led by Representative James Oberstar, a Democrat of Minnesota and a union champion, would finally put the two companies on the same footing. Mr. Oberstar argues adamantly that a Republican Congress unfairly allowed FedEx special antiunion protections in 1996, and this needs to be corrected.
The Senate-passed measure has no such provision. And a filibuster is threatened to protect FedEx by Senators Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander, Republicans of Tennessee, where, of course, FedEx is based. Far more than parochial posturing is at stake in the bill, which also includes modernization of the air traffic control system.
Both sides remain unyielding on the union fight. We sympathize with Representative Oberstar's point and find the filibuster threat on behalf of FedEx shameless. Congress needs to rise above this to serve the one special interest most at stake: air passenger safety.
What About Air Safety?
Published: July 16, 2010
Last year's crash of a commuter plane near Buffalo, which killed 50 people, highlighted the need for more stringent pilot training and tougher rules about how long pilots can fly before they are required to rest.
Those reforms have been irresponsibly sidetracked by one of Capitol Hill's nastiest and most expensive lobbying fights over the unrelated issue of unionization rules at the rival delivery companies, FedEx and United Parcel Service.
The complex bill reauthorizing the Federal Aviation Administration would require more hours in training for commercial pilots and a closer watch on their flight schedules. The House and Senate have passed versions of the reauthorization with the sensible new safety rules. But the legislation has stalled as the two corporations and their hugely well-paid lobbyists battle over whether the unionization standards for U.P.S. package deliverers should also be applied to FedEx's ground workers.
The nation is fortunate that the standoff has now galvanized a less dollar-driven lobbying force - the families of the victims in last year's tragedy. They are buttonholing lawmakers with a question: What's happening with passenger safety?
The House's aviation bill, led by Representative James Oberstar, a Democrat of Minnesota and a union champion, would finally put the two companies on the same footing. Mr. Oberstar argues adamantly that a Republican Congress unfairly allowed FedEx special antiunion protections in 1996, and this needs to be corrected.
The Senate-passed measure has no such provision. And a filibuster is threatened to protect FedEx by Senators Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander, Republicans of Tennessee, where, of course, FedEx is based. Far more than parochial posturing is at stake in the bill, which also includes modernization of the air traffic control system.
Both sides remain unyielding on the union fight. We sympathize with Representative Oberstar's point and find the filibuster threat on behalf of FedEx shameless. Congress needs to rise above this to serve the one special interest most at stake: air passenger safety.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Our Brother and Sisters of FedEx Express Need Our Help
We are nearing the end of our fight and it can go one way or the other. Our two Senators are the ones who are protecting
Fedex and allowing them to have an advantage over every other shipping company. If it was not for them this FAA safety bill would have easily passed with the fedex language in it. It is more important to them to let one company have a one up on everyone else over getting a very important aviation safety bill through. Please if you have the time to call them and let them know that this is wrong. I always thought when you have a majority in the house and senate (in this case democrates) you could get things done. But I now know why our country is in the shape it is because nothing can get done. 2 republican senators can make a saftey bill that has taken years to put together go down the tubes. This bill will effect anyone who fly's at anytime on a jet. We are trying to stop allowing uncertified mechanics from working on the jets our friends and family fly on. Overseas they have no drug tests and need no licence while we in the united states are held to a much higher standard. Who do you want working on your planes.
They have extended the money that goes to the Faa and other aviation things at least 7 times and they say this will not happen again so the pressure is on either to let fedex get away with anything they want or to pass the bill with the language and protect our loved ones. Its confusing with all that is going on and thats the way Fedex likes it but these are the facts I had laid out.
Thank you and get all your friends and family to call their Senators in there state and tell them to vote on the Faa reauthorization bill with the Fedex language in it also.here are the two Senators numbers to call.
Robert Phillips Corker, Jr.US Senator from Tennessee(202) 224-3344
Andrew Lamar Alexander, Jr.US Senator from Tennessee(202) 224-4944
Fedex and allowing them to have an advantage over every other shipping company. If it was not for them this FAA safety bill would have easily passed with the fedex language in it. It is more important to them to let one company have a one up on everyone else over getting a very important aviation safety bill through. Please if you have the time to call them and let them know that this is wrong. I always thought when you have a majority in the house and senate (in this case democrates) you could get things done. But I now know why our country is in the shape it is because nothing can get done. 2 republican senators can make a saftey bill that has taken years to put together go down the tubes. This bill will effect anyone who fly's at anytime on a jet. We are trying to stop allowing uncertified mechanics from working on the jets our friends and family fly on. Overseas they have no drug tests and need no licence while we in the united states are held to a much higher standard. Who do you want working on your planes.
They have extended the money that goes to the Faa and other aviation things at least 7 times and they say this will not happen again so the pressure is on either to let fedex get away with anything they want or to pass the bill with the language and protect our loved ones. Its confusing with all that is going on and thats the way Fedex likes it but these are the facts I had laid out.
Thank you and get all your friends and family to call their Senators in there state and tell them to vote on the Faa reauthorization bill with the Fedex language in it also.here are the two Senators numbers to call.
Robert Phillips Corker, Jr.US Senator from Tennessee(202) 224-3344
Andrew Lamar Alexander, Jr.US Senator from Tennessee(202) 224-4944
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
Sunday, July 11, 2010
Thursday, July 8, 2010
PLEASE HELP FORMER CF TEAMSTERS CLAIM THEIR MONEY
Approximately 850 former Teamster employees of Consolidated Freightways (CF) have un-cashed or undeliverable payments due to them stemming from the 2002 CF bankruptcy, and time is running out for them to collect their money.
The vast majority of the 14,000 affected Teamster CF employees have received money from the 2002 bankruptcy, but the union has been unable to locate approximately 850 former employees who are entitled to payment. As freight Teamsters, many of you may know former CF Teamsters. Below is a link to a list of ex-CF Teamsters who are owed money.
If you know ex-employees on this list, please contact them and let them know that they may be entitled to a payment, but they must act now to claim their money. Any employee who is listed must respond on or before July 30, 2010, or they will lose their money.
If you know any of the listed former CF Teamsters on the attached pdf, please urge them to visit www.cfwy.com. Any employee on the list must call (414) 223-0408 to claim their money, and must do so on or before July 30, 2010. More information is available at www.cfwy.com.
The list contains names of ex-CF workers and their local union numbers. Not all local unions are available.
See list here.
The vast majority of the 14,000 affected Teamster CF employees have received money from the 2002 bankruptcy, but the union has been unable to locate approximately 850 former employees who are entitled to payment. As freight Teamsters, many of you may know former CF Teamsters. Below is a link to a list of ex-CF Teamsters who are owed money.
If you know ex-employees on this list, please contact them and let them know that they may be entitled to a payment, but they must act now to claim their money. Any employee who is listed must respond on or before July 30, 2010, or they will lose their money.
If you know any of the listed former CF Teamsters on the attached pdf, please urge them to visit www.cfwy.com. Any employee on the list must call (414) 223-0408 to claim their money, and must do so on or before July 30, 2010. More information is available at www.cfwy.com.
The list contains names of ex-CF workers and their local union numbers. Not all local unions are available.
See list here.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)