Hartford HD Drivers Vote But Ballots Not Counted
The Home Delivery drivers in the Hartford terminal voted this morning as ordered by the NLRB. The company again inserted another delaying tactic into the process by requesting the NLRB review the Region 34 Regional Director's decision on the driver status. While this request for review is considered by the NLRB, the Hartford ballots have been impounded and will be counted in the near future.
The entire FedEx strategy in the NLRB process is wholly predictable. The FedEx strategy is deny, delay and lose. FedEx denies the drivers are employees, FedEx delays the process with days of meaningless testimony at a hearing, then FedEx loses in the end when the Regional Director rules the drivers are in fact employees.
This request for review tactic is more of the same. FedEx denies that the Regional Director made proper the ruling, FedEx delays by requesting the ballots get impounded and then FedEx will lose.
FedEx will lose this request for review just like the company lost in its reviews in Barrington, like they lost in Northboro and like they lost in Wilmington.
Although delayed by the process, the justice for the Hartford drivers won't be denied. We expect a ruling from the NLRB within a few weeks and then the ballots will be counted.
-- May 11
Hartford HD Drivers to Vote May 11
The single-vehicle contractors at the Home Delivery terminal in Hartford, CT go to vote for Teamsters Local Union 671 on May 11. The company sent the usual suspects (Tim Edmonds, recently charged with unfair labor practices in Northboro) but also sent other senior managers from Pittsburgh to make phony claims and empty promises. The Hartford drivers are taking the next step to standing up to the FedEx scam.
-- May 10
FedEx Ground Denies NLRB Allegations in Northboro
The Worcester Telegram & Gazette followed up with the NLRB and reports on FedEx Ground's response to the Region 1 complaint.
Although the language suggests that it is the Teamsters that have made the allegations, in fact the complaint comes from the NLRB and its investigation of the practices by FedEx in its anti-union campaign in Northboro. If the workers' charges of unfair labor practices in Northboro were just hot air, then the NLRB investigation would conclude without a sound. Instead, the NLRB concluded that there was enough evidence of illegal actions by FedEx to file the complaint.
This is very similar to what happened to unfair labor practice charges stemming from the Barrington, NJ events. In that case, the NLRB complaint also caused brave talk from FedEx spokesmen but ultimately FedEx Ground settled for cash considerations with those workers.
-- May 08
Hartford Paper Reports on Windsor Organizing Campaign
The Hartford Courant got early wind of the NLRB Region 34 decision and put out an article last Saturday.
FedEx spokesperson Perry Colosimo continue to live in an alternate universe and repeats the company line.
"We disagree with the NLRB regional district's ruling and, as usual in these cases, we're prepared to go forth with an election at our Hartford facility," said Perry Colosimo, a spokesman for FedEx Ground.
Colosimo said most of the FedEx workers that the company considers to be independent contractors would prefer to remain independent. He did not say whether the company would appeal the decision.
Hello, Perry? Didn't you read the Region 34 Director's decision that said, "Between November 2, 2004 and September 20, 2006, three other regional offices have issued a total of four Decisions and Direction of Elections regarding the issue of whether the Employer's contract drivers are employees or independent contractors...In all four DDE's, the Regional Directors rejected the company's claim that drivers at issue were independent contractors....I take administrative notice of the fact that the Board denied the Employer's Request for Review in all four cases regarding the determination that contract drivers were statutory employees within the meaning of the Act."
So who do you believe, Perry or the NLRB?
-- April 20
Initial Thoughts on FedEx Express Race Case Settlement
Certainly, FedEx Express didn't easily part with $55 million. Or gleefully agree to the large scale changes to its hiring and employment policies. The FedEx Express workers bravely took on the company and the company blinked.
This latest cave-in by FedEx just goes to show how powerful a group of workers can be.
Remember how FedEx talked tough as recently as its 2006 annual report. In Note 19 from the company's annual report, they said
The district court's ruling on class certification is not a decision on the merits of the plaintiffs' claim and does not address whether we will be held liable. Trial is currently scheduled for February 2007. We have denied any liability and intend to vigourously defend ourselves in this case.
Remember how FedEx talked tough in the face of the California class action lawsuit for off-the-clock work - another case FedEx settled at the last minute - in the 2005 annual report.
The plaintiffs allege that hourly employees are routinely required to work "off the clock" and are not paid for this additional work. . . . We have denied any liability with respect to these claims and intend to vigorously defend ourselves in these cases.
And now look at how FedEx talks tough about the FedEx Ground misclassification lawsuit in its 2006 annual report.
We strongly believe that FedEx Ground's owner-operators are properly classified as independent contractors and we will prevail in these proceedings.
This has been a very long losing streak for FedEx.
-- April 12
NLRB Complaint Hits the Papers
The NLRB Region 1 complaint against FedEx Home Delivery for unfair labor practices in Northboro, MA was widely covered in the media. As Teamster General President Jim Hoffa said, "In FedEx’s quarterly earnings announcement last week, CEO Fred Smith bragged about his company. This week, the company’s real face of threats, forgeries, intimidation and firings has been exposed."
A Bloomberg article provided more analysis of the independent contractor issued. The reporter noted Fred Smith has claimed "FedEx has successfully defended itself in more than 100 lawsuits challenging the model." While that may be technically true, the FedEx CEO fails to mention how cases like a decision in 1992 from the Texas Employment Security Commission is relevant to 2007. Fred Smith also doesn't mention the series of depositions of FedEx executives like Dan Sullivan and Dave Rebholz in the on-going national litigation.
The Reuters article had more empty talk from FedEx Ground spokesmen. In the last paragraph, however, the unnamed writer confuses the Northboro FedEx Home Delivery unit that is the subject of the NLRB complaint with the Northboro FedEx Smartpost unit that voted last month. Dow Jones also had a short wire story on the complaint.
The hometown Worcester Telegram & Gazette went and spoke with at least one of the former drivers. And since that paper is the one the workers still in the Northboro terminal will most likely read, their coverage is the most important. Typically, FedEx wouldn't return the hometown paper call in time for the article.
-- April 05
Massachusetts Rejects FedEx's Argument Again
FedEx Ground continues to have a hard time convincing anyone in the Massachusetts state government that its drivers are "contractors" as the company claims.
First there was the August 2006 unemployment insurance appeal ruling that found a driver to be an employee and eligible for unemployment benefits.
Now comes the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination refusal to dismiss the complaint of four Muslim men who are claiming discrimination based on their race and religious belief.
Both Reuters and the Associated Press filed wire stories which got picked up widely - even by the international newspapers and financial press .
The company's losing streak in Massachusetts is long and growing.
-- March 06
FedEx Express Age Discrimination Lawsuit Moving Ahead
The law firm representing a class of FedEx Express couriers who allege age discrimination at the company issued a press release with an update on the case.
Currently two cases have been filed against the world's largest cargo carrier: Holowecki, et al., filed in the US District Court for the Southern District of NY, 1:02-cv-03355 JSR, and Clausnitzer, et al., filed in the US District Court in the Central District of California, SACV 05-1269 DOC (ANx). The lawsuits are based upon Federal Express' violations of the Age Discrimination in Employment Act.
-- February 23
ACTION UPDATE: Contact New Attorneys General
Following the elections in November 2006, a number of newly elected officials now serve as the Attorney General in many states. If you come from any of the states below, take a moment to send your new Attorney General a note requesting an investigation into the FedEx Ground independent contractor scam.
- Arkansas - Attorney General McDaniel
- California - Attorney General Brown
- Delaware - Attorney General Biden
- Florida - Attorney General McCollum
- Kansas - Attorney General Morrison
- Maryland - Attorney General Gansler
- Massachusetts - Attorney General Coakley
- Minnesota - Attorney General Swanson
- Nevada - Attorney General Cortez-Masto
- New Jersey - Attorney General Rabner
- New Mexico - Attorney General King
- New York - Attorney General Cuomo
- Ohio - Attorney General Dann
- Tennessee - Attorney General Cooper
- Wisconsin - Attorney General Van Hollen
-- February 22
Who needs to Jump-seat
BusinessWeek looks at some fine print in Fred Smith's compensation and finds...
FedEx Corp. gave CEO Frederick W. Smith $833,000 in jet use and security services on top of his $1.3 million salary in fiscal 2006. FedEx, which requires the CEO to use the jet for all travel, says an independent security consultant determined the need for the benefits.
Why continue a policy of letting employees jump-seat when one flies corporate luxury with a 'security need' as an excuse?
-- February 20
New York Looking at Workers Comp Shortfall
There is something heading towards FedEx Ground in New York. A steamroller, perhaps?
With the election of Eliot Spitzer as Governor, one of the most activist politicians in the country now holds the reins of one of the most empowered offices in the country. The latest on FedExaminer.com is that some Home Delivery drivers in New York have received paperwork from the NY Department of Labor asking very probing questions about FedEx's contractor model. (FedExWatch would post any documents that were sent our way at fedexwatch at teamster dot org.)
The New York-based Fiscal Policy Institute recently released a report that documents a large shortfall in the collection of workers compensation payments when compared to the state unemployment insurance rolls. Governor Spitzer has said that he intends to look at ways to solidify the state's workers comp system. It seems unlikely that only the so-called contractors at FedEx will be the focus of his attention.
-- February 06
Where is Fred Smith Going with This?
Where is Fred Smith going with this crusade on energy policy? At what point do his efforts split between those of a CEO of an gas-guzzling company and those of a private citizen?
-- January 31
FedEx Corporation's Latest Quarterly Report
The FedEx Corporation released its latest 10-Q to the Securitites and Exchange Commission on December 22, 2006. The company provided updates on its legal issues as "Contingencies.
Wage-and-Hour. We are a defendant in a number of lawsuits filed in federal or California state courts containing various class-action allegations under federal or California wage-and-hour laws. The plaintiffs in these lawsuits are employees of FedEx operating companies who allege, among other things, that they were forced to work "off the clock" and were not provided work breaks or other benefits. The plaintiffs generally seek unspecified monetary damages, injunctive relief, or both. We have denied any liability and intend to vigorously defend ourselves. Given the nature and preliminary status of these wage-and-hour claims, we cannot yet determine the amount or a reasonable range of potential loss in these matters, if any.
Race Discrimination. On September 28, 2005, a California federal district court granted class certification in Satchell v. FedEx Express, a lawsuit alleging discrimination by FedEx Express in the Western region of the United States against certain current and former minority employees in pay and promotion. The district court's ruling on class certification is not a decision on the merits of the plaintiffs' claim and does not address whether we will be held liable. Trial is currently scheduled for February 2007. We have denied any liability and intend to vigorously defend ourselves in this case. Given the nature of the claim, we cannot yet determine the amount or a reasonable range of potential loss in this matter, if any. It is reasonably possible, however, that we could incur a material loss as this case develops.
Independent Contractor. FedEx Ground is involved in numerous purported class-action lawsuits and other proceedings that claim that the company's owner-operators should be treated as employees, rather than independent contractors. These matters include Estrada v. FedEx Ground, a class action involving single work area contractors that was filed in California state court. Although the trial court granted some of the plaintiffs' claims for relief in Estrada ($18 million, inclusive of attorney's fees, plus equitable relief), the appellate court has reversed the trial court's issuance of equitable relief. We expect to prevail on the rest of the pending appeal as well. Adverse determinations in these matters could, among other things, entitle certain of our contractors to the reimbursement of certain expenses and to the benefit of wage-and-hour laws and result in employment and withholding tax liability for FedEx Ground. On August 10, 2005, the Judicial Panel on Multi-District Litigation granted our motion to transfer and consolidate the majority of the class-action lawsuits for administration of the pre-trial proceedings by a single federal court - the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Indiana. We strongly believe that FedEx Ground's owner-operators are properly classified as independent contractors and that we will prevail in these proceedings. Given the nature and preliminary status of these claims, we cannot yet determine the amount or a reasonable range of potential loss in these matters, if any.
FedEx Ground is also involved in several lawsuits, including one purported class action, that claim that the drivers of the company's independent contractors were jointly employed by the contractor and FedEx Ground. We strongly believe that FedEx Ground is not an employer of these drivers and that we will prevail in these proceedings. Given the nature and preliminary status of these claims, we cannot yet determine the amount or a reasonable range of potential loss in these matters, if any.
Other. FedEx and its subsidiaries are subject to other legal proceedings that arise in the ordinary course of their business. In the opinion of management, the aggregate liability, if any, with respect to these other actions will not materially adversely affect our financial position, results of operations or cash flows.
The company added some 'color' to the disclosure on the on-going FedEx Ground driver litigation later on in the 10-Q in its discussion of the Ground segment.
Purchased transportation increased 17% in the second quarter of 2007 primarily due to higher package volume and an increase in the rates paid to our independent contractors. Purchased transportation increased 18% in the first half of 2007 principally due to volume growth and an increase in the rates paid to our independent contractors, including fuel supplements. Salaries and employee benefits, as well as other operating costs, increased in the second quarter and first half of 2007 largely due to increases in staffing and facilities to support volume growth. Other operating expenses increased 22% in the second quarter of 2007 and 24% in the first half of 2007 due primarily to increased legal costs.
In the questioning of FedEx management during the quarterly conference call (which can be heard here), one analyst did ask about these legal costs and what expectations were for future legal expenses in the Ground litigation. The company responded that the expenses were expected to be less for the upcoming two quarters. The analysts missed an opportunity to ask questions about the FedEx Ground settlement in New Jersey and its financial and legal implications.
Lastly, the company disclosed that the FedEx Express operations in Europe are now also under investigation by the European Commission for "possible anti-competitve behavior."
On December 19, 2006, FedEx Express received a formal request for certain information in connection with an ongoing investigation by the Directorate General for Competition of the European Commission into possible anti-competitive behavior relating to air freight transport services in the European Union/European Economic Area. This investigation is in addition to the ongoing investigation by the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice that was disclosed in our Annual Report. We do not believe that we have engaged in any anti-competitive activities, and we are cooperating with both the EC and the DOJ.
The announcement of the investigation was reported on briefly following the company's release.
-- December 27
Wilmington Victory Profiled by Change To Win
The Teamsters joined the Change to Win federation to spur active organizing that would bring the benefits of union membership to thousands of workers. The victory by FedEx Home Delivery drivers in electing Teamsters Local Union 25 is the type of jolt of energy that Change to Win wants to highlight. So the Change to Win website has done a profile of the Wilmington victory.
-- December 14
Labor Lawyers Wanted at FedEx Ground HQ
Lumps of coal and pink slips in some of FedEx lawyers' Christmas stocking this year?
FedEx Ground's Legal Department currently has three (3) openings for experienced Litigation Attorneys who will provide legal counsel and trial support in the ordinary and special activities of the corporation to ensure maximum protection of its legal rights and maintain its operations within the limits prescribed by law.
EDUCATION:
# Mandatory requirement: Juris Doctor DegreeEXPERIENCE:
7+ years trial experience in a law firm, large corporate legal department, or the government; outstanding professional credentials; in-depth and demonstrated knowledge and first chair experience in employment, commercial, and/or class action cases. Preferred: bar admissions in more than one state.WORK RELATED SKILLS:
These positions will focus on handling employment, class action, and/or commercial litigation and trial work, selecting outside counsel and managing litigation delegated to them, overseeing and evaluating the performance and progress of outside counsel representing the corporation, including counsel's effective advocacy and compliance with billing and budget guidelines. and providing legal advice and representing the company before administrative agencies, federal, state and local courts. They will also: implement policies and procedures to ensure that the company is operating in compliance with regulations and that regulatory reporting requirements are met, interpret federal, state and local laws and government regulations affecting the operation of the company; and ensure effective human resource and quality management within the department. Proficiency in Microsoft Office, excellent communication skills, attention to detail and ability to successfully work in fast paced environment and handle multiple tasks is required.
Odd that they are potentially looking for two types of lawyers.
FedEx Ground's Legal Department currently has an opening for an experienced labor and employment attorney who will provide legal counsel in the ordinary and special activities of the corporation to ensure maximum protection of its legal rights and maintain its operations within the limits prescribed by law with a special focus on labor and employment law counseling.
EDUCATION:
# Mandatory requirement: Juris Doctor DegreeEXPERIENCE:
3+ years employment-related trial experience and/or labor and employment law experience in a law firm, large corporate legal department, or the government; outstanding professional credentials. Preferred: transportation law experience and/or experience working with an independent contractor workforce.WORK RELATED SKILLS:
With a focus on labor and employment work: Provide legal advice and guidance to the corporation in the implementation of policies and procedures to ensure that the company is operating in compliance with regulations and that regulatory reporting requirements are met, interpret federal, state and local laws and government regulations affecting the operation of the company, selecting outside counsel and managing arbitration and other matters delegated to them, overseeing and evaluating the performance and progress of outside counsel representing the corporation, including counsel's effective advocacy and compliance with billing and budget guidelines, and providing legal advice and representing the company before administrative agencies and in arbitrations. Proficiency in Microsoft Office, excellent communication skills, attention to detail and ability to successfully work in fast paced environment and handle multiple tasks is required.
The company seems intent on circling the wagons and on hiring more lawyers to sue more states like in California and Oregon. Looks like 2007 will be a lot like 2006.
-- December 08
New York Times Investigate Federal Motor Carrier Rules
The New York Times began a series of investigative reports on how regulation impacts our daily lives with a lengthy article on federal transportation and motor carrier safety rules.
Although FedEx is not mentioned in the piece, the general issues raised in the report will be immediately recognized by anyone who follows the company.In decisions that had the support of the White House, the motor carrier agency has eased the rules on truckers' work hours, rejected proposals for electronic monitoring to combat widespread cheating on drivers' logs and resisted calls for more rigorous driver training.
While applauded by the industry, those decisions have been subject to withering criticism by federal appeals court panels in Washington who say they ignore government safety studies and put the industry's economic interests ahead of public safety.
-- December 04
New Resource: CA UIAB Agrees FedEx G/HD Drivers are Employees
The California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board Chief Administrative Law Judge ruled that FedEx Ground did not have a legal leg to stand on in challenging the California Employment Development Dept. audit that found FedEx Ground owed the state more than $7 million for wrongly classifying its single route drivers as contractors.
In 17 concise pages, the ALJ demolished the FedEx Ground argument that drivers were "independent contractors."
Kind of makes any "concessions" seem like a last ditch effort to avoid scrutiny by other states or the feds. Because if one state is going to be made whole through investigating the FedEx contractor scam, one can be certain that other taxmen won't be left holding the bag.
More important to drivers however is why would New Jersey drivers be covered by unemployment insurance as part of a settlement while other states are still fighting legal battles. Why are NJ drivers getting their legal benefits as employees while no one else in the country does?
-- November 28
What Is FedEx Ground Saying about Wilmington?
FedEx Ground and Home Delivery managers woke up with a new set of rules this Monday following the Wilmington drivers vote for the Teamsters. The slogan on the 3 x 5 card saying the Teamsters have never won an election at FedEx Ground is now 'inoperative.'
The Wall Street Journal reported over the weekend of some so-called "concessions" by FedEx Ground in the company's operations. The report said that there will be more people trying to tell drivers that they are "independent" but gave no examples of any change in practices that would actually make drivers more "independent."
Like the song says: Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
And here is what lame duck Dan Sullivan is apparently telling the management ranks after the Wilmington drivers voted for a voice in their working lives.
We've learned today that the ballots in the union elections in Boston have been counted and that the majority of contractors in both Wilmington FedEx Home Delivery facilities have opted for third-party representation. Unfortunately, the 24 votes supporting third party representation at these terminals are not surprising considering the "say anything, do anything" tactics the Teamsters used during their campaign. We will immediately begin the legal process of challenging this election because of the Teamsters' objectionable conduct, which made a fair election impossible in these facilities.As you may know, the Teamsters have previously filed 46 petitions for elections over the history of FedEx Ground, FedEx Home Delivery and RPS, our predecessor company. The union was rejected in all but two Teamster organizing efforts, and contractors in those locations eventually withdrew their support of the Teamsters after the union repeatedly failed to deliver on their campaign promises. To this day, 15,000 FedEx Ground contractors in more than 500 facilities have chosen to remain Teamster free.
No doubt, the Teamsters will use this opportunity to claim that they are in the best position to serve the interests of contractors throughout our company. History and recent events show us that this is simply not true. For example:
-) The Teamsters have lost hundreds of thousands of members' jobs in recent years, due primarily to unreasonably restrictive work rules, customer service disruptions caused by strikes, rising membership costs, and higher incidence of member mistreatment. They are desperate to replenish their declining membership and revenue base and have publicly targeted large companies, including FedEx, for attack. Over the past year, many FedEx Ground facilities have been the site for aggressive Teamster campaigns—with obviously very limited success.
-) As you know, the largest constituency served by the Teamsters is UPS and its 220,000 dues-paying drivers. It doesn't take much thought to understand what the Teamsters' real motives are and who will be the primary beneficiary if they can advance their agenda.We firmly believe that the Teamsters are not the right choice for FedEx contractors, FedEx customers, or FedEx. We are also gratified that the overwhelming majority of our contractors completely agree and understand what's at stake for their businesses. For those contractors, we remain fully committed to work directly with them to enhance their environment and increase their opportunities for success.
We will continue to update you on this situation as developments occur.
At FedEx Ground, the truth hurts. The truth is that the Wilmington drivers had enough of the empty purple promises. The truth is that the Wilmington drivers voted to take control of their lives. The truth is that no matter how many times the company repeats its lies, the Wilmington drivers are through with meaningless "concessions." FedEx Ground and Home Delivery drivers don't need the company telling them what are the "right choices" to improve their lives.
And to compound its problems, FedEx will fight another losing battle if it pursues its challenges to the election.
TeamsterPower started a thread over at DailyKos on the Wilmington election, so mosey on over and join in the conversation.
-- November 20
New Resource: FedEx Sues California Employment Dept.
FedEx Ground must not have managers or lawyers who understand California law. The verdict in the Estrada case is the most clear indication that the FedEx Ground system won't fly in California. The California state audit that found single-route drivers to be employees is a close second place to the Estrada case. The California Employment Development Dept. audited FedEx Ground for 2001 to 2004 and concluded the company wasn't following California law. The state assessed FedEx Ground more than $7.8 million in back payments.
FedEx Ground has appealed the case to the California Unemployment Insurance Appeals Board. The CUIAB has not yet ruled.
We've uploaded the full audit by the EDD but be warned that it is a large, scanned pdf document.
-- October 24
Wilmington, MA FedEx Home Delivery Drivers Vote for Teamsters
FedEx Home Delivery drivers in Wilmington, MA cast ballots today in an election to select Teamsters Local Union 25 as their bargaining representative. In a show of strength and solidarity, a large number of drivers marched in single file together to the voting station. The drivers in Wilmington faced down the FedEx campaign of misinformation and intimidation following the latest NLRB ruling that gave these employees the right to vote union. All the drivers are out on the road today servicing their areas.
The outcome of the election has not been announced. At the last minute, FedEx requested a review of the NLRB Region 1 director's ruling that ordered the election. The ballots have been impounded temporarily until the request is handled by the NLRB. This latest, desparate try by FedEx to delay the outcome is another company tactic to deny the drivers their right to join the Teamsters. FedEx has tried this tactic in the past - and lost - most recently in the March 2006 NLRB review order.
There is another day's wait for these drivers, but they've shown strength and determination all along. They'll have the final say soon enough.
-- October 20
Page 4 of 6 pages « First < 2 3 4 5 6 >
