Stephen, J. Cabot blog

April 29, 2010

DEMS DO UNION BIDDING

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 5:21 pm

From the desk of Stephen Cabot:

United Parcel Service is waging a full-strength campaign to get the U S Congress to make sure that FedEx will be subject to the same onerous union rules as itself.
According to an article in The Wall Street Journal, “House Transportation Chairman James Oberstar (D. Big Labor) last year slipped 230 words into a spending bill that would make it easier for the Teamsters to unionize FedEx. This ambush was included at the urging of UPS, which has been saddled with the Teamsters for decades and wants FedEx to feel its pain.”
While UPS operates under the rules of the National Labor Relations Act, which makes the company vulnerable to strikes (e.g. a 15 day strike in1997), FedEx operates under the rules of the Railway Labor Act, which discourages strikes so that there will not be any “interruptions to commerce”

FedEx delivers most of its time-sensitive packages via air, and its customers choose its services because they expected rapid uninterrupted deliveries. UPS, by other means, delivers most of its packages by truck and customers understand that delivery may take a few days.

Having failed to have itself re-classified under the Railway Labor Act, UPS would now like to have FedEx made subject to the National Labor Relations Act, which would open the doors to Teamster organizers. And that’s a potentially large dues paying number of workers for the Union: there are 125,000 FedEx workers.

Imagine, for a moment, if FedEx were to be unionized and then experience slow downs or walk outs by Teamster-organized workers. Its business model would be utterly destroyed. And so UPS is intent on lobbying Congress to make FedEx subject to National Railway Act, thus opening the door to union organizers.

Congress should ignore the lobbying of UPS and adhere to the principles of a free market economy, and UPS should work to decertify its union rather than impose restrictions on its competition. The American economy works best when companies are free to engage in unhindered competition. The answer is not to shackle one’s competition; rather, the answer is to throw off one’s own shackles and engage in a free, open, and vibrant economy.

January 22, 2010

AN OVERLOOKED ELEMENT IN THE GREAT MASS UPSET

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , — Stephen Cabot @ 1:41 pm

 

According to various polls, most Americans believe that unions have often been an obstacle, standing in the way of American companies being able to compete with foreign-based and non-union companies. One need only look at the sorry state of GM.

 

In addition, Americans have not voiced approval for President Obama’s pro-union activities, such as attempting to staff the NLRB with pro-union advocates and cozying up to the leaders of the Service Employees International Union and the AFL-CIO. Leaders of both unions have been frequent visitors to the White House.

 

Though many commentators noted Senate candidate Martha Coakley’s gaff about the Boston Red Sox, there was also another element responsible for her loss to Senator Scott Brown.  Seemingly unaware of public sentiment about unions, Ms. Coakley announced during her campaign that she supported the Teamsters’ efforts to organize the workers of FedEx. She stated that she supported the Express Carrier Employee Protection Act.  “As someone deeply committed to ensuring a level playing field for our workforce, I am pleased to support this legislation that will end FedEx’s unfair ability to deny workers’ rights,” stated Ms. Coakley. She didn’t, of course, state that consumers are pleased with the services that they get from FedEx. Furthermore, she did not state that many FedEx drivers prefer the opportunity to own their own routes, be their own bosses, buy additional routes, and enjoy the opportunity of earning as much money as their ambitions and energies permit. By accepting union support and not balancing that with the sentiments of the electorate, she self-destructively hammered another nail into her own political coffin.

 

Driving around during the campaign in his pick-up truck, Scott Brown seemed to voters as independent and as free of union influence as FedEx drivers. It’s just another reason why Massachusetts voters went to the polls to express their own independence. Being a union stooge is no way to run for political office.

June 19, 2009

Congress Keeps On Truckin’

Filed under: Employee Free Choice Act — Tags: , , , , , , , , — Stephen J. Cabot @ 12:42 pm

Congress is determined to promote the unionization of FedEx Express drivers by passing a bill that would change the labor status of those drivers. Rather than operating under the Railway Labor Act, FedEx Express would have to operate under the National Labor Relations Act (NLRA).

Under the rules of the Railway Labor Act, drivers can only join a union if there is national vote. Under the rules of the NLRA, however, drivers could vote to join unions in individual geographical areas.

Once the bill is passed by the Senate, union organizers will encourage drivers to vote for union representation, and it is likely that the majority of workers will do so. Should that occur, the labor costs for FedEx (where many drivers are independent contractors who own their routes) would skyrocket. In addition, the competitive edge that FedEx enjoys vis-à-vis UPS would vanish, for all UPS drivers operate under the NLRA.

It’s not surprising that UPS has been lobbying Congress to get FedEx Express classified under the NLRA.

FedEx is fighting back by accusing UPS on its website BrownBailout.com, that the federal government, in effect, is giving UPS a government bailout by supporting a change of rules for FedEx drivers. U.P.S. and the Teamsters union, however, have denied the accusations of FedEx and are planning a PR campaign to the present their point of view. The Teamsters represent about 240,000 UPS workers.

 

This is just another example of a Democratic congress doing the bidding of organized labor, and it portends bad times for Corporate America.