FedEx trying to fend off reclassification of its workforce

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share
On The Beat Industry News In Brief

One of the region’s largest employers, Memphis-based Federal Express, is still scrambling like one of its package haulers at the height of an early-morning sort to defeat a proposed reclassification of its work force.

In recent days, FedEx sent to Indianapolis its head of communications, Maury Lane, to try to win the hearts and minds of businesses. Lane and FedEx brass have been trying to counter legislation pending in Congress being pushed by arch rival United Parcel Service and the Teamsters union.

Legislation passed by the House and due for Senate consideration would remove FedEx’s air cargo employees from coverage under the Railway Labor Act, which was extended to airlines in 1936. The RLA essentially prevents a local labor dispute in one part of a broader transportation system from bringing that system to a halt.

FedEx says its Indianapolis air operation could feel disruptions if workers are reclassified by Congress, as rival UPS seeks. (IBJ file photo)

UPS started its air cargo business in the 1980s, but its workers are still under the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act—making it more vulnerable to system-wide disruption when local labor disputes arise. UPS’ vulnerability was illustrated by a 15-day strike in 1997 that brought significant disruption.

Lane argues that putting FedEx air workers under the NLRA is absurd, saying 85 percent of FedEx cargo moves by air while 85 percent of UPS’ cargo is still moved by truck.

“What they’re trying to do is treat us like a trucking company,” Lane said. “There are no stop signs at 30,000 feet.”

FedEx’s campaign includes distributing to media and business leaders a story that ran last month in The Washington Post about some UPS operations pulling workers aside to write letters to Congress in support of reclassifying rival FedEx’s work force.

FedEx said if UPS succeeds in Congress, it will cancel orders for Boeing 777 cargo freighters in anticipation of what it says will be costly harm to its business. FedEx, which employs about 5,000 at its second-largest U.S. hub at Indianapolis International Airport, says businesses will also pay the price in the form of less reliability due to labor disputes.



  • Fedex is very deceitful
    The reason why Federal Express can stay under the RLA is because they make there couriers sign contracts that they will have to abide by DOT Regulations. Once these couriers sign these contracts Fedex then use the couriers driver's license as a CDL license. The Fedex managers can check your driving record even if its on your own personal vehicle. When you report to your manager and tell them you got a summons on your own personal vehicle , the manager then goes on you driving record and put commercial driving next to the tickets. This is a sneaky tatic that they do to there couriers. I think you can sue them for altering a government document. This is how they get away with staying under the RLA Act.
  • I guess FedEx packages are delivered by flying trucks. FedEx has been abusing this loophole for decades. FedEx is shaking in their boots because of the piss poor treatment of employees. Now the employees have a chance to get a fair shake and they are scared.
    • This is just the unions trying to get political favors for supporting the Democrats in Washington. This clause, reclassifying all of FedEx's employees, and trying to unionize them is just a ploy to replenish the union's coffers after the loss of all the union jobs in this country.

      Post a comment to this story

      We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
      You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
      Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
      No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
      We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

      Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

      Sponsored by

      facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
      Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
      Subscribe to IBJ
      1. From the story: "The city of Indianapolis also will consider tax incentives and funding for infrastructure required for the project, according to IEDC." Why would the City need to consider additional tax incentives when Lowe's has already bought the land and reached an agreement with IEDC to bring the jobs? What that tells me is that the City has already pledged the incentives, unofficially, and they just haven't had time to push it through the MDC yet. Either way, subsidizing $10/hour jobs is going to do nothing toward furthering the Mayor's stated goal of attracting middle and upper-middle class residents to Marion County.

      2. Ron Spencer and the entire staff of Theater on the Square embraced IndyFringe when it came to Mass Ave in 2005. TOTS was not only a venue but Ron and his friends created, presented and appeared in shows which embraced the 'spirit of the fringe'. He's weathered all the storms and kept smiling ... bon voyage and thank you.

      3. Not sure how many sushi restaurants are enough, but there are three that I know of in various parts of downtown proper and all are pretty good.

      4. First off, it's "moron," not "moran." 2nd, YOU don't get to vote on someone else's rights and freedoms that are guaranteed by the US Constitution. That's why this is not a state's rights issue...putting something like this to vote by, well, people like you who are quite clearly intellectually challenged isn't necessary since the 14th amendment has already decided the issue. Which is why Indiana's effort is a wasted one and a waste of money...and will be overturned just like this has in every other state.

      5. Rick, how does granting theright to marry to people choosing to marry same-sex partners harm the lives of those who choose not to? I cannot for the life of me see any harm to people who choose not to marry someone of the same sex. We understand your choice to take the parts of the bible literally in your life. That is fine but why force your religious beliefs on others? I'm hoping the judges do the right thing and declare the ban unconstitutional so all citizens of Wisconsin and Indiana have the same marriage rights and that those who chose someone of the same sex do not have less rights than others.