IBJNews

N.Y. attorney general sues FedEx over driver status

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint

New York Attorney General Andrew Cuomo sued FedEx Corp. in state court Friday, saying the delivery company improperly classifies ground delivery drivers as independent contractors rather than employees.

In the suit, filed in New York’s Supreme Court, Cuomo said the company’s FedEx Home Delivery service classifying its drivers as contractors rather than employees fails “to provide its drivers the rights” afforded other employees and does not comply with the state’s labor laws.

The contractor model gives FedEx’s Ground unit a cost advantage of as much as 30 percent over rival United Parcel Service Inc., University of Pittsburgh business professor Marick Masters has estimated.

“FedEx has the power to control, and does in fact control, almost all aspects of its drivers’ work,” including “hours, job duties, routes, and even clothing,” Cuomo said in the filing. “The drivers are clearly perceived by the public to be employees.”

The Memphis, Tenn.-based company, which has a distribution hub in Indianapolis, says its contract-driver model is legal and was approved for tax purposes by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service in 1994.

Some FedEx drivers have filed private litigation. FedEx in June won partial dismissal of a class-action lawsuit filed in Indiana by contract drivers who contend they are entitled to full benefits because the company treats them as employees. them as employees.

A federal judge in South Bend, threw out some claims in the suit, saying the workers failed to exhaust out-of-court, administrative procedures that might help them get the medical, dental and retirement benefits they seek.

The company’s Home Delivery service has 701 contractors that, combined, employ 2,500 workers, said Maury Lane, a FedEx spokesman. The average contractor had revenue of $190,000, he said, with the 10 largest billing an average of $2.6 million in 2009.

“It is disappointing that in the midst of his campaign for governor Attorney General Cuomo would choose to destroy that many jobs in New York,” Lane said, commenting after reviewing a copy of the filing.

“Any suggestion that the Attorney General’s office handling of this case is improper is absurd,” John Milgrim, a spokesman for Cuomo, said in an e-mailed statement. “This office and a group of other states had been negotiating with FedEx for months. The case was filed, as was a similar case by Kentucky, when those discussions broke down,” Milgrim said.

ADVERTISEMENT

  • Don't work there
    The FedEx structure has been that way for a long time. I don't understand that if you don't like the structure going into the job don't work there. You can't go work somewhere knowing the rules and then cry foul after you start working there.

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
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
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT