Comments on: FedEx/UPS and H.R. 915 Follow Up; and no, UPS is not my Pimp

By: E!! The True Conservative Story » Blog Archive » UPS and FedEx Continued

Sat, 14 Nov 2009 23:18:13 +0000

[...] UPS and FedEx Continued Posted by E!! on November 14, 2009 Uncategorized I’ve blogged on the UPS / FedEx thing before. Here and here. [...]

By: E!! The True Conservative Story » Blog Archive » Brilliant Move, Guys

E!! The True Conservative Story » Blog Archive » Brilliant Move, Guys — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 20:18:42 +0000

[...] OMG, Scandals, Washington D.C., labor unions Since writing about the Fed Ex/UPS dust-up here and here - and taking a fair amount of heat for it (see the Comments) – I’ve occasionally been [...]

By: Sid Burgess

Sid Burgess — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 20:03:30 +0000

I worked for UPS for a short time as a packacke handler. What I saw made me sick to my stomach. I did not join the union there and I am glad the Teamsters never got a penny from me. They protected horrible workers. They had worked a deal where supervisors couldn’t even fire you for being late until your 9th offense. Guys would just not show up all the time and there was NOTHING that the supervisors could do. I even saw one supervisor say something to an “offendor” only to see Union and bigger bosses come by and have words with him. The rules are simple, you are not alowed to threaten their jobs, and you are not allowed to fire them for not showing up.

Me being the “normal” guy on the belt showed up to work each night only to find that it was ME who would pay the price of the silly rules ( I want to call them something much worse). I don’t know if I would go so far as to say all unions are bad, but in an economy like this, and when good help is hard to find, UPS lost a lot because of the Teasmsters.

Oh, and they asked me about a dozen times to join. They will houned you. I was so happy to be able to smile and say no every time.

Peace.

By: Victor

Victor — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 17:04:40 +0000

John – of course. I was only using UPS (as representative of all the companies who operate under the stricter regulations) for the sake of convenience.

By: John JBZ

John JBZ — Mon, 29 Jun 2009 01:40:43 +0000

The key factor is that two companies in the same industry should be regulated the same. The argument that UPS should be placed under the regulation of the RLA would then place the two largest transportation companies under legislation that would give them a significant advantage over the rest of the transportation companies. All delivery companies should be regulated the same. FDX and UPS should not get special treatment

By: E!!

E!! — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 22:44:25 +0000

(sigh)

By: Victor

Victor — Sat, 27 Jun 2009 00:36:14 +0000

E – I understand your fairness arg, but what I don’t understand is why you don’t choose to apply it the other way.

UPS operates under an unfair burden of regulation. Fedex doesn’t. Why not advocate that the burden on UPS gets removed, not that Fedex is similiarly weighted down?

And I don’t think your blow off arg that a such a proposal failed – “even back when the Republicans were in charge” – is sufficient.

What did the Republicans pass that favored the free market/limited government when they were in charge? Abolishing the Department of Education? Entitlement reform? Lower spending? Lower debt? Less waste? Fewer earmarks?

Just because those things didn’t pass, doesn’t mean they aren’t good ideas or that we shouldn’t continue to pursue them.

Alright, one last random analogy. It’s like saying, we shouldn’t give businesses government subsidizes or bailouts, but since we already gave one to AIG, Citigroup, and Cabela’s, we might as well make it a fair playing field and give bailouts/subsidizes to all.

If the principle is bad, repeal the principle, don’t try and subject everyone to it’s authority.