View Story | 219 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
My son works for Fed-Ex as an independant contractor. He is head or heals in debt and owed $9,000 dollars in taxes last yr. alone. He has two trucks on the road and they both broke down this past yr. He had to make repairs and rented trucks while they were repaired. He went in debt over those trucks. He can't get ahead and now they are threatening him over his contracts. What a mess. If they drop his contracts he will have to file bancrucpty. Probably loose everything.
"Though the Mills of the Gods grind slowly,Yet they grind exceeding small."
by Owllwoman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 04:50:51 AM PDT
[ Parent ]
So if you want more people to see this diary, please hit the recommend this diary button above. If there are enough, a diary gets on the front page recommended diary list. And a diary gets listed on jotters list if top diaries and gets additional attention.
According to Jotter, diary recommendations count many times more in his calculations than do comments - though both matter.
unbossed You betcha!
by shirah on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 04:55:36 AM PDT
you can't get out. You have too much money invested and you are too far indebt to leave. The power lives in Fed-Ex's hands. They have control over these people almost as if they were indentured servants.
by Owllwoman on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 05:02:19 AM PDT
Diaries of substance on the Recommended list... New Orleans and labor issues - could we be waking up after a long pre-primary nightmare?
The law is slacked and judgment doth never go forth: the wicked compass about the righteous and wrong judgment proceedeth - Habakkuk 1:4
by vox humana on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 05:36:38 AM PDT
This is an excellent piece, shirah, and you've been doing great work all along on the FedEx outrages.
Every FedEx driver I've ever spoken to, going back decades, has hated his job. Every single one. My wife taught one in an evening class earlier this year, and he kept missing classes or arriving an hour or two late because his work could never be completed on time.
"Our programs are as lawful as they are valuable." -Michael Hayden
by smintheus on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 09:02:10 AM PDT
under this kind of phony "independent contractor" status - let's hope it is made illegal soon!
Is it true? Is it kind? Is it necessary?
by Wee Mama on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 05:44:53 AM PDT
What Owlwoman and Wee Mama say. I worked independently as a delivery person for a year and ended up losing so much money that it took two years at a regular job to pay it back.
by northsylvania on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 06:03:40 AM PDT
Grovel for recs.
GWOT - Global War on Terra(-firma) - Bush's War on the Planet.
by grndrush on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 09:34:40 AM PDT
question in comments. The commentator expressed a wish that this would get lots of attention, and I explained how the system works.
Nothing more.
Sorry for the misunderstanding about the point of that comment. There have been a lot of comments, and the thread may have been lost.
by shirah on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 09:38:37 AM PDT
He sounds like an independent contractor to me running a small trucking business with two trucks.
What am I missing?
by chike on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 07:11:40 AM PDT
Does he hire other drivers?
Does he have any say in any pricing?
Does he have any say in hours?
Who arranged financing?
Who arranged licensing?
etc.
Single payer universal healthcare coverage saves money and saves lives.
by freelunch on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 07:16:47 AM PDT
I assume so... unless he can drive two trucks at once!
Define "say". He can always negotiate. Does his customer have to agree to his demands to avoid being an employer?
In a logistics delivery business? Of course not... you deliver when the customer requires it.
Customer financing is common in many industries. For example, in international business companies frequently get loans backed by customer L/Cs. Or a customer wants you to upgrade your machinery but you don't have the cash... so you arrange an advance payment or they provide a loan guarantee.
My company is probably about to set up in a South Asian country. Our key customer there has agreed to handle all of our business registration and investment licensing issues. I don't think that makes us his employees.
by chike on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 07:49:03 AM PDT
corporate FedEx determines the price of shipping. Haven't you ever used Fed Ex? Do you negotiate prices? (and if you do, with whom?)
by pitbullEmily on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 08:15:41 AM PDT
FedEx determines the price to the customer.
But then FedEx has to negotiate with its suppliers on what it pays them. That's true whether it's a multi-national shipping firm or a guy with a truck.
Of course the multi-national has a lot more negotiating power than the guy with the truck.
It is certainly not normal business practice to allow suppliers to have a say in a company's pricing to its customers so if that's your meaning this is worthless as a test for contracor vs. employee.
Interestingly enough, back when I was an employee, I often negotiated salary with my bosses and got movement in the direction I wanted (up). By the tests you suggest that made me a contractor... not sure it's a good test.
by chike on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 08:32:02 AM PDT
There might be precedent in looking at the Microsoft "perma-temp" lawsuit.
They had avoided giving benefits, etc., to huge numbers of people who came in to work at their offices every day, year in and year out, by hiring them through third-party "contracting services".
A big 'ol class-action lawsuit was necessary to change things. Now, a person who has gone in to work at Microsoft on a contract can only be contracted for a year, maximum, and then they are ineligible to do contract work there for 100 days. Microsoft had to pay damages, and give some recompense for lost stock options.
Now, some poor folks are stuck on the contracting merry-go-round, one year on, 100 days off, but as soon as they get into a department that needs them, or start making important contributions to an on-going project, they get their "blue badge", proper benefits and all. Which was the whole point. If your operation depends on someone's particular skills or work, they need to be treated with respect.
The FedEx drivers, sadly, are kept at enough of an "arm's length" that they may have trouble. Certainly, though, the shipping public thinks they're dealing with employees . . .
What would Gandhi do? "The cause of liberty becomes a mockery if the price to be paid is the wholesale destruction of those who are to enjoy liberty."
by Robespierrette on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 09:01:48 AM PDT
Temp workers at Microsoft were always free to say "Make me permanent or I walk."
The difference now is that they no longer have a choice - they have to go somewhere else for 100 days like it or not rather than spend that 100 days trying to become indispensable.
Is this a net benefit for workers?
by chike on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 09:23:21 AM PDT
. . . being screwed than under the old regime, according to folks I know there.
And truthfully, if the department you're working in can say a cheerful goodbye to you after a year. . .? That extra 100 days probably won't help.
I know a lot of people, my husband included, who would still be contractors there, if not for the "100 day rule". All of these folks got in on a contract, and then proved themselves non-interchangeable.
My husband was all ready to take a 3-1/2 month vacation, but the folks he worked with scrambled to get headcount. If they could have simply renewed his contract, I'm guessing we still wouldn't have health insurance.
by Robespierrette on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 09:37:45 AM PDT
Pro
Con
George Bush is Living proof of the axiom "Never send a boy to do a man's job" E -2.25 S -4.10
by nathguy on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 10:09:17 AM PDT
Sounds like he has signed an exclusive contract w/FedEx, so he can't really go elsewhere. Unfortunately, with freight, you are VERY dependent on the whims of the company. An owner-op has very little say in what he can do or where he can go. And if you get too uppity, magically, your loads disappear. And with the loads, so goes the payment on your trucks.
by gmhowell on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 10:41:39 AM PDT
Your son WORKS for FedEx as an EMPLOYEE. The fact that his employer classifies him otherwise doesn't change that.
It IS somewhat incredible that this investigation would be occurring under the current regime. You'd think they'd be hell-bent on FedEx's side.
by grndrush on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 09:32:57 AM PDT
.... conservative wingnut Congresspeople like my current corrupt Republican incumbent always get lots of money from these types of companies via PACs and lobbyists. But this favoritism goes both ways, the corrupt politicians also expect lots of juicy campaign donations to make sure the companies can continue to operate under certain labor practices.
If a company was perhaps balking at the amount of donations paid, it would not surprise me to see a vindictive politician threaten to sic the IRS on the company. This is speculation on my part but would seem to fit the scenario.
This is the heart of why is it is wrong to privatize and politicize certain functions of our government, it turns it into nothing more than a sleazy cash cow for politicians.
John Doolittledump Doo Vote Brown
by AmericanRiverCanyon on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 11:32:46 AM PDT
of government functions is a clever scheme to rip off taxpayers for the maximum amount.
If they (have they already? I've heard partially so) 'privatize' the IRS, all of a sudden the cost of 'administering' the IRS function by private companies skyrockets the additional costs are dumped on tax payers.
Privatize department of transportation at the state or national level and costs of 'administering' the transportation projects skyrockets. No oversight, no cost control.
Privatization is all about no oversight or accountability and ripping off tax payers. Anyone who believes otherwise is deluded or corrupt to the core and they have never substantively proven that privatization is a 'value' except to whomever exploits it.
Orwell meet George the 43rd
by FreeTradeIsYourEpitaph on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 01:13:10 PM PDT
This is an issue I've written a lot about over the years. The biggest issue in the news has been private debt collectors.
Less visible has been hiring contractors, in particular, IAP Worldwide (of Walter Reed fame) to handle taxpayer forms and contracting out the mailrooms in 2004.
If you are interested in this issue, you can find information on the NTEU website - NTEU.org - check out its IRS watch. And/ or my posts at unbossed - just do a search for IRS and NTEU
by shirah on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 01:34:57 PM PDT
of my rural US postal service has been privatized and the service sucks, they have yet to deliver a package to my home even though I work out of my home a lot.
You don't have to convince me that they are doing it nor do I have to be convinced that it is not good for the American people and the workers themselves.
Yet I know from a government worker (relative) that he hears coworkers grumbling frequently about being able to make more money in the private sector. Of course, these grumblers have been in government work for so long they have no clue as to how cutthroat the private sector is anymore and they may make more money in the short term but when they get laid off...working at walmart will become their 'dream' job at $8.75/hr and no benefits. They are clueless as to the realities of the real working world these days.
by FreeTradeIsYourEpitaph on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 07:05:35 PM PDT
Does he own his trucks, or is he stuck in some lease purchase scam with fedex? If the former, I've heard lots of good info about signing on with Landstar and delivering his own loads. If he has daycabs... good luck.
by gmhowell on Wed Jan 02, 2008 at 10:38:42 AM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 219 comments