FedEx, Teamsters Battle Over Bill

FedEx and the Teamsters are battling over aviation legislation that will contain provisions to make it easier for unions to organize airline workers.

Congress is, yet again, attempting to expand the role of unions and regulation by forcing this bill on to the employees at FedEx. None of these articles interview or quote a FedEx employee ...do they even want this bill, which would probably force FedEx to downsize?

Something has gone terribly wrong when the health and well-being of a large American corporation depends on whether the government treats it as an "airline" or a "trucking company." Why should the government treat these two types of companies differently in the first place? And if it does treat them the same, why does that require the involvement of powerful unions?

The following is an article from yesterday’s Wall Street Journal. The FAA re-authorization bill is currently in House-Senate conference committee. As you’ll see, the Teamsters have made this issue a major priority to make the House bill (w/ the Brown Bailout language) override the Senate bill. Senator Hutchison is on the conference committee and has signaled her opposition to the Brown Bailout language; however continued communications are encouraged as the conference committee debate continues. - Peggy Venable, AFP-TX director

FedEx, Teamsters Battle Over Bill
Wall Street Journal
Josh Mitchell
April 19

FedEx Corp. and the Teamsters union are battling over whether wide-ranging aviation legislation will contain provisions to make it easier for unions to organize airline employees and harder for carriers to cut costs by allying with rivals or outsourcing maintenance.

A House version of the bill to fund the Federal Aviation Administration—a three-year, $54 billion package passed last year—contains several pro-union provisions. A two-year, $35 billion Senate version doesn't. Lawmakers from both chambers are set to negotiate a final version within the next few weeks.

Lobbyists for unions and industry groups are stepping up efforts to influence the outcome.

The Teamsters are pushing a measure that would make it easier for FedEx Corp. employees to unionize. FedEx says allowing workers to organize locally would contradict legal precedent and cause uncertainty, with the prospect of local strikes disrupting its entire operation.

Also, airline-employee unions are backing a provision to make it harder for carriers to collaborate on certain routes, which unions say can cost jobs in the U.S. And the AFL-CIO is lobbying for a measure to require U.S. inspections of overseas maintenance facilities, which some airlines use because they cost less than U.S. operations.

Passing the House version of the bill "is a major, major priority of ours," says Edward Wytkind, president of the AFL-CIO's Transportation Trades Department.

But industry groups say that the labor-backed provisions would hurt airlines and related industries, threatening thousands of U.S. jobs.

The provision designed to rein in industry alliances would strip airlines of longstanding antitrust exemptions within three years, forcing the carriers to reapply for the exemptions. The Air Transport Association, the industry's main trade group, says the bill would disrupt operations and could cost 15,000 jobs.

President Barack Obama, who was elected with strong union support, hasn't taken a public stance on the House's FAA bill. A White House spokesman didn't respond to a request for comment.

A factor in the bargaining could be concerns that European Union objections to certain elements of the House bill would jeopardize U.S.-EU talks to further deregulate air travel over the Atlantic. The EU has warned the House bill would invite retaliatory measures from European countries.
The main proponent of the union-backed measures is House Transportation Committee Chairman James Oberstar (D., Minn.), a longtime critic of airline alliances. Mr. Oberstar also supports tougher restrictions on foreign ownership of airlines.

Nine of his top 11 campaign contributors are labor unions, including the Teamsters, the Air Line Pilots Association and the Machinists/Aerospace Workers union, according to the nonpartisan Center for Responsive Politics. The nine have contributed a total $722,800 to Mr. Oberstar's campaigns. Another top contributor is FedEx rival United Parcel Service Inc., which has given $83,400 to the lawmaker's campaigns, the center says.

Jim Berard, a spokesman for Mr. Oberstar, says the congressman is a union worker's son who has always fought for workers' rights and isn't influenced by campaign contributions.

Critics of the House bill, including airlines and FedEx, are also major campaign contributors and big spenders on lobbying. UAL Corp.'s United Air Lines Inc. and Delta Air Lines Inc. have contributed $43,100 and $40,100, respectively, to the campaigns of Senate Commerce Committee Chairman John D. Rockefeller IV (D., W.Va.), who sponsored the Senate version that the airline industry favors. A spokeswoman for Mr. Rockefeller didn't respond to a request for comment.

FedEx, based in Memphis, Tenn., is a top campaign contributor of Sen. Bob Corker (R., Tenn.), who has threatened to hold up the legislation if the provision on FedEx unionization is included. Mr. Corker's office didn't respond to a request for comment.

The House bill would place some of FedEx's drivers and other employees under the National Labor Relations Act, allowing employees to organize locally. UPS drivers are governed by that law. The Teamsters says the bill would ensure fairness across the industry.

"Their drivers, their loaders, their unloaders, they have the same training, they perform the same duties as all the other employees within the industry, who are rightfully covered" by the act, says Ken Hall, Teamsters vice president and package division director.

FedEx argues that it is properly covered under the Railway Labor Act because of the history and arrangement of its air and ground networks.