Fed Ex furlough

[propjob27]

FDX is airline #4. They are working hard to be no better than anyone else (and doing a very good job).

PIPE

Not at treating their core employee group. They are doing a very good job of the exact opposite of that.

 

[rajflyboy]

Anyone ever see how GREAT the Ground Fedex drivers are treated??

NOT

 

[pipe]

Not at treating their core employee group. They are doing a very good job of the exact opposite of that.

I guess I wasn't clear. They're acting like every other scumsucking bunch of management leeches at every other airline. Treat your employees like crap and demand everything in return.

PIPE

 

[CDub]

Not to worry...he'll be taxed on that trip.

Probably not... I'm sure that trip has already been written off as a business expense.

 

[milky]

You are the idiot that doesn't get it. FEDEX is still making money and in fact they have enough money to sponsor the FEDEX BCS bowl championship game >> Yet they are laying off people. Forecasts can't be counted on. They are just a "Best Guess" at the future. A Future that none of us can predict for certain.

If you treat employee's fairly you will maintain a good working relationship with them. If you just dump them on the street then all hell will break loose. Just basic common sense.

Forecasts ..... anyone that has a brain and has a business degree understands the limits of these things.

Many companies right now are using this "Economy" as an EXCUSE to put people on the street. At the same time they are making a profit. You will not convince me anything different.

Yes, FedEx and other companies that are furloughing see a grand opportunity to bring their employees much ill will with no regard to the bottom line or how it will affect the company. The evil management just wants to watch you suffer.

In the real world (please feel free to join us anytime), the company has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders. If lowering labor is the way that it thinks it must achieve the desired profit, that is their responsibility. They DO NOT have a responsibility to you to keep you employed. I agree, if they alienate all labor to the point that they cannot fill their pilot seats, they will do themselves a disservice. I also have noted that right now, people would climb over each other to have a chance to work at FedEx. Supply and demand and market forces affect the free world.

FedEx can furlough all but 2 of its pilots even if it makes 400 billion dollars this year. Will it probably fail? I would think so. My point is that somebody is being paid to run the company, and they seem to think that they are overmanned. They are taking actions to fix the problem BEFORE it affects the profit margin. Sorry, FedEx is not in business to employ anybody. They are in business to MAKE A PROFIT. In fact, to make as much profit as they possibly can. Somehow before when they were one of the most stable and better paying flying jobs in the country, nobody faulted them for that. When they cannot afford to continue to pay so many pilots so much money, you want them to just keep everybody on board and ignore reality.

Like I said before, you claim management is inept and runs the airline businesses into the ground, but as soon as one is proactive, you claim it is greedy and self-serving. Must be nice to have it both ways.

 

[UALRATT]

Yes, FedEx and other companies that are furloughing see a grand opportunity to bring their employees much ill will with no regard to the bottom line or how it will affect the company. The evil management just wants to watch you suffer.

In the real world (please feel free to join us anytime), the company has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders. If lowering labor is the way that it thinks it must achieve the desired profit, that is their responsibility. They DO NOT have a responsibility to you to keep you employed. I agree, if they alienate all labor to the point that they cannot fill their pilot seats, they will do themselves a disservice. I also have noted that right now, people would climb over each other to have a chance to work at FedEx. Supply and demand and market forces affect the free world.

FedEx can furlough all but 2 of its pilots even if it makes 400 billion dollars this year. Will it probably fail? I would think so. My point is that somebody is being paid to run the company, and they seem to think that they are overmanned. They are taking actions to fix the problem BEFORE it affects the profit margin. Sorry, FedEx is not in business to employ anybody. They are in business to MAKE A PROFIT. In fact, to make as much profit as they possibly can. Somehow before when they were one of the most stable and better paying flying jobs in the country, nobody faulted them for that. When they cannot afford to continue to pay so many pilots so much money, you want them to just keep everybody on board and ignore reality.

Like I said before, you claim management is inept and runs the airline businesses into the ground, but as soon as one is proactive, you claim it is greedy and self-serving. Must be nice to have it both ways.

YO!! You jerk it out only to swollow it after. Milk, I'm talking about... Your philosophy is exactly why we find ourselves a broke nation today. Developers are after profits, banks are after profits, investments firms are after profits, oh hell, even Bernard Madoff was after profits and now the runaway cart is frighteningly pulling the horses down the hill (redefined as cartpower instead of horsepower).

Every company share a "fiduciary responsibility that goes well beyond the shareholder. Off course, shareholders are about profits but companies are about products and services that drive macro economies, and provide broader financial securities for the countries in which they thrive. In other words I'm simply defining "the stakeholders", of which you and me happen to be part and parcel off.

Our problem today is that the modern day internet MBAs are well versed at copying and pasteing rather than in creating smart and innovative business ideas, for which they are paid $$$$$$$$$$$. Instead, the entitlest fly up to the Capital in corporate jets begging for money because they have in fact run out of ideas.

'Till recently some thought that a company have only one value: its share-price and that they was no conflict between the responsibility companies have to shareholders and that to society as a whole. You are ALWAYS dead wrong when you imagine things from a single perspective.

 

[bouttime]

YO!! You jerk it out only to swollow it after. Milk, I'm talking about... Your philosophy is exactly why we find ourselves a broke nation today. Developers are after profits, banks are after profits, investments firms are after profits, oh hell, even Bernard Madoff was after profits and now the runaway cart is frighteningly pulling the horses down the hill (redefined as cartpower instead of horsepower).

Every company share a "fiduciary responsibility that goes well beyond the shareholder. Off course, shareholders are about profits but companies are about products and services that drive macro economies, and provide broader financial securities for the countries in which they thrive. In other words I'm simply defining "the stakeholders", of which you and me happen to be part and parcel off.

Our problem today is that the modern day internet MBAs are well versed at copying and pasteing rather than in creating smart and innovative business ideas, for which they are paid $$$$$$$$$$$. Instead, the entitlest fly up to the Capital in corporate jets begging for money because they have in fact run out of ideas.

'Till recently some thought that a company have only one value: its share-price and that they was no conflict between the responsibility companies have to shareholders and that to society as a whole. You are ALWAYS dead wrong when you imagine things from a single perspective.

Hey Stalin, if you think companies are in it for the "social good," why don't you work for free?


Who is John Galt?

 

[pipe]

Yes, FedEx and other companies that are furloughing see a grand opportunity to bring their employees much ill will with no regard to the bottom line or how it will affect the company. The evil management just wants to watch you suffer.

In the real world (please feel free to join us anytime), the company has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders. If lowering labor is the way that it thinks it must achieve the desired profit, that is their responsibility. They DO NOT have a responsibility to you to keep you employed. I agree, if they alienate all labor to the point that they cannot fill their pilot seats, they will do themselves a disservice. I also have noted that right now, people would climb over each other to have a chance to work at FedEx. Supply and demand and market forces affect the free world.

FedEx can furlough all but 2 of its pilots even if it makes 400 billion dollars this year. Will it probably fail? I would think so. My point is that somebody is being paid to run the company, and they seem to think that they are overmanned. They are taking actions to fix the problem BEFORE it affects the profit margin. Sorry, FedEx is not in business to employ anybody. They are in business to MAKE A PROFIT. In fact, to make as much profit as they possibly can. Somehow before when they were one of the most stable and better paying flying jobs in the country, nobody faulted them for that. When they cannot afford to continue to pay so many pilots so much money, you want them to just keep everybody on board and ignore reality.

Like I said before, you claim management is inept and runs the airline businesses into the ground, but as soon as one is proactive, you claim it is greedy and self-serving. Must be nice to have it both ways.

That is patent bullsh!t! A company is a citizen of the community. If it were only about profit and loss there would be no controls on emissions, no donations to charities, etc., etc. Do you think that FedEx is failing their "fiduciary responsibility to the shareholder" when they give millions and millions of dollars to run St. Jude's Childrens Hospital? Are they failing their "fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders" when they pay to operate the Orvis DC-10 flying around the world to administer free eye surgery? As a shareholder, do you see that as Fred Smith stealing money from your pocket for those damned sick kids and blind people?

Your contention that every red cent should go to the shareholders is a steaming pile of bull. Without responsible corporations that value the communities they are in and the workers they employ, we've got nothing. Your shares might do well, but when the corporations in your city act in the manner that you embrace -- your community is in trouble.

Case in point. St. Louis. Anheuser-Busch was a great corporate neighbor. In-Bev buys them. They put 2000 on the streets, don't take care of their grounds they way they used to, put several formerly free local attractions up for sale, stop giving away free beer, etc. All of this to increase the profits for In-Bev shareholders. Sure, I can buy In-Bev shares to cash in on all of this. Bottom line though, no matter how many shares I buy, or how well they do, it won't put those things back "right in my community".

The dollars aren't always first!!!!

PIPE

 

[bouttime]

Can you say... tax write off?

 

[pipe]

FedEx Cup in golf.

FedEx Bowl Championship Series.

FedEx Orange Bowl.

FedEx NASCAR Car.

FedEx Stadium.

FedEx Forum.

I would question whether these thing hit the target audience and generate a consummate degree of revenue. But I would not question whether these thing get upper management suites, tickets, and all-access passes.

Isn't this stealing from the pockets of the shareholders???

My point is not that the company shouldn't do these things, it is that every penny does not and should not necessarily go to the shareholder. If the dividends or the PE aren't to your liking, don't buy the stock.

PIPE

 

[zonker]

wezfdxcZDC NBMBXZXV M

 

[rajflyboy]

FedEx Cup in golf.

FedEx Bowl Championship Series.

FedEx Orange Bowl.

FedEx NASCAR Car.

FedEx Stadium.

FedEx Forum.

I would question whether these thing hit the target audience and generate a consummate degree of revenue. But I would not question whether these thing get upper management suites, tickets, and all-access passes.

Isn't this stealing from the pockets of the shareholders???

My point is not that the company shouldn't do these things, it is that every penny does not and should not necessarily go to the shareholder. If the dividends or the PE aren't to your liking, don't buy the stock.

PIPE

Bingo! We have a winner here! Nicely Put !

 

[waka]

YO!! You jerk it out only to swollow it after. Milk, I'm talking about... Your philosophy is exactly why we find ourselves a broke nation today. Developers are after profits, banks are after profits, investments firms are after profits, oh hell, even Bernard Madoff was after profits and now the runaway cart is frighteningly pulling the horses down the hill (redefined as cartpower instead of horsepower).

Every company share a "fiduciary responsibility that goes well beyond the shareholder. Off course, shareholders are about profits but companies are about products and services that drive macro economies, and provide broader financial securities for the countries in which they thrive. In other words I'm simply defining "the stakeholders", of which you and me happen to be part and parcel off.

Our problem today is that the modern day internet MBAs are well versed at copying and pasteing rather than in creating smart and innovative business ideas, for which they are paid $$$$$$$$$$$. Instead, the entitlest fly up to the Capital in corporate jets begging for money because they have in fact run out of ideas.

'Till recently some thought that a company have only one value: its share-price and that they was no conflict between the responsibility companies have to shareholders and that to society as a whole. You are ALWAYS dead wrong when you imagine things from a single perspective.

Thank you! People don't understand that companies not only are a benefit to society through providing a service, products or jobs. Companies benefit from society as well....hence their responsibility to society. Cold hard numbers are a reality. However, it is unrealistic to not factor in social ramifications.

 

[rajflyboy]

YO!! You jerk it out only to swollow it after. Milk, I'm talking about... Your philosophy is exactly why we find ourselves a broke nation today. Developers are after profits, banks are after profits, investments firms are after profits, oh hell, even Bernard Madoff was after profits and now the runaway cart is frighteningly pulling the horses down the hill (redefined as cartpower instead of horsepower).

Every company share a "fiduciary responsibility that goes well beyond the shareholder. Off course, shareholders are about profits but companies are about products and services that drive macro economies, and provide broader financial securities for the countries in which they thrive. In other words I'm simply defining "the stakeholders", of which you and me happen to be part and parcel off.

Our problem today is that the modern day internet MBAs are well versed at copying and pasteing rather than in creating smart and innovative business ideas, for which they are paid $$$$$$$$$$$. Instead, the entitlest fly up to the Capital in corporate jets begging for money because they have in fact run out of ideas.

'Till recently some thought that a company have only one value: its share-price and that they was no conflict between the responsibility companies have to shareholders and that to society as a whole. You are ALWAYS dead wrong when you imagine things from a single perspective.

I agree with you here. No doubt about it. I was reading in an article in an accounting publication recently. It had an article written by some businessmen in Germany. The Germans believe that the current management in the United States is too concerned with SHORT TERM gains and not concerned with LONG TERM viability of their company's.

 

[Big Beer Belly]

Yes, FedEx and other companies that are furloughing see a grand opportunity to bring their employees much ill will with no regard to the bottom line or how it will affect the company. The evil management just wants to watch you suffer.

In the real world (please feel free to join us anytime), the company has a fiduciary responsibility to its shareholders. If lowering labor is the way that it thinks it must achieve the desired profit, that is their responsibility. They DO NOT have a responsibility to you to keep you employed. I agree, if they alienate all labor to the point that they cannot fill their pilot seats, they will do themselves a disservice. I also have noted that right now, people would climb over each other to have a chance to work at FedEx. Supply and demand and market forces affect the free world.

FedEx can furlough all but 2 of its pilots even if it makes 400 billion dollars this year. Will it probably fail? I would think so. My point is that somebody is being paid to run the company, and they seem to think that they are overmanned. They are taking actions to fix the problem BEFORE it affects the profit margin. Sorry, FedEx is not in business to employ anybody. They are in business to MAKE A PROFIT. In fact, to make as much profit as they possibly can. Somehow before when they were one of the most stable and better paying flying jobs in the country, nobody faulted them for that. When they cannot afford to continue to pay so many pilots so much money, you want them to just keep everybody on board and ignore reality.

Like I said before, you claim management is inept and runs the airline businesses into the ground, but as soon as one is proactive, you claim it is greedy and self-serving. Must be nice to have it both ways.

Great post milky! Reminds me of Atlas Shrugged.

The weak are drawn to socialism and its cradle to grave "entitlement" mentality. Sadly, they have no problem with confiscating the fruits of others' hard work to fund their "entitlements."

BBB

 

[zonker]

wezfdxcZDC NBMBXZXV M

Whoops.

Looks like my little girl got a hold of the computer. :laugh:

 

[milky]

That is patent bullsh!t! A company is a citizen of the community. If it were only about profit and loss there would be no controls on emissions, no donations to charities, etc., etc. Do you think that FedEx is failing their "fiduciary responsibility to the shareholder" when they give millions and millions of dollars to run St. Jude's Childrens Hospital? Are they failing their "fiduciary responsibility to the shareholders" when they pay to operate the Orvis DC-10 flying around the world to administer free eye surgery? As a shareholder, do you see that as Fred Smith stealing money from your pocket for those damned sick kids and blind people?

Your contention that every red cent should go to the shareholders is a steaming pile of bull. Without responsible corporations that value the communities they are in and the workers they employ, we've got nothing. Your shares might do well, but when the corporations in your city act in the manner that you embrace -- your community is in trouble.

Case in point. St. Louis. Anheuser-Busch was a great corporate neighbor. In-Bev buys them. They put 2000 on the streets, don't take care of their grounds they way they used to, put several formerly free local attractions up for sale, stop giving away free beer, etc. All of this to increase the profits for In-Bev shareholders. Sure, I can buy In-Bev shares to cash in on all of this. Bottom line though, no matter how many shares I buy, or how well they do, it won't put those things back "right in my community".

The dollars aren't always first!!!!

PIPE

Nowhere in my post did I say that every cent earned by a company was due directly to shareholders. Advertising and sponsoring and community involvement are all expenses that have likely been factored to bring value to the company in some way that will translate into increased profits. Charity also is rewarded economically. So, you can take your socialist ideals and put them where they belong (you and half of the posters on this thread). I still contend that any company that wants to stay solvent has a duty to cut costs where needed when needed. If cutting jobs causes them to lose so much in morale or productivity that they lose money, then that would be counterproductive. I contend that a cut in pilot jobs (while completely tragic, and I hope it does not ever happen) is not going to bring great hate on a company like Fed Ex when furloughs are rampant in the industry. So, the bottom line is if a company needs to cut jobs because of lack of desire for their service, it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to do so even if it does cause some pain to the jobs involved. THIS ISN'T A SOCIALIST COUNTRY.

 

[rajflyboy]

Nowhere in my post did I say that every cent earned by a company was due directly to shareholders. Advertising and sponsoring and community involvement are all expenses that have likely been factored to bring value to the company in some way that will translate into increased profits. Charity also is rewarded economically. So, you can take your socialist ideals and put them where they belong (you and half of the posters on this thread). I still contend that any company that wants to stay solvent has a duty to cut costs where needed when needed. If cutting jobs causes them to lose so much in morale or productivity that they lose money, then that would be counterproductive. I contend that a cut in pilot jobs (while completely tragic, and I hope it does not ever happen) is not going to bring great hate on a company like Fed Ex when furloughs are rampant in the industry. So, the bottom line is if a company needs to cut jobs because of lack of desire for their service, it is THEIR RESPONSIBILITY to do so even if it does cause some pain to the jobs involved. THIS ISN'T A SOCIALIST COUNTRY.

Yes. I agree. Its a free country and FEDEX can do anything they want to do.

But:

Do you think its wise to piss off an employee group? Is that going to be good for Long Term Stability of the company?? Is it going to be good for the balance sheet?

 

[UALRATT]

Hey Stalin, if you think companies are in it for the "social good," why don't you work for free?


Who is John Galt?

You think John Galt would vote to keep cabotage on the books? Would you vote to keep it?? My guess is that you enjoy watching our best jobs outsourced in the name of codesharing (the workaround for cabotage)(http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/ticker/article.aspx?symbol=US:UAUA&feed=PR&date=20090122&id=9535698), when we don't have the opportunity to compete for the resulting jobs. An Airbus is an Airbus, right? I'm furloughed for that very reasons. Look at who's doing hiring!! Hit the link and navigate to the about page to see that a JAA Air Transport Pilots Licence along with EU working rights are required for the job. Open skys eh? http://www.aerlingus.com/cgi-bin/ob...j.0&P_OID=-8057&Category=0&NEWS_OID=536888934. Protectionisn I would say in an open marketplace. The EU is eating our lunch right out of our plate.

Dude, if you believe that you are part of the club then thats great for you. At the end of my day though, only fools will look at the mess we're in, and pretend that nothing is wrong, just to put a claim of some ISM. In the mean time REALISM leads us to believe that the climate we find ourselves in today is not because of the lack of industry by the American worker. I'll start the list with irrational greed and lack of accountability. Feel free to add your nouns and adjectives__________________

Characters of fiction are in your head. Time to open your mind to reality...

 

[Jaffo]

What DOH would that go back to?

Does anyone have an answer?