Fed Ex furlough

[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?

 

[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.

Well I guess we'll just agree to disagree. I don't know where you're family's first 10 million is going to come from to get into the club. It's getting to be fairly assured that hard work ain't gonna get it done.

Maybe you've got family money.

PIPE

 

[Propsync]

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?

As long as it gives shareholder return: yes. Assuming you have a 401k, you have a plethora of companies' stock. Do you really take the time to make sure each fund has stock in companies operating on your personal principals, or do you just want a good return? My guess is the later. So your questions, while valid, are probably contradicting what you really want in life. Run over everybody and give me my ROI.

 

[Falconjet]

What DOH would that go back to?

Approximately Mar 28, 2005.

Assuming 700.

FJ

 

[tyuwerty]

I have no dog in this fight, just shocked at the fall in cargo traffic.

http://www.flightglobal.com/article...-cargo-traffic-collapse-is-unprecedented.html

IATA: Cargo traffic collapse is unprecedented

IATA's latest figures have underlined the crisis in the cargo market, showing a 22.6% drop in international freight traffic during December.
The fall meant that international cargo traffic over the whole of 2008 fell by 4%.

IATA describes the figures as "unprecedented", and director general Giovanni Bisignani says: "There is no clearer description of the slowdown in world trade."

The collapse in freight business reflects 20-30% falls in export and import volumes being reported across Asia, North America and Europe, says IATA.
"This year is shaping up to be one of the toughest ever for international aviation," says Bisignani, adding that the dismal cargo figures "put us in uncharted territory, and the bottom is nowhere in sight".

 

[jmreii]

We are in a global recession: which will take time to work it's way through and solve the various issues that are demanding our attention.