WTF? Now the WSJ is publishing "Brown Bailout" Spam??

[MotF Bane]

Already read that, it is still UPS trying to push a law to screw over FedEx. So again are you referring to the whole law or just the term?

Plus, if you read YOUR link the only thing it says is that "bailout" isn't really the correct term, it does not say that the whole thing is made up.

This. UPS just wants to fuck up its competitor.

 

[Zorba]

Wow.

Okay, I am now just going to assume that you have no real point except to troll, I have asked you 4 times what your point was and you have failed to respond. Marketing people use simple/known terms to describe complex issues all the time.

BTW: This is from your link:

The measure would bring drivers and other non-airline-based employees of FedEx’s Express division, which handles “time-sensitive shipments,” under the coverage of the National Labor Relations Act, instead of the Railway Labor Act. Under the NLRA, the FedEx workers would be able to unionize locally, on a site-by-site basis, instead of nationally as required by the RLA. Unionizing, in other words, is somewhat easier under the NLRA.

...

But does the legislative change that UPS wants amount to a bailout? Not in the traditional sense and certainly not in the way the American public has heard the term used in recent months.

So your own link says the issue is real, they are just bitching about the term "bailout," but UPS is big enough and old enough to know that if you play with matches you will get burned.

So, yes, wow you are a just another troll.

 

[PaperclipGod]

The only reason this "issue" exists in popular conscious is because FedEx is kicking and screaming about it. To most rational people, making FedEx play by the same rules as its competitor is a non-issue. i.e., "duh"

The mere fact that you're framing UPS as "big enough and old enough to know that if you play with matches you will get burned" is a clear example of just how effective this marketing has been, apparently. You're blaming UPS for wanting fair competition, just as FedEx hoped.

Also: Wow, your brain is mush.

 

[JS80]

Were you born yesterday? How are you this clueless about the history of unionized labor in this country?

The modern democratic party was been built upon Labor and sticking up for "the common man". You really think it's just a matter of UPS saying "hey politicians, not sure if you noticed, but unions kinda sux for us -- how 'bout we get rid of them?"

The bizarre part is that so many of you are open to the idea of preventing FedEx workers from unionizing when the views on Anandtech tends to skew so heavily democratic. I'd love it if UPS got to kick its union out... but that seems about as likely as Republicans trying to ban handguns.

lol you think supporting unions is sticking up for the common man. HAHAHA

 

[PaperclipGod]

lol you think supporting unions is sticking up for the common man. HAHAHA

And you think most people equate unions with filthy rich executives...?

 

[Zorba]

The only reason this "issue" exists in popular conscious is because FedEx is kicking and screaming about it. To most rational people, making FedEx play by the same rules as its competitor is a non-issue. i.e., "duh"

The mere fact that you're framing UPS as "big enough and old enough to know that if you play with matches you will get burned" is a clear example of just how effective this marketing has been, apparently. You're blaming UPS for wanting fair competition, just as FedEx hoped.

Also: Wow, your brain is mush.

I never said which side I supported, I am just saying UPS is pushing for something that FedEx doesn't want, of course FedEx is going to fight back. I was just trying to figure out what your argument was.

That said, I am all for fair competition, so I think UPS should be reclassified under RLA.

 

[PaperclipGod]

I never said which side I supported, I am just saying UPS is pushing for something that FedEx doesn't want, of course FedEx is going to fight back. I was just trying to figure out what your argument was.

That said, I am all for fair competition, so I think UPS should be reclassified under RLA.

But that isn't practical or likely (especially with a democratic majority atm). Instead of trying to change 100 years of organized labor, lets just try to ensure that the burdens imposed by labor are felt evenly by all competitors.

 

[Zorba]

But that isn't practical or likely (especially with a democratic majority atm). Instead of trying to change 100 years of organized labor, lets just try to ensure that the burdens imposed by labor are felt evenly by all competitors.

So your argument is, "Since we can't fix our labor laws, lets be sure they fuck everyone over." That is a good way of driving more and more outsourcing.

 

[MotF Bane]

So your argument is, "Since we can't fix our labor laws, lets be sure they fuck everyone over." That is a good way of driving more and more outsourcing.

Again, this.

 

[PaperclipGod]

Are you kidding? You really think that continuing to put UPS at a disadvantage is going to save jobs? How does forcing UPS out of business help save jobs? How does treating FedEx the same as UPS result in "outsourcing"? How are Chinese workers going to deliver packages to your door?

Also: I'm a fucking libertarian and apparently I'm less idealistic than you. Refusing to improve a bad situation simply because it doesn't involve your ideal political philosophy is just obnoxious and completely harmful to the country you're supposed to be so concerned about.