Safety Advocates Ask Court to Overturn Bush 'Midnight Regulation'

The Teamsters, Public Citizen, Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety, and the Truck Safety Coalition asked an appeals court today to review a dangerous Bush-era regulation that increased the amount of time truck drivers can spend behind the wheel.

The groups also sent a letter to Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood asking him to begin work on a new regulation that would reduce truck crashes caused by fatigue.

"We have taken this action with the conviction, based on research and scientific data, that longer driving and working hours are unsafe and promote driver fatigue," the letter said.

The rule, which took effect in 2003, was twice thrown out by the court. It allows truck drivers to drive for 11 hours, one more hour than they were allowed before the 2003 rule. It allows them to drive as many as 77 hours in seven days or 88 hours in eight days, over 25 percent more than previously.

The D.C. Circuit Court's 2004 decision focused on the Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration's (FMCSA) failure to address the serious health impact of its rule on the regulated drivers.

FMCSA's latest version of rule, which followed after the court threw out an identical 2005 rule, was issued on Nov. 13, just weeks before President Obama took office. The rule went into effect on Jan. 19, 2009.

"I urge the Obama administration to change direction on truck safety," said Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa. "The last administration completely disregarded the health and safety of truck drivers. I'm confident President Obama will do better."

"Twice now the court has found wanting the agency's justifications for this unsafe and unhealthy rule," said Bonnie Robin-Vergeer, the Public Citizen attorney who represents the four petitioning groups. "Insisting on the same flawed rule over and over is no substitute for complying with Congress' mandates."

"It is illogical and unacceptable that the prior Administration's solution to truck driver fatigue was longer working and driving hours, said Jackie Gillan, vice president for Advocates for Highway and Auto Safety. "Public health and safety is at stake and there needs to be a new rule."

Added Joan Claybrook, president of Citizens for Reliable and Safe Highways, a member of the Truck Safety Coalition, "The Bush Administration's rule put industry profits in the driver's seat and public safety in the back seat. This needs to be reversed now."

FedEx Cuts Workers' Retirement Compensation While CEO Rakes in Multimillion-Dollar Pension

More Drastic Cuts in Workforce Compensation Fuels Drive for Teamster Representation

FedEx Corp. today announced drastic cuts in pay and deferred compensation for most of its U.S. workforce. Salaried U.S. FedEx employees will take permanent 5 percent to 10 percent base salary reductions while FedEx founder, Chief Executive and Chairman Fred Smith will take a permanent 20 percent reduction in base salary.

According to company statements, hourly employees will not see base wages impacted in this round of cost controls.

"The FedEx workers that have made this company a household name and deliver the profits will now shoulder more insecurity for their futures," said Teamster General President Jim Hoffa. "At the busiest time of their delivery season, the company is delivering nothing but coal for its workforce."

More dramatically for hourly employees, bonus compensation and the company's 401(k) matching contribution will cease for 2009. This unilateral decision to stop 401(k) matches closely follows the June 2008 capping of FedEx Express employees' defined benefit pension. In announcing the end of the defined benefit plan in 2007 FedEx said, "Planning and saving for retirement is a partnership between FedEx and its employees, and we are committed to helping our employees enjoy a financially sound future."

Apparently, that "partnership" is no longer part of the corporation's future.
Although garnering headlines for his salary adjustment, Smith meanwhile retains $26,411,752 accrued under the FedEx Retirement Parity Pension Plan and $1,164,464 under the Employees' Pension Plan. Additionally, Smith's $1.4 million salary only comprised 13 percent of the $10.9 million that he raked in for 2008. In fact, 55 percent of Smith's 2008 pay was in stock options not tied to any performance goals.

As of May 31, Smith also held currently exercisable, in-the-money options worth $24.9 million, based on yesterday's closing stock price. In the past two years alone, he's exercised options worth more than $60 million. FedEx has not clarified if the company's variable compensation changes will affect Smith's outstanding, exercisable options or if FedEx will suspend option grants for 2009.

"FedEx workers have seen their wages stagnate, their health care costs go up and their retirement benefits go down or go away entirely while FedEx has pocketed millions in profits in good times," said Teamsters Vice President At Large and Package Division Director Ken Hall. "Many FedEx workers already see Teamster representation as a way to secure their future and these drastic measures will convince more of the value of a Teamster contract."

The difference in pay and compensation between management and workers is one factor leading FedEx workers to seek Teamster representation. The broken "Purple Promises" on wages and retirement benefits were the subject of a public Blue Ribbon Commission hearing on Dec. 16, jointly sponsored by the Teamsters, the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor, and Clergy and Laity for Economic Justice/Los Angeles (CLUE LA).

Blue Ribbon Commission members U.S. Rep. Linda Sanchez, Los Angeles City Councilman Bill Rosendahl and United Methodist Church (Los Angeles) Bishop Mary Ann Swenson heard testimony from a number of FedEx workers on their deteriorating work conditions and struggles to hold onto the middle class life.

"I could afford to retire at age 62 under the defined benefit pension plan but with the stroke of a pen, and with little warning and no input or discussion from employees, FedEx changed our retirement plans," said Dan Forrand, a 15-year veteran aircraft maintenance technician from FedEx Express in Los Angeles.

Now, as the economy suffers and FedEx Express employees' retirement security is in greater jeopardy, FedEx has pulled a bait and switch more drastic than even Forrand knew on Tuesday.

Forrand's statement and other testimony and questions are archived online at www.fedxmx.com. Additional information is at www.FedExWatch.com.

Hoffa: Senate should reject death sentence for GM

What's ailing the auto industry in the United States is the same as what's ailing the industry in China, Japan, Europe and South America.

Carmakers around the world are struggling through the worst slump in 40 years. Sales of cars by Toyota and Honda fell more during the last year than did sales of cars by Ford.

For America's Big Three automakers, the bad news turned catastrophic last month. In November, 236,000 North American-made cars were sold. That is a shocking 40 percent drop from the number of cars sold in November 2007. No industry can afford a 40 percent sales decline.

Sure, mistakes were made. But the Big Three's dire straits are a result of frozen credit markets and a global recession.

Fortunately, many in Congress recognize that it's crucial to rescue the U.S. auto industry. The House has approved a bill negotiated with the White House that would use existing money for a short-term loan and restructuring of the troubled carmakers.

There are 1.59 million people employed by the Big Three, their parts suppliers and dealerships. As many as 5 million people depend on the auto industry for work, including Teamsters who haul cars, parts and supplies. Letting the domestic auto industry collapse would dramatically worsen a recession that's already a year old.

It would be disastrous to allow even one of the Big Three to seek bankruptcy protection. That would cause the failure of hundreds of auto parts companies and dealerships. The remaining Big Two automakers, dependent on the parts and dealer networks, would go under. Securitized auto loans and their insurers would fail, whipsawing fragile credit markets.

Another consideration: General Motors couldn't get financing for a Chapter 11 bankruptcy. So do the math. Bankruptcy for one automaker means GM closes its doors. For good.

There are some free-market wing nuts who are fine with that. We've all heard their arguments: "Since the automakers brought their problems on themselves, let them fail." Or, "Don't interfere with the free market."

But they ignore a lesson of the last century: America's peace and prosperity depend on a robust manufacturing base.

We would have lost World War II if we didn't have an auto industry that could produce weapons during the war. That's why Franklin Roosevelt called Detroit the "Arsenal of Democracy."

We would not have enjoyed record prosperity during the post-World War II era without a strong manufacturing base -- and productivity gains that were shared with workers.

In recent decades, we've taken our eye off the ball. Instead of shoring up our manufacturing base, we've favored the interests of Wall Street over other sectors of the economy. Nowhere is that more evident than in the ongoing, multitrillion-dollar bailout of irresponsible financial services companies. (By the way, I don't hear anyone complaining that the unions brought down Lehman Brothers.)

Now, Wall Street's follies are hurting the auto industry.

For those who would pull the plug on our domestic automakers, I ask them to consider that our economic competitors won't let their auto industries vanish.

The European Commission is offering $6.3 billion in industry loans for developing greener cars. The Swedish government said it's prepared to help out its automakers. Japan already subsidizes its auto industry by keeping the yen artificially low.

China's automakers, which are owned or controlled by the government, get research grants and loans from state-owned banks. They're asking the government for emergency help in the form of tax relief, lower gas prices and grants.

I hope Congress will take to heart Franklin Roosevelt's words: "The strength of this nation shall not be diluted by the failure of the government to protect the economic well-being of its citizens."

Scorsese and De Niro option film rights for new movie

Deathbed confession to Hodder

A deathbed confession by the murderer of Teamster union boss Jimmy Hoffa, on which director Martin Scorsese and actor Robert De Niro are basing a new film, has been acquired by Hodder & Stoughton.

Jack Fogg, editor at Hodder, said the deal for the true crime thriller I Heard You Paint Houses was for "a good five-figure sum". Hodder has Commonwealth rights, excluding Canada. A royal trade paperback edition is due out in March 2010, while the mass paperback will be released to coincide with the film.

Fogg said: "The book came around now because Scorsese and De Niro have just optioned the film rights, and they are going to do a big Goodfella’s-style Mafia movie in the next 2-3 years. We are publishing [the first edition] on the 25th anniversary of Hoffa’s disappearance, and then we’ll tie in the [mass] paperback with the movie."

The book, which was published in the US by Steer Forth Press in 2004, is written by former investigative lawyer Charles Brandt who "elicited the confession" from Frank Sheerhan, who claimed he had been ordered by the Mafia to kill Hoffa in 1975.

"At the time, Hoffa just disappeared, and years later Sheerhan said they cremated him so no one would ever find out," said Fogg. "Hoffa had been mouthing off about his Mob ties, and they obviously didn’t want him to, so they called in this guy, who was a really good friend of his."

Fogg said although only "true crime buffs" might be familiar with the story in the UK "in the States it is like ‘who killed Diana’", adding the film’s release would give the book "a boost" for this market.

Headline is planning to pitch the title as "upmarket true crime". Fogg explained: "As it was written by a lawyer, he threshes out the politics behind the slayings carried out by the Mob at the peak of their power. There are also implications Frank Sheerhan might have supplied the weapons for the Kennedy shooting."