October 26th, 2009
You’re driving to work on the freeway and all of a sudden you hit traffic. You can see some flashing light activity in the distance and you become a little annoyed that the traffic mess you’re sitting in is a result of so called rubberneckers. Well my friends, I am a rubbernecker. Now before you blame me for all traffic related messes on the way to work today, let me clarify by saying that I’m not a traffic rubbernecker. What I am is a FedEx rubbernecker. What? Well let me explain.
I’ve been making an attempt to distance myself from the poster child of worker misclassification. However while on the misclassification news highway, I can’t seem to take my eyes off of the FedEx related incidents occurring on the shoulder. This time, the incident is in the form of three Attorneys General for the states of New York, Montana and New Jersey declaring that they’re prepared to sue FedEx Ground unless the courier giant can explain why there shouldn’t be a lawsuit. The lawsuit that the AG’s are referring to would center around the worker model that FedEx has taken on, which classifies it’s ground drivers as independent contractors rather than employees. This type of model provides Fedex with an unfair advantage since they do not have to pay employment taxes or provide benefits.
Now I applaud the 3 AG’s for their mighty talk but what took them so long to go after FedEx? And why not file a lawsuit rather than asking FedEx to provide a reason why they should not be sued. If the AG’s can initiate a lawsuit fast enough, then perhaps they will take the lead in attempting to bring down the FedEx driver model. Though a nationwide class action lawsuit still lingers in Indiana, there’s a good chance that the outcome of an Attorney General led lawsuit will provide a faster end result. An AG lawsuit decision could set precedence for future courier lawsuits.
In the coming weeks, be on the lookout for signs indicating Attorney Generals at Work There’s a good chance that the misclassification highway will detour directly to Fedex.
Posted in Attorney General, Case Studies | No Comments »
October 16th, 2009
Last week, Tennessee’s Attorney General filed a lawsuit against four staffing agencies for their wrongdoings. The staffing agencies promised workers jobs at extraordinary pay rates, career development, job placement services and perhaps the worst of the them all, charging an up-front fee. Just today, the Minnesota Attorney General filed a lawsuit against a staffing agency for fraud and deceptive business practices of which also included false job openings, advanced interview training(which never occurred) as well as an upfront fee. Have staffing agencies become a new breed of shark in the water?
Though I’ve never performed the duties of a staffer, I worked in a staffing office for more than 7 years. During that time, I saw staffers casually continue to advertise for positions that were once available, but now filled, in order to build their candidate database or perhaps replenish certain skill sets that were lacking in their candidate pool. I’m sure most staffing agencies at one time or another have participated in this type of practice. As for the other allegations, I’m in disbelief over the complete lack of common sense generated by these agencies regarding the promises of career development and interview training. I know staffing agencies don’t always deliver on promises made but didn’t these agencies know that all bets were off the minute they started charging candidates up-front fees?
What I don’t get is how these agencies could have cheated job candidates out of money during a time when people are desperate for a job. I’m sure most of the people who were the victims of these wrongdoings went to these staffing agencies with the hope that they would find an opportunity. What they received in return was a lighter wallet with a side of lies.
Hopefully these instances of staffing industry trickery are isolated incidents. If not this could potentially bring negative publicity to an industry that is seeing tough times. Let’s hope the outcome of these lawsuits provide potential job candidates with the authority to issue a DNU to agencies who do not play fair.
Posted in Attorney General, Case Studies, Law | No Comments »
