Fair Warning to White Glove Dog Owners

[layoutshooter]

Well It did..to me anyhow..i am sure some will even disagree with my conclusion as always...


I do understand about a uniform set of rules across the board..so dispatch doesn't have to sort thru, who has got what and where...and a contract so signed and agreed to...

Not to worry, no one cares about your conclusion any way!!

 

[OntarioVanMan]

Not to worry, no one cares about your conclusion any way!!

I won't take them personally considering the source..so there

 

[Streakn1]

Now what does a dog have to do with safety?

Maybe compliance...like rifling thru ones sleeper like he is known to do? personal drawers looking for illegal contraband he claims?

A little over the top...IMO

Terry, tell the EO community this is not true! I have ALWAYS had a huge respect for you and Rene but I have to agree with OTV. If you are in fact rifling thru ones sleeper as OTV alleges, that is over the top if it is random and without "probable cause" meaning one driver saw a FDCC driver drinking, doing drugs, or committing some other illegal activity in their truck.

As I reread my old contract from my FDCC days, with the exception of the initial sign on inspection, nowhere does it state that I would be required to allow you at random to do an interior inspection of my cab and sleeper area or allow you to rifle through my drawers looking for illegal contraban, and especially without probable cause. Is that not a job for law enforcement instead of a roving company employee? So without probable cause, what then would be the justification for such random searches by Terry? I can understand exterior safety and appearence inspections. The customer has no business or concern as to the driver's sleeper and how they live inside of it.

So has FDCC changed their contract to now require that ALL contractors MUST allow Terry free access to their sleepers at any time simply based on his request? How many of you FDCC contractors have actually been subject to Terry's internal searches.

 

[layoutshooter]

The only time that any FedEx employees have been inside my cab or sleeper is when we are working on TVAL stuff or on a sales call with a customer. That is it. I have never been asked by anyone at FedEx to inspect my sleeper. They do inspect my cargo box and truck etc.

 

[greg334]

well seeing it has turned into a clusterfest, what seems to be a simple business as usual turns into another controversial issue.

First Phil knows better, this has been the norm since long before I joined FedEx. It will continue to be the norm for a while more. Warning W/G owners seems to be redundant at best - they ALL know the rules and know what happens if they get caught - BUT if they don't know the rules then they should not be there at all. Maybe FedEx should enforce another policy, the one that says all White Glove 'candidates' need to prove themselves before even a consideration to be 'put' on that list.

Second, Terry is an employee, has been for a while and more or less we all know what he does. I think some here are critical of his job, while others don't give a crap. I don't care because he can not affect me and my business interests because of a lot of reasons. However he has a job to do which are enforcing the policies of FedEx to protect the image and brand and he seems to be doing a good job of it.

Third no one has access to the sleepers, FedEx is stepping into serious privacy issues unless they have serious cause and this is something that is not just a CC issue but a ground and SC issue too. He is taking a round about way of finding out who is in the sleeper, which it sly but effective. Not all dogs respond to the dog whistle, Cats don't seem to care and gerbils, birds and other things I have seen in trucks seem not to care.

Fourth, I am just having too much fun yanking chains.

 

[jjoerger]

We have never had anyone from FedEx look inside of our truck.
We have had various security guards at both shippers and receivers look inside. The US Border Patrol has looked inside and the US Military at bases have looked inside.
The only problem we have with someone wanting to look is when one of us is asleep and we have to get up and get dressed and get out. Especially after driving 11 hours and only having been asleep for a few hours.

As far as WG drivers with pets on board. They agreed to the no pets requirement and should abide by the rule or give up there WG slot.

I have talked to Terry several times on the phone and found him to be one of the most helpful people at FedEx.

 

[ATeam]

There is NO privacy issue.

Perhaps there is no privacy issue in this particular case, but there is the distrust, proactive spy aspect and presumption of guilt that Diane and I find to be very unsettling.

While we have nothing to fear from a truck inspection, inside or out, and while our near-zero CSA points make us a desired team in the industry, our O'Connell encounter was not an uplifting event but a demoralizing one.

After O'Connell left, we spent the rest of the day thinking about the kind of company FedEx Custom Critical has become and wondered anew about our future and the future of the company to which we have given our very best for seven years.

 

[Turtle]

 

[layoutshooter]

Perhaps there is no privacy issue in this particular case, but there is the distrust, proactive spy aspect and presumption of guilt that Diane and I find to be very unsettling.

While we have nothing to fear from a truck inspection, inside or out, and while our near-zero CSA points make us a desired team in the industry, our O'Connell encounter was not an uplifting event but a demoralizing one.

After O'Connell left, we spent the rest of the day thinking about the kind of company FedEx Custom Critical has become and wondered anew about our future and the future of the company to which we have given our very best for seven years.

Phil, I don't know what is going on at FedEx. Many U.S. companies are getting "goofy" to say the least. It would be a real shame if FedEx is going down that road. It will hurt them bad if it is what is going on. It always does. They will find that if they don't show trust in those working for them that they will no longer be trusted. It always goes two ways.

 

[greg334]

Perhaps there is no privacy issue in this particular case, but there is the distrust, proactive spy aspect and presumption of guilt that Diane and I find to be very unsettling.

Really?

You think?

Really Phil, you knew all of this before, it is no secret and never was.

FedEx seems to do this a lot. Here they monitor people and seem to know who to trust and who not to trust to ensure their brand and image

While we have nothing to fear from a truck inspection, inside or out, and while our near-zero CSA points make us a desired team in the industry, our O'Connell encounter was not an uplifting event but a demoralizing one.

So are about a million others who have zero CSA2010 points. I don't think we are going to see this massive exodus or carriers favoring one owner/driver over another because of their ratings, something about fairness and contracts seem to be an issue.

 

[Turtle]

FedEx trust those working for them? Not a chance. FedEx is and always has been about controlling those who work for them, whether they actually work for them or not. That attitude has begun for some time now to creep into Custom Critical. It won't get better before it gets worse.

 

[Streakn1]

No, I did not get approval. He did not swear us to secrecy before telling us about the device. I presumed he told an outspoken person like me about his use of this device because he wants people to know.

My purpose is to help a buddy by giving warning. No different than giving a bear report on the CB.

The real question is: would FedEx want Terry sharing what some (not saying myself) might deem as an underhanded tactic with ANY of the contractors or their drivers that are leased to them. Or would their preference have been to keep it under the radar. By sharing this publically does the Fed see this release of information as Terry overstepping his guidelines?

 

[cheri1122]

I ran into Terry more than a year ago, and after he offered Kenzy a treat, I laughingly asked why he even has them, and he explained how part of his job is to 'catch' noncompliant WG folks with dogs.
Personally, I have no problem with it - just like corporations who employ 'mystery shoppers', they have a right to know how their representatives are representing them.
As for the privacy issue: OVM alleged that Terry 'has been known to poke around in personal areas', but I've never heard that from anyone else, and have to wonder whether he has any solid proof of the allegation?

 

[cheri1122]

The real question is: would FedEx want Terry sharing what some (not saying myself) might deem as an underhanded tactic with ANY of the contractors or their drivers that are leased to them. Or would their preference have been to keep it under the radar. By sharing this publically does the Fed see this release of information as Terry overstepping his guidelines?

Um - why would that matter, to you?
The reason I never 'shared' the knowledge is because folks who cheat are taking a risk, and if they get caught, it's their lookout - I won't help them get away with it.

 

[BillChaffey]

Fortunately I'm with Bolt and Anne M was up front right from the start. "The dogs are okay, the mules & horse's have to stay home".

 

[Streakn1]

Perhaps there is no privacy issue in this particular case, but there is the distrust, proactive spy aspect and presumption of guilt that Diane and I find to be very unsettling.

While we have nothing to fear from a truck inspection, inside or out, and while our near-zero CSA points make us a desired team in the industry, our O'Connell encounter was not an uplifting event but a demoralizing one.

After O'Connell left, we spent the rest of the day thinking about the kind of company FedEx Custom Critical has become and wondered anew about our future and the future of the company to which we have given our very best for seven years.

Finally, as we once wore the same wonderful blinders regarding the Fed, its sounds to me as it another pair has fallen off and into the mud! LOL

 

[nightcreacher]

Even though W/G is part of FDCC,W/G has had their own rules for many years.No pets,and to be in W/G you need to be a US Citizen.These rules are because there are many customers that require this.As when you do a load that requires dual drivers,they want to speak to both drivers.Lately dispatch has aked to talk to the co drivers here at Tri State when doing team loads.

 

[Streakn1]

Um - why would that matter, to you?
The reason I never 'shared' the knowledge is because folks who cheat are taking a risk, and if they get caught, it's their lookout - I won't help them get away with it.

Nothing since I'm no longer contracted to FedEx. My only real interest here is (and having stated my respect for Terry and Rene) that I hope Phil's choice to post publically parts of a private conversation between Terry, Diane, and himself without Terry's consent will have no negative effect on the relationship between Terry and his employer for openly sharing company tactics in catching employees/contractor breaking rules.

This all makes us even more thankful we are leased to a carrier we can trust and be treated as they know they can trust us!

When are we gonna get some more Kenzy photos?

 

[cheri1122]

Anyone else find it ironic that Phil chose FedEx for their reputation & image, and yet he finds it 'disheartening' that they are willing to go further to protect the image than most?
I don't see any difference between the Fed's efforts to discover 'illicit' dogs, and the government's efforts to discover illicit drugs with roadside narcotic dogs [like NB out of Laredo].

 

[OntarioVanMan]

I ran into Terry more than a year ago, and after he offered Kenzy a treat, I laughingly asked why he even has them, and he explained how part of his job is to 'catch' noncompliant WG folks with dogs.
Personally, I have no problem with it - just like corporations who employ 'mystery shoppers', they have a right to know how their representatives are representing them.
As for the privacy issue: OVM alleged that Terry 'has been known to poke around in personal areas', but I've never heard that from anyone else, and have to wonder whether he has any solid proof of the allegation?

Yes EX EO members on another forum are saying this...that is why they quit posting here....their personal info and email addresses were acquired ...from insider knowledge...