Comments on: FedEx’s Brown Bailout: How Big Companies *Shouldn’t* Use Social Media http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/ Just another WordPress weblog Wed, 10 Mar 2010 02:06:47 -0800 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.5 hourly 1 By: Jay http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-534 Jay Wed, 17 Feb 2010 13:30:37 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-534 Perhaps the statistics I've read are off, but they state that the vast majority (85% and up) of FedEx's shipping is done via air. The stats for UPS are almost the reverse (85% are ground-shipped). If it's possible to have different union standards for different company divisions (RLA for air-related, NRLA for ground), maybe that's the solution. If not though, I can't see it being fair to FedEX to force their air freight-dominated company to play by ground-union rules. Perhaps the statistics I've read are off, but they state that the vast majority (85% and up) of FedEx's shipping is done via air. The stats for UPS are almost the reverse (85% are ground-shipped). If it's possible to have different union standards for different company divisions (RLA for air-related, NRLA for ground), maybe that's the solution. If not though, I can't see it being fair to FedEX to force their air freight-dominated company to play by ground-union rules.

]]> By: redsword http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-448 redsword Mon, 07 Dec 2009 21:33:00 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-448 <a href="http://www.domain.com/wp-login.php?action=rp&key%5B%5D=" rel="nofollow">http://www.domain.com/wp-login.php?action=rp&ke...</a> http://www.domain.com/wp-login.php?action=rp&ke...

]]> By: BoMan http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-297 BoMan Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:56:21 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-297 Please elaborate cory. I don't think you have any idea what this could do to the small to medium business if UPS succeeds. . Please elaborate cory. I don't think you have any idea what this could do to the small to medium business if UPS succeeds. .

]]> By: cory http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-285 cory Fri, 10 Jul 2009 00:09:22 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-285 kinda seems like fedex is looking for a bailout kinda seems like fedex is looking for a bailout

]]> By: Lucy http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-276 Lucy Thu, 02 Jul 2009 18:06:28 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-276 Huh? So what's your point? This doesn't have anything to do with a government bailout, nor would anyone think it does. Huh? So what's your point? This doesn't have anything to do with a government bailout, nor would anyone think it does.

]]> By: matt ceniceros http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-246 matt ceniceros Fri, 26 Jun 2009 08:19:15 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-246 Jon - <br>1. brand squatting continues to be a big issue on Twitter. @fedex, @fedexoffice, @fedexexpress, @fake_fedex are all non-official accounts. We've filed claims with Twitter customer service dating back to April of 2007 to get them removed or shuttered and just keep getting auto-responsed backed. Facebook actually locked most of the FedEx brand names when it opened up vanity URLs on Pages. But even there we have issues getting our brand back. Very frustrating. <br><br>2. Correct. FedEx at this time does not have an official YouTube or Twitter account opened for the purpose of promoting <a href="http://brownbailout.com" rel="nofollow">brownbailout.com</a>. The bailout site does have social tags and capabilities, but I'd argue that it's an interactive campaign, not a social media campaign. <br><br>I like to think that the dialogue happening on the FedEx Citizenship Blog and on this blog is the essence of social media. Putting up a webpage with a "YouTube" video is not a social media campaign - it's an interactive site. Social = dialogue. That's what we have here. <br><br>3. I understand your point on lobbyists. However, while FedEx does it's share, UPS has spent its money on specifically this issue and this issue alone. They call it a "fair playing field" but neglect to say they have tried for years to be reclassified under the RLA. Only after being denied entry did they turn their attention to reclassifying FedEx Express. <br><br>We continue to take marketshare in all areas of our business. We're focused on our customer, our culture and our mission. UPS has been focused on changing labor laws. The bailout we refer to is the fact they're looking for government to help them compete: the banks, insurance, auto makers all have asked gov support to help them remain competitive. <br><br>What's at issue is protecting commerce. The ability for workers to organize and strike at the local level would cripple an air express network that carries critical medical, technological and day-to-day items that the global economy depends on. When the UPS strike happened in 1997, we had UPS customers throwing their mission critical packages and documents over our fence so they could conduct business. The emerging e-commerce industry was greatly effected. And, small businesses, such as yourself, we heavily impacted. <br><br>"But some online vendors that rely on FedEx are suffering because of the UPS strike. "It's a bitch," said a spokesperson at <a href="http://Thefoodstores.com" rel="nofollow">Thefoodstores.com</a>, who asked not to be identified. Because FedEx will not guarantee its next-day shipments, the food store has had to turn down almost all orders for perishable items. This constitutes half of the company's business. CNET <a href="http://news.cnet.com/Net-vendors-feel-UPS-strike-pinch/2100-1017_3-202122.html%22" rel="nofollow">http://news.cnet.com/Net-vendors-feel-UPS-strik...</a> <br><br>Like I said, I've been discussing the issue with interested people on Twitter and in blog discussions. Social media makes this discussion possible. I'm sure in your counsel to clients you explain a YouTube or Twitter account doesn't equal a social media strategy. The discussion we've engaged in is at the heart of social media. <br><br>This isn't a FedEx press release talking in a one-way fashion to you. I'm Matt. I'm a dad, husband and I work at FedEx. I care about my company. I'm proud to work at FedEx. And, if you'd like to talk about how we do business, I'm all ears.<br><br>Thanks, <br>Matt Ceniceros <br>@mattceni Jon –
1. brand squatting continues to be a big issue on Twitter. @fedex, @fedexoffice, @fedexexpress, @fake_fedex are all non-official accounts. We've filed claims with Twitter customer service dating back to April of 2007 to get them removed or shuttered and just keep getting auto-responsed backed. Facebook actually locked most of the FedEx brand names when it opened up vanity URLs on Pages. But even there we have issues getting our brand back. Very frustrating.

2. Correct. FedEx at this time does not have an official YouTube or Twitter account opened for the purpose of promoting brownbailout.com. The bailout site does have social tags and capabilities, but I'd argue that it's an interactive campaign, not a social media campaign.

I like to think that the dialogue happening on the FedEx Citizenship Blog and on this blog is the essence of social media. Putting up a webpage with a “YouTube” video is not a social media campaign – it's an interactive site. Social = dialogue. That's what we have here.

3. I understand your point on lobbyists. However, while FedEx does it's share, UPS has spent its money on specifically this issue and this issue alone. They call it a “fair playing field” but neglect to say they have tried for years to be reclassified under the RLA. Only after being denied entry did they turn their attention to reclassifying FedEx Express.

We continue to take marketshare in all areas of our business. We're focused on our customer, our culture and our mission. UPS has been focused on changing labor laws. The bailout we refer to is the fact they're looking for government to help them compete: the banks, insurance, auto makers all have asked gov support to help them remain competitive.

What's at issue is protecting commerce. The ability for workers to organize and strike at the local level would cripple an air express network that carries critical medical, technological and day-to-day items that the global economy depends on. When the UPS strike happened in 1997, we had UPS customers throwing their mission critical packages and documents over our fence so they could conduct business. The emerging e-commerce industry was greatly effected. And, small businesses, such as yourself, we heavily impacted.

“But some online vendors that rely on FedEx are suffering because of the UPS strike. “It's a bitch,” said a spokesperson at Thefoodstores.com, who asked not to be identified. Because FedEx will not guarantee its next-day shipments, the food store has had to turn down almost all orders for perishable items. This constitutes half of the company's business. CNET http://news.cnet.com/Net-vendors-feel-UPS-strik...

Like I said, I've been discussing the issue with interested people on Twitter and in blog discussions. Social media makes this discussion possible. I'm sure in your counsel to clients you explain a YouTube or Twitter account doesn't equal a social media strategy. The discussion we've engaged in is at the heart of social media.

This isn't a FedEx press release talking in a one-way fashion to you. I'm Matt. I'm a dad, husband and I work at FedEx. I care about my company. I'm proud to work at FedEx. And, if you'd like to talk about how we do business, I'm all ears.

Thanks,
Matt Ceniceros
@mattceni

]]> By: Jon Bischke http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-245 Jon Bischke Fri, 26 Jun 2009 03:11:35 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-245 Thanks for your reply Matt. For starters, I don't have a side on the issue. I'm actually for less government intervention in business in general. My issue was with the way this campaign was conducted.<br><br>So a few follow-ups...<br><br>#1 - twitter.com/brownbailout is not you guys??!! I'll take you at your word but that seems really odd to me especially since it uses your logo, etc. And you guys are aware that Twitter has a non-impersonation policy right? All the details are here: <a href="http://help.twitter.com/forums/26257/entries/18366" rel="nofollow">http://help.twitter.com/forums/26257/entries/18366</a> <br><br>#2 - Does "We do not have an official YouTube account" mean that <a href="http://www.youtube.com/user/brownbailout" rel="nofollow">http://www.youtube.com/user/brownbailout</a> is not you guys? Because it pretty much seems like it is you guys (e.g., "We take this issue very seriously, but weve made some videos that explore this greedy move with a little bit of humor."). And you are embedding the YouTube videos on BrownBailout.com??<br><br>#3 - I think the rest of the stuff you said is great and again, I don't take issue with your stance. It just seems like calling this a "bailout" and making this seem like a citizen-driven, rather than corporate-driven, effort is a disingenuous use of social media.<br><br>That's all. :) Thanks for your reply Matt. For starters, I don't have a side on the issue. I'm actually for less government intervention in business in general. My issue was with the way this campaign was conducted.

So a few follow-ups…

#1 – twitter.com/brownbailout is not you guys??!! I'll take you at your word but that seems really odd to me especially since it uses your logo, etc. And you guys are aware that Twitter has a non-impersonation policy right? All the details are here: http://help.twitter.com/forums/26257/entries/18366

#2 – Does “We do not have an official YouTube account” mean that http://www.youtube.com/user/brownbailout is not you guys? Because it pretty much seems like it is you guys (e.g., “We take this issue very seriously, but weve made some videos that explore this greedy move with a little bit of humor.”). And you are embedding the YouTube videos on BrownBailout.com??

#3 – I think the rest of the stuff you said is great and again, I don't take issue with your stance. It just seems like calling this a “bailout” and making this seem like a citizen-driven, rather than corporate-driven, effort is a disingenuous use of social media.

That's all. :)

]]> By: matt ceniceros http://jonbischke.com/2009/06/25/fedexs-brown-bailout-how-big-companies-shouldnt-use-social-media/comment-page-1/#comment-244 matt ceniceros Fri, 26 Jun 2009 01:09:37 +0000 http://jonbischke.com/?p=131#comment-244 Jon - thanks for writing a post about this very important issue. There are some clarifications that need to be made here. <br>1. twitter.com/brownbailout is not affiliated with FedEx. I am @mattceni. Does the person who created this account feel compelled to publish factoids about this important debate, sure. But if you have any questions, which you did earlier today, and I answered.<br>2. We do not have an official YouTube account. <br>3. A modern-day bailout, by definition, is a company looking for government involvement to help it compete in the marketplace. UPS PAC has spent more money in the past two years than any other company. So, to your point. No, UPS isn't asking for a bailout. Just their multi-million dollar lobbyists have. <br><br>About the issue. <br>1. FedEx CEO and Chairman blogged about this very important issue at blog.fedex.com/RLA. <br>2. is UPS asking for a bailout. Yes. UPS has decided to compete on labor law. FedEx Express will continue to compete on culture. <br>3. UPS has tired to be reclassified into the RLA throughout the 90's. Independent labor boards declined them. Federal courts in the 90's upheld FedEx Express classification in the RLA. <br><br>I welcome further dialogue about this important topic. Follow me @mattceni on Twitter. Read the FedEx blog at <a href="http://blog.fedex.com" rel="nofollow">blog.fedex.com</a>. Jon – thanks for writing a post about this very important issue. There are some clarifications that need to be made here.
1. twitter.com/brownbailout is not affiliated with FedEx. I am @mattceni. Does the person who created this account feel compelled to publish factoids about this important debate, sure. But if you have any questions, which you did earlier today, and I answered.
2. We do not have an official YouTube account.
3. A modern-day bailout, by definition, is a company looking for government involvement to help it compete in the marketplace. UPS PAC has spent more money in the past two years than any other company. So, to your point. No, UPS isn't asking for a bailout. Just their multi-million dollar lobbyists have.

About the issue.
1. FedEx CEO and Chairman blogged about this very important issue at blog.fedex.com/RLA.
2. is UPS asking for a bailout. Yes. UPS has decided to compete on labor law. FedEx Express will continue to compete on culture.
3. UPS has tired to be reclassified into the RLA throughout the 90's. Independent labor boards declined them. Federal courts in the 90's upheld FedEx Express classification in the RLA.

I welcome further dialogue about this important topic. Follow me @mattceni on Twitter. Read the FedEx blog at blog.fedex.com.

]]>