XPO Logistics Closes Seven Truck Terminals

Company extends cost-reduction effort at former Con-way Freight operation by shutting service centers in remote locations

An XPO Logistics less-than-truckload truck. PHOTO: XPO LOGISTICS INC.

By 

PAUL PAGE

Feb. 4, 2016 1:41 p.m. ET

0 COMMENTS

XPO Logistics Inc. has closed seven freight terminals in the former Con-way Inc. trucking network, extending cost reductions at the business it acquired last fall.

The shutdowns in what XPO said were remote locations follow the elimination of 190 jobs last week in what the company said were back-office areas of the former Con-way Freight less-than-truckload operation, which sells delivery services on trucks for multiple customers.

“We’re continuing to migrate to a more efficient LTL organization, with better network efficiency and greater utilization of our capacity,” XPO said in a statement. “As part of our planned restructuring, we decided to close seven service centers in remote areas without exiting any markets.”

The company declined to identify the locations of the closed terminals.

XPO said shipments from the customers near the sites would be processed through other, larger facilities, making those operations more efficient. “All of our LTL customers have continuity of service during the transition,” the company said.

The $3 billion Con-way purchase completed last October capped a rapid series of acquisitions in recent years that have built XPO into a $14 billion operation. XPO Chairman and Chief Executive Bradley Jacobs has said the company is taking a break from its buying spree to focus on integrating the businesses it acquired last year, including Con-way and French trucker Norbert Dentressangle.

Shares in XPO, which reports full-year 2015 earnings on Feb. 23, were up more than 11% in trading Thursday, to $24.24.

Write to Paul Page at paul.page@wsj.com

THE WALL STREET JOURNAL

XPO Logistics Trucking Subsidiaries Sued Over Driver Classification

      http://www.wsj.com

Class-action lawsuit argues that drivers were misclassified as independent contractors

XPO Logistics CEO Brad Jacobs, left, talks with a company driver. Three trucking company subsidiaries of XPO were sued in California Monday for allegedly misclassifying their drivers as independent contractors. PHOTO: TONY DING/ASSOCIATED PRESSBy

 By 

ERICA E. PHILLIPS

Jan. 12, 2016 7:24 a.m. ET

Three trucking company subsidiaries of XPO Logistics Inc. were sued in California Monday for allegedly misclassifying their drivers as independent contractors.

The lawsuit seeking class action status, filed in Los Angeles Superior Court, argues that drivers for XPO subsidiaries Pacer Cartage Inc., Harbor Rail Transport and PDS Transportation Inc. failed to pay minimum wage, provide meal breaks and rest breaks and to reimburse business expenses, among other allegations.

In an emailed statement, XPO Chief Operating Officer Troy Cooper said: “We believe this case is without merit and plan to litigate it vigorously. We are in constant dialogue with our independent-contractor carriers and believe the vast majority of them value the significant benefits that operating independently can bring.”

XPO, a transportation services company, has grown rapidly over the past few years through acquisitions. Until last year, when XPO purchased trucking company Con-way Inc. and French transportation firm Norbert Dentressangle SA, most of the company’s subsidiaries were “asset-light,” meaning their contractors owned the equipment—for example, trucks—that they used to transport cargo.

The trucking companies that were sued Monday perform what is known as drayage trucking services, or hauling goods the short distance between seaports and nearby rail yards and warehouses, a key link in the national supply chain. Within the domestic drayage market, estimated by research firm FTR Transportation Intelligence as generating $12 billion in annual revenue, the independent owner-operator model is common.

But that model has increasingly come under legal scrutiny, in drayage as well as other sectors of the transportation industry. Alleged misclassification of workers has led to high-profile lawsuits against Uber Technologies Inc. and FedEx Corp., among others. FedEx settled a case in California last year for $228 million. Last month, a California judge ruled to expand a class-action suit brought against Uber by three drivers who claim they are employees, not contractors, and deserve benefits such as workers’ compensation.

Workers in the lawsuit filed Monday are being represented by the Los Angeles law firm Kabateck Brown Kellner LLP, which has previously brought similar claims against several drayage trucking companies, including Pacer. A $4.25 million settlement with Pacer, which they reached last May, is awaiting a judge’s approval.

Write to Erica E. Phillips at erica.phillips@wsj.com

Organizing Continues At Fedex Freight,Conway/XPO

CLICK HERE TO CHECK OUT ARTICLE ON TEAMSTERS MAGAZINE

New Calif. law will bring equal pay for all

http://teamsternation.blogspot.com/2015/12/new-calif-law-will-bring-equal-pay-for.html

Once again taking the lead where the dysfunctional U.S. Congress failed to do so, California’s legislature and Gov. Jerry Brown – with significant lobbying from the Teamsters and other unions – pushed through a strong equal pay law that brings fairness of all workers.

Jerry Brown signed the bill into law in October.

The California Fair Pay Act (CFPA), which takes effect Jan. 1, closes loopholes created since the federal Equal Pay Act passed in 1963, at least in the Golden State, home to one of every eight people in the U.S. The CFPA is among almost two dozen pro-worker laws the Democratic-run pro-labor legislature approved in its 2015 session.

The California law expands federal equal pay rights by mandating that employers pay workers, regardless of sex or gender, equally for “substantially similar” work, not just strictly equal work. Federal courts have been increasingly strict in deciding what is “equal work” the federal law covers. They’ve turned most such pay discrimination cases down.

The California law also strengthens worker protection against employer retaliation and requires firms to keep employment records, including pay records, for three years, not two.

A legal summary says California bans paying workers of the opposite sex less for "substantially similar work, when viewed as a composite of skill, effort, and responsibility." And the employer must take account of "similar working conditions," not just wages at the worksite or company branch involved.

California employers could still discriminate in pay, but only if they can show the wage differences “are due to a seniority system, merit system, a system that measures the quantity or quality of production, or a ‘bona fide factor other than sex, such as education, training, or experience,’" the law adds.

And if they cite those reasons, they must be directly job-related – and show that the factor that produces wage discrimination is “consistent with business necessity." The new law then gives workers a defense against business necessity by showing “an alternative business practice exists that would serve the same purpose without producing the wage disparity.”

The California law also bans employers from retaliating against workers who disclose their own wages, discuss other workers’ wages, ask about others’ wages or help other workers exercise their rights. But if the worker asks about wages, the
employer can refuse to answer.

If the employer is guilty of breaking the law, the worker gets back pay plus interest, an equal amount in damages, and attorney’s fees.

• Press Associates, Inc., contributed to this report.

ONE YEAR LATER NMF/MIAMI REMAIN STRONG IN WORKING FOR COLLECTIVE BARGANING CONTRACT

Conway/XPO Forced to Follow Law and Negotiate Contract

https://www.nlrb.gov/case/16-CA-159605

Judge: Con-way Violated Rights of Workers in Los Angeles

https://teamster.org/news/2015/11/judge-con-way-violated-rights-workers-los-angeles

Teamsters

America's Strongest Union

Con-way Freight, Inc. violated the rights of workers who were trying to form their union with the Teamsters and must re-hire two workers it unlawfully fired during the organizing campaign, among other remedies, an administrative law judge with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) has ruled.

“By instructing employees not to wear union insignia, threatening employees for supporting the Union, filing criminal charges against an employee, suspending employees, and terminating employees because they supported the Union, the Respondent has engaged in unfair labor practices…,” Administrative Judge Eleanor Laws wrote in her decision.

The workers at Con-way’s Los Angeles terminal were trying to join Local 63. The company must cease its illegal activities, reinstate the two fired workers and pay them back wages and benefits, and take other steps.

To read the decision, click here.