FedEx Home Delivery v. National Labor Relations Board
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
563 F.3d 492 (2009)
Facts
FedEx Ground Package System, Incorporated (FedEx) (plaintiff) operated the FedEx Home Delivery program. The drivers at the two FedEx terminals in Wilmington, Massachusetts, each voted for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, Local Union 25 to serve as their collective-bargaining representative. FedEx refused to bargain with the union, claiming that the drivers the union represented were not employees. The drivers were referred to as contractors in FedEx’s standard contractor operating agreement. The drivers were given routes by FedEx in exchange for agreements to service the routes. Drivers could be given multiple routes. The routes could be transferred to other qualified drivers for money. FedEx required the drivers to wear a uniform and adhere to certain performance and appearance standards, but it gave them wide latitude in exactly how to service their routes. The drivers provided their own vehicles. They were also free to hire helpers or substitute drivers, which was a necessity for servicers of multiple routes. They were free to use their vehicles for other work, but never while servicing a FedEx route. The National Labor Relations Board (the board) determined that FedEx committed an unfair labor practice in refusing to bargain with the union. FedEx appealed the board’s determination.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Brown, J.)
Dissent (Garland, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 709,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 44,500 briefs, keyed to 983 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.
