Airline Pilot Central Forums

Airline Pilot Central Forums (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/)

- Cargo (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/cargo/)

- - UPS: The F word (https://www.airlinepilotforums.com/cargo/31705-ups-f-word.html)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skymaster (Post 471860)

Two well renowned Anti Trust attorneys gave testimony as well as Ohio's Attorney General.

Attorneys will side with whomever pays them. Sad but true. They did not come to the hearings out of the goodness of their own hearts.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skymaster (Post 471860)

Go read the transcipts from both the Judiciary and Transportation Committee hearings. Two well renowned Anti Trust attorneys gave testimony as well as Ohio's Attorney General. Even the Transportation Committee Chairman has indicated this is a clear cut case of Anti-Trust.

During both hearings there were witness after witness speaking out against this "merger" and the only ones speaking in favour were UPS and DHL.

So should FDX not be able to carry for the USPS?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skymaster (Post 471860)

I don't have to read the scripts as there are as many "well renowned" Anti-trust attorneys that say the exact opposite. You know, there were several "well renowned" forensic experts that said OJ didn't do it either. But like I said before, nobody here will convince you otherwise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skymaster (Post 471860)

this "merger"

Only it is not a merger

Quote:

Originally Posted by SLPII (Post 471759)

It may makes a difference if one is a consumer (less competition). But for the people who are going to lose their jobs no matter who DHL decides to team up with, why would you care who is taking over the flying? Whether it's UPS, FDX or the supplementals?

Because that is at the crux of the anti-trust issue SLI. If it were another ACMI carrier they were using, there would be no grounds for any action. Because they are using a direct competitor, there are grounds to fight it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sideshow Bob (Post 471773)

So...

Given (and you take many interpretive liberties IMO, and the opinions of many, many others differ from yours) that assumption (and it's not fact etched in legal stone BTW):

Is it your position that the U.S. government can/should FORCE DHL to continue using you as domestic air lift and FORCE DHL to continue using ILM as the sort for their U.S. activities? Then, since you've let that camel into your tent:

Should that U.S. government subsequently determine that MORE U.S. jobs would be gained having UPS and/or someone else do the job, would you be OK with that?

Much like banking, be wary of asking for de-facto nationalization of industries, you may not like the outcome.

My answer to you was clear and concise, SB. I see no reason to put other variables into it. Another ACMI carrier used, then no case. A primary competitor used, case. Period. And we both know that there will be no "new" jobs at UPS over this deal. Both companies loads are down signifigantly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by UPSFO4LIFE (Post 471797)

My STL Rams need a bailout, can someone please help???

Would prayers help FO? ;)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Slice (Post 471866)

So should FDX not be able to carry for the USPS?

USPS is exempt from anti-trust issues Slice. They are a government entity.

Quote:

Originally Posted by hvydriver (Post 471879)

USPS is exempt from anti-trust issues Slice. They are a government entity.

The principle is the same and they are meant to operate cost neutral but periodically turn a profit... Quasi-government agency at best under current operations.

About the U.S. Postal Service

Quote:

Originally Posted by ERJ Jay (Post 471864)

Attorneys will side with whomever pays them. Sad but true. They did not come to the hearings out of the goodness of their own hearts.

The two Anti-Trust Attorneys who testified were "disinterested parties", hired by the US government to evaluate and give an opinion based upon the facts and without prejudice.