Buyout in 2013

[packageguy]

I think the company would rather have you leave on your own
then pay you to leave. I know there are supervisor who left knowing
they can not see them self doing this job for 25 to 30 years. According
to them company has changed since they went public.

 

[pretzel_man]

LTIP is what started their upward climb. It was put in place to accelerate the compensation of the 20+ group (and highly accelerate it for the top few executives in this group). I know all of that.

I question the philosophy that says the company will be more successful when the top few are paid much more and the rest of us less. I see the result in the day to day decision making of my peers. Easy wins out these days.

Since you brought up LTIP, isn't it the height of hypocrisy that these awards vest after three years instead of five? If five is a good number then let's make the number five.

I don't know if its hypocrisy or not. I think five years is fair. I bet if it were five years, you would still complain.

If LTIP was the start, what happened after? I'm not aware of anything else.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

They have a choice pay me to leave or pay me more to stay!!!!!!!!!!Ill keep going just not as fast!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[FracusBrown]

I don't know if its hypocrisy or not. I think five years is fair. I bet if it were five years, you would still complain.

If LTIP was the start, what happened after? I'm not aware of anything else.

LTIP is what started their upward climb. It was put in place to accelerate the compensation of the 20+ group (and highly accelerate it for the top few executives in this group). I know all of that.

I question the philosophy that says the company will be more successful when the top few are paid much more and the rest of us less. I see the result in the day to day decision making of my peers. Easy wins out these days.

Since you brought up LTIP, isn't it the height of hypocrisy that these awards vest after three years instead of five? If five is a good number then let's make the number five.

To expect those on the losing end of the compensation changes to accept it without complaining is somewhat unreasonable.

After LTIP came salary bands, reduced benefit coverage, delayed MIP payments, elimination of the half month bonus, to name a few.

It's common knowledge that the company intended to reduce management compensation expense. They have been quite successful.

As mentioned earlier, stock growth was at one time a major source of long term financial gain for all management. Since there has been no growth, options became worthless. They implemented other forms of compensation for the upper levels of management to compensate while the lower levels get nothing other than one well planned and cleverly disguised reduction after another.

 

[pretzel_man]

To expect those on the losing end of the compensation changes to accept it without complaining is somewhat unreasonable.

After LTIP came salary bands, reduced benefit coverage, delayed MIP payments, elimination of the half month bonus, to name a few.

It's common knowledge that the company intended to reduce management compensation expense. They have been quite successful.

As mentioned earlier, stock growth was at one time a major source of long term financial gain for all management. Since there has been no growth, options became worthless. They implemented other forms of compensation for the upper levels of management to compensate while the lower levels get nothing other than one well planned and cleverly disguised reduction after another.

As was said many years ago, UPS upper management 20's and above were underpaid compared to the marketplace.

18's were about equal to the market. Supervisors and Managers were above the market.

Like it or not, that is just the facts of the situation.

Complain or not. The situation is unchanged.

I suspect that many of the complainers would complain regardless.

BTW, Salary bands, Delayed MIP, RSU's, affect everyone including 20's and above.

 

[Catatonic]

As was said many years ago, UPS upper management 20's and above were underpaid compared to the marketplace.

18's were about equal to the market. Supervisors and Managers were above the market.

Like it or not, that is just the facts of the situation.

Complain or not. The situation is unchanged.

I suspect that many of the complainers would complain regardless.

BTW, Salary bands, Delayed MIP, RSU's, affect everyone including 20's and above.

I assume that was a Freudian slip.
The situation has changed but not all the way to where UPS is lined up perfectly with the marketplace for the total management workforce.
If you look at management hired in the last 5 years, it is probably in sync with the marketplace.
You may be overpaid but the new hires off the street are not.

PS - you are back on your soapbox being negative about people seeking the truth.

 

[pretzel_man]

I assume that was a Freudian slip.
The situation has changed but not all the way to where UPS is lined up perfectly with the marketplace for the total management workforce.
If you look at management hired in the last 5 years, it is probably in sync with the marketplace.
You may be overpaid but the new hires off the street are not.

PS - you are back on your soapbox being negative about people seeking the truth.

What I meant by unchanged is that 20+ pay increased.... There is nothing changing that.

Looking for the truth means objectively accepting things that are true. Not denying everything that doesn't match an existing opinion.

Not being happy about grade 20 pay has nothing to do with truth..... Its fine as an opinion.

 

[Catatonic]

To expect those on the losing end of the compensation changes to accept it without complaining is somewhat unreasonable.

After LTIP came salary bands, reduced benefit coverage, delayed MIP payments, elimination of the half month bonus, to name a few.

It's common knowledge that the company intended to reduce management compensation expense. They have been quite successful.

As mentioned earlier, stock growth was at one time a major source of long term financial gain for all management. Since there has been no growth, options became worthless. They implemented other forms of compensation for the upper levels of management to compensate while the lower levels get nothing other than one well planned and cleverly disguised reduction after another.

What I meant by unchanged is that 20+ pay increased.... There is nothing changing that.

Looking for the truth means objectively accepting things that are true. Not denying everything that doesn't match an existing opinion.

Not being happy about grade 20 pay has nothing to do with truth..... Its fine as an opinion.

That's what I figured you meant but I couldn't resist messing with you.

You do realize that 90% (at least) perceive what Fracus posted in #84 as reality.
Most do not complain ... they just accept the inevitability of the changes or as you may phrase it "objectively accepting things that are true".

One thing that I do disagree with Fracus on is that these "enhancements" were cleverly disguised.

 

[pretzel_man]

That's what I figured you meant but I couldn't resist messing with you.

You do realize that 90% (at least) perceive what Fracus posted in #84 as reality.
Most do not complain ... they just accept the inevitability of the changes.

One thing that I do disagree with Fracus on is that these "enhancements" were cleverly disguised.

Nearly everything he stated was fact:

- We pay more for healthcare
- We got RSU's instead of immediate payout.
- Salary bands impacted many jobs and were horribly implemented.

On the other hand.... Here are some differences to what I see:

- Salary bands (although horribly implemented) raised the level of many jobs (namely on-road supervisors)
- 1/2 month pay was not eliminated. The 4.5% was put in our pay, and raises within historical ranges were still given.

There is no doubt that the management committee felt that management should "share" the burden.... Is this wrong? Probably not, but that's another story.....

 

[Catatonic]

- 1/2 month pay was not eliminated. The 4.5% was put in our pay, and raises within historical ranges were still given.

Whereupon a large part of the management workforce was red-circled with no raises for the foreseeable future.
I and many others actually predicted this when the 1/2 month was put into our monthly salary.

But that is OK ... I saw it coming and just chuckled when it all came down. It is what it is and I can't change the truth.

 

[pretzel_man]

Whereupon a large part of the management workforce was red-circled with no raises for the foreseeable future.
I and many others actually predicted this when the 1/2 month was put into our monthly salary.

But that is OK ... I saw it coming and just chuckled when it all came down. It is what it is and I can't change the truth.

Hoax,

I do not think its true that a large part was red circled.....

HR said that about 2% would be red circled. I don't know if that is accurate or not. For my group, I had about 3% red circled.

I don't believe the red circling had anything to do with the 1/2 month pay. They (HR) would have done it anyway with the poorly implemented salary bands.

The salary band presentations do make sense, they were just poorly done. They were so poorly done that HR is still updating things today and trying to fix the problems from last year.

As you probably have heard, more change in this regard is coming.

 

[Jones]

Hoax is gone man, you can't hurt him no more.

 

[Catatonic]

Hoax,

I do not think its true that a large part was red circled.....

HR said that about 2% would be red circled. I don't know if that is accurate or not. For my group, I had about 3% red circled.

I don't believe the red circling had anything to do with the 1/2 month pay. They (HR) would have done it anyway with the poorly implemented salary bands.

The salary band presentations do make sense, they were just poorly done. They were so poorly done that HR is still updating things today and trying to fix the problems from last year.

As you probably have heard, more change in this regard is coming.

I think the main reason the 1/2 month was put into the monthly salary was to make UPS more attractive when recruiting.
I could see the MIP being rolled into monthly salary as well for the same reason.

I don't know about HR stated percentages but I can tell you that 7 people in one group of 9 managers were maxxed out last March and I heard many others in the SCS building complaining about "no raise" due to being at or above the max for their job.
These were all Level 16 -17 and most were sole contributors (no direct reports).
Maybe I just associate with people who are overpaid.

PS - Our group was not "banded" last year so I guess I will not get to see that implementation.
I hear we have a lot of exciting changes coming though.

BTW - None of these people were complaining but just discussing the truth.

As an aside, it seems everyone freely discusses their salary which is a new development.

 

[FracusBrown]

I don't know if its hypocrisy or not. I think five years is fair. I bet if it were five years, you would still complain.

If LTIP was the start, what happened after? I'm not aware of anything else.

As was said many years ago, UPS upper management 20's and above were underpaid compared to the marketplace.

18's were about equal to the market. Supervisors and Managers were above the market.

Like it or not, that is just the facts of the situation.

Complain or not. The situation is unchanged.

I suspect that many of the complainers would complain regardless.

BTW, Salary bands, Delayed MIP, RSU's, affect everyone including 20's and above.

BTW the 18s, 20s and above are making more while the rest are making less in total compensation. Add it up how ever you choose.

What I meant by unchanged is that 20+ pay increased.... There is nothing changing that.

Looking for the truth means objectively accepting things that are true. Not denying everything that doesn't match an existing opinion.

Not being happy about grade 20 pay has nothing to do with truth..... Its fine as an opinion.

Dont care what the 20s make. Give um all they want, just not at the expense of others.

That's what I figured you meant but I couldn't resist messing with you.

You do realize that 90% (at least) perceive what Fracus posted in #84 as reality.
Most do not complain ... they just accept the inevitability of the changes or as you may phrase it "objectively accepting things that are true".

One thing that I do disagree with Fracus on is that these "enhancements" were cleverly disguised.

I dont recall any being described as a reduction in compensation. Perhaps misleadingly sold as a postive or a necessity would have been a better choice of words.

 

[SignificantOwner]

I don't know if its hypocrisy or not. I think five years is fair. I bet if it were five years, you would still complain.

Easy trigger. I simply responded to a random statement you made that I didn't agree with. You don't know me at all so I think that's a lousy thing to say. You seem kind of hostile toward the front line. I don't want LTIP RSUs to vest in five years. I want all RSUs to vest in three years like the LTIP.

 

[pretzel_man]

Easy trigger. I simply responded to a random statement you made that I didn't agree with. You don't know me at all so I think that's a lousy thing to say. You seem kind of hostile toward the front line. I don't want LTIP RSUs to vest in five years. I want all RSUs to vest in three years like the LTIP.

I have no hostility to the front line at all. In fact, I have the utmost respect....

I do have issues with management that complains (rightfully so) about the lack of stock growth, but then are not willing to support things the management committee does to try and spur it (at least keep it from getting worse).

There is a policy about management's responsibility in this area.

We all have plenty to be unhappy about, but Casey spoke of constructive dissatisfaction. Not just dissatisfaction.

 

[beentheredonethat]

As was said many years ago, UPS upper management 20's and above were underpaid compared to the marketplace.

18's were about equal to the market. Supervisors and Managers were above the market.

Like it or not, that is just the facts of the situation.

Pretzel here's my question to you on what you just stated. In the past I was always told, and I had believed it to be true, that yes UPS did pay more then others (for front line mgmt). We expected more from our people and our people worked longer hours to get the job done.

1st question.. Was this statement above basically true?

If yes, 2nd question. How does our front line (supvs\mgrs) being paid above the market compare to them working harder and longer then what others work at other companies?

I personally believe the answer was Yes to question 1, and for question 2, UPS decided to ignore that when they saw other Supervisors and mgrs were paid less at other companies.

However, I am now of the opinion, if UPS wants to pay me market pay, I will give them market effort. (maybe even slightly above market effort).

 

[DS]

I have no hostility to the front line at all. In fact, I have the utmost respect....

And you mine,Constructive dissatisfaction has eroded into warning letters
for failing to do the impossible.If you ask 20 supervisors a tough question,
you get 18 different answers.There is no more team with a few exceptions
of some well run centers. After 105 years you'd think there would be a Bible
that contains every possible scenario that could happen in a day in the life.
Jim looks down and says,forgive them,for they know not what they do.

 

[SignificantOwner]

I have no hostility to the front line at all. In fact, I have the utmost respect....

I do have issues with management that complains (rightfully so) about the lack of stock growth, but then are not willing to support things the management committee does to try and spur it (at least keep it from getting worse).

There is a policy about management's responsibility in this area.

We all have plenty to be unhappy about, but Casey spoke of constructive dissatisfaction. Not just dissatisfaction.

That was a nice speech, but I carried out all responsibilities assigned to my pay band in 2012. What more are you asking for?

 

[j13501]

How does our front line (supvs\mgrs) being paid above the market compare to them working harder and longer then what others work at other companies?

The real answer to why our supervisors & managers were paid above the market hasn't been discussed yet. The real reason was that (once upon a time) we hired all our front line supervisors from the drivers ranks. Since our drivers were the highest paid in the industry, you had to pay a higher supervisor wage rate if you were going to attract good candidates.
This was true for decades. Drivers and management worked very hard and were paid very well.

Then in the last ten years, we started to lose market share. We looked at our cost per delivered/picked up package vs. the competition and realized that although our drivers were the hardest working people in the delivery business, we couldn't give them enough work in a day to make up for our competitor's lower wage scale. Since the drivers wages are based a negotiated contract, there was going to be no relief in hourly compensation. The only bucket of compensation that was available for cost control, was management. IMO, that's one reason we've moved to a more "market based" management compensation structure.
I'm not saying I'm happy about it, but let's face facts. If the board of directors thought we could run the company with 1/2 the current management workforce, they would do it in a second. Management is a control and planning cost. In a perfect world, you'd have as little management as possible.

The sad part of this discussion is that I'm not sure that a young supervisor today will have the same chance that I had for financial success. The change in the calculation for M.I.P. was huge. Our management team is outstanding, and I wish I could "turn the clock back" to give everyone an equal chance to have their hard work rewarded.