What'dyabringmetoday???
Well-Known Member
Yup- it is never the union's fault. Just ask Big Union Man...
Deferred Delivery Coming
- Thread starter PACNW
- Start date
That's not true. These buildings have never ran at max capacity/ efficiently. The current situation doesn't really work all that well. If just half of the people stopped giving away all of the free time they give. This ship would sink quick.
I worked at UPS for 42 years.....I know how it "ran".
The buildings worked at max capacity and efficiency so much so....that they expanded them as much as possible and built huge new ones.....so much so I worked 60+ hours a week.
Emergency Conditions
Well-Known Member
They'll just hide it behind severe weather condition and mechanical failure exceptions.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
That depends on what supplement you are covered by.
Central Region Article 12 section 7.
"Each full-time employee put to work shall have a daily guarantee of eight (8) hours of work. Any full-time employee reporting to work and not put to work shall receive six (6) hours’ guarantee."
brown metal coffin
Well-Known Member
That is the answer I was looking for because that's exactly what I was thinking. What on earth would be the benefit of trying to slow down the network now. All they ever preach is that the customer wants it faster and we have to keep up with the competition that's already providing that. That's why they fought so hard for Saturdays and behind closed doors they want Sunday too. So the message that they want to go back to the dumpster fire of rural remote just doesn't compute but never underestimate the cubicle computer screen warriors who will try anything to spend a dollar to save a dime and wreck a network in the blink of an eye....
retired2000
Well-Known Member
They tried this way back in the 80’s did not last long
Don't forget you work for UPS.
When you remember that this makes 100% sense.
Commercial Inside Release
Well-Known Member
They're giving the unprofitable rural customers to FedEx on a silver platter, to be used against you Teamsters. They're going to make a big deal about customers going to FedEx, cry poor. The speeding up the ground network prior to this, is just convenient plausible deniability.
Might as well face it. UPS management doesn't plan on negotiating, much.
Might as well face it. UPS management doesn't plan on negotiating, much.
That’s my whole route. Only difference is my customers get their stuff unlike FedEx. Those guys leave stuff at the most random places on the route
PreTrippin’
Stinkin Ginzo
Please please do this to me when I’m 30 years in. Make a high seniority driver run a rabbit route 2 days a week? Lolol that will happen exactly once.
RuralDriver
Member
There are lots of routes in the Dakotas going out with 40-60 stops, and 250-350 miles. Once in a while, you'll see a route with 30 stops, and 300 miles. Some of them end up 80 or 90 miles from the center at their furthest point. Those routes do nothing but bleed money, and I can see the appeal of dropping service from entire areas twice a week.
But I think there's a few problems that would keep that from being successful: (1) perishable food and medicine, (2) most of those package cars are really small, and can't hold two days worth of volume, (3) you're going to end up with 13 1/2 hour days following the days off.
A better approach would be to cut off specific stops, rather than whole zip codes. There are days that getting rid of four stops can shave off 30 miles. Do that enough places, and three routes traveling in a particular direction become two. But that approach would only work if local supervisors/dispatchers were trusted (and empowered) to do their jobs.
But I think there's a few problems that would keep that from being successful: (1) perishable food and medicine, (2) most of those package cars are really small, and can't hold two days worth of volume, (3) you're going to end up with 13 1/2 hour days following the days off.
A better approach would be to cut off specific stops, rather than whole zip codes. There are days that getting rid of four stops can shave off 30 miles. Do that enough places, and three routes traveling in a particular direction become two. But that approach would only work if local supervisors/dispatchers were trusted (and empowered) to do their jobs.
Think of the huge staffing it would take to examine each stop and pkg to figure all this out....newsflash: they want to cut staffing not increase it. An algorithm won't consider meds and all that stuff. If....UPS cares.
This^. I'm anticipating working 4 days a week most weeks (3 on low vacation weeks) (when the weather isn't
ty enough that we have to "catch up" on volume) from Apr til Aug because whole zip codes are going to be cut, instead of surgically sniping off "orphan" stops that can be deferred. But it's better than working 1-3 days a week. I was told they originally wanted to execute deferrals Tue-Fri, instead of just Tue-Wed or Wed-Thur.
Do these routes have Saturday delivery?This^. I'm anticipating working 4 days a week most weeks (3 on low vacation weeks) (when the weather isn't
But it's better than working 1-3 days a week. I was told they originally wanted to execute deferrals Tue-Fri, instead of just Tue-Wed or Wed-Thur.
bottomups
Bad Moon Risen'
Probably wants to speed up the profitable business to business stops. The rural residential customer is a losing proposition.
No
govols019
You smell that?
We did it in the '90's with remotes...no huge staffing needs or algorithms needed.
The past always repeats itself. It didn't work 27 years ago...it won't work now.
Some of those places the post office doesn't even deliver to.
