Full-Time Supervisors Excluded From SRP

[Red Rose Tea]

If you are an admin and you work in the District office and your district office is no longer the NEW district office, you are likely impacted.
Don't mean to sound callous but update your resume and start looking for new employment.

I'm not an admin in a District office - Part-time sup in a center office, along with hourly admins. Its a multi center bldg which may consolidate into 1 center. Just wondering how this may affect us in operations. Who would be impacted - hourly admins or part time sups (formerly called OMS)

 

[Old Man Jingles]

I'm not an admin in a District office - Part-time sup in a center office, along with hourly admins. Its a multi center bldg which may consolidate into 1 center. Just wondering how this may affect us in operations. Who would be impacted - hourly admins or part time sups (formerly called OMS)

I would say you and the admins will be relatively untouched by this since your jobs are related to the # of drivers, delivery packages and pickup stops. If someone quits (attrition) then they may not be replaced.

Warning: Nothing is for sure including my thoughts on your question.

 

[Red Rose Tea]

I would say you and the admins will be relatively untouched by this since your jobs are related to teh # of drivers, delivery packages and pickup stops. If someone quits (attrition) then they may not be replaced.

Warning: Nothing is for sure including my thoughts on your question.

Thanks for your thoughts.

My only concern is if it is determined the office is overstaffed. What will be the determining factor of who will be affected?

 

[Cezanne]

This is an "assumption" or "point of view" I have noticed; people are responding to this as if this is something the company is giving to the affected people. The affected people are being pushed out and UPS is not "giving" anything to the individuals. They are the losers in this program. If you still have a job, you are the winner.

It is all about getting rid of non-value added, redundant positions. The individual is irrelevant except UPS has identified the people they want for each position and try and keep them and terminate the less-desirable people.
UPS is simply doing what other companies have been doing for years.

The problem with your assumption is that most of the targeted "redundant individuals" have the ways and means of hiring the best labor attorney money can buy and file a age or whatever discrimination suit. This buyout would only be effective if the incentives are in place for them to leave happy.

I can see the same thing happening again that occurred in the l995 buyout, we lost alot of good, smart, young and non-conformist management people while retaining most of the knuckledragging yes men.

 

[pretzel_man]

The problem with your assumption is that most of the targeted "redundant individuals" have the ways and means of hiring the best labor attorney money can buy and file a age or whatever discrimination suit. This buyout would only be effective if the incentives are in place for them to leave happy.

I can see the same thing happening again that occurred in the l995 buyout, we lost alot of good, smart, young and non-conformist management people while retaining most of the knuckledragging yes men.

I see a huge difference in this one vs. the previous two. I could be wrong, but this is what I see.

Before, the buyouts offers basically said that if you choose to not take it, you still have a job. They implied you would need to work harder, but the expectation was that a job loss was not iminent.

This time, the message seems to be if the offer is not taken, the is no assurance of a job, and that forced seperation will be happening.

This time, they have said that jobs will be lost. This time, an individual may have to look around and see if they are one of the 1800 poorest performers. If so, the buyout is better than the alternative.

I do not know this for a fact, but the signs point that way. I believe the poorer performers will be let go as compared to what happened previously. Before, the best performers took the buyour because they had alternatives.

We shall see.

P-Man

 

[Six Sides]

The problem with your assumption is that most of the targeted "redundant individuals" have the ways and means of hiring the best labor attorney money can buy and file a age or whatever discrimination suit. This buyout would only be effective if the incentives are in place for them to leave happy.

I can see the same thing happening again that occurred in the l995 buyout, we lost alot of good, smart, young and non-conformist management people while retaining most of the knuckledragging yes men.

The part of this buyout for the age group 55 plus or turning 55 in 2010 is offered to all levels of full time management except the full time sup. When companies offer a buyout it must be planned so it does not have an adverse impact on any one group. So by not including the full time sups that are 55 plus or turning 55 this year, it may be open for a legal battle.

 

[SignificantOwner]

I can see the same thing happening again that occurred in the l995 buyout, we lost alot of good, smart, young and non-conformist management people while retaining most of the knuckledragging yes men.

This offer doesn't extend to young management people.

 

[LED]

They said "As a result of the changes, we will need fewer managers, division managers, region staff managers, and district managers than we currently employ."

P-Man

Seems that UPS has decided to get rid of the high salary people, and yet retain those involved in day to day operations.

Two out of the three on car sups in my center were never drivers. Part-time sups to full-time sups overnight. I would guess that they make far less than a management person that was a full-time driver.

The plan seems to be to bring in young people, pay them a minimal amount, and never let them make the kind of salaries that division, district, and region managers currently make.

The UPS district manager of tomorrow may very well make what a center manager of today makes.

Just my .02 cents.

 

[Just Numbers]

The part of this buyout for the age group 55 plus or turning 55 in 2010 is offered to all levels of full time management except the full time sup. When companies offer a buyout it must be planned so it does not have an adverse impact on any one group. So by not including the full time sups that are 55 plus or turning 55 this year, it may be open for a legal battle.

And a legal battle is probably what they need to wake them up a little. From what I've heard you front line guys (who do all the work anyway) will get more put on you. Freeze your pay, eliminate the 401K match and now this. So this is how UPS spells loyalty. I see a major slowdown or a major just get buy attitude growing...them who will run the company?

 

[pretzel_man]

Seems that UPS has decided to get rid of the high salary people, and yet retain those involved in day to day operations.

Two out of the three on car sups in my center were never drivers. Part-time sups to full-time sups overnight. I would guess that they make far less than a management person that was a full-time driver.

The plan seems to be to bring in young people, pay them a minimal amount, and never let them make the kind of salaries that division, district, and region managers currently make.

The UPS district manager of tomorrow may very well make what a center manager of today makes.

Just my .02 cents.

What they did was eliminate A Lot of districts. Therefore the district staff is not needed. This is not a plan to eliminate higher paid people and replace with lower paid ones.

P-Man

 

[seagull4]

I was in operations as a supervisor and then transfered into BD.Supervisors and managers were excluded and I am aware of managers in BD who are extremely upset over that. A well rounded old guard sup or MGR spent time in all phases of the company. If you read the Q & A it was pointed out supervisors were excluded because they could reduce that rank by attrition. Funny they expect to reduce supervisors by attrition,but not managers. Anybody that implies that there may be another offer forget it.It was made clear that this would be the only offer made. The old culture is gone.The man in the trenches is simply looked at as a grunt person. They could have made the offer for a specific age group in all portions of the small package business and transferred operations people or district people into vacated positions. BD into operations or vice versa.That would have protected the jobs of many younger people who will be given a severance and be forced to leave due to the consolidation.Young people with families. Maybe around 800.

 

[Old Man Jingles]

I was in operations as a supervisor and then transfered into BD.Supervisors and managers were excluded and I am aware of managers in BD who are extremely upset over that. A well rounded old guard sup or MGR spent time in all phases of the company. If you read the Q & A it was pointed out supervisors were excluded because they could reduce that rank by attrition. Funny they expect to reduce supervisors by attrition,but not managers. Anybody that implies that there may be another offer forget it.It was made clear that this would be the only offer made. The old culture is gone.The man in the trenches is simply looked at as a grunt person. They could have made the offer for a specific age group in all portions of the small package business and transferred operations people or district people into vacated positions. BD into operations or vice versa.That would have protected the jobs of many younger people who will be given a severance and be forced to leave due to the consolidation.Young people with families. Maybe around 800.

This is an "assumption" or "point of view" I have noticed; people are responding to this as if this is something the company is giving to the affected people. The affected people are being pushed out and UPS is not "giving" anything to the individuals. They are the losers in this program. If you still have a job, you are the winner.

I never heard anything from the company that indicated that Supervisor positions were looking to be reduced. The "span of control" (SOC) of supervisors to hourly people is already at an acceptable level. The mismatch of the SOC ratio is at the manager and above level - how many sups report to your manager? If it is less than 7 then that is a red flag.

The SRP it is all about getting rid of non-value added, redundant positions. The individual is irrelevant except UPS has identified the people they want for each position and try and keep them and terminate the less-desirable people.
UPS is simply doing what other companies have been doing for years.


Mods - Sorry if these similar posts I have made seem redundant but I am refining them to each poster I respond to.
Geez - everybody's got somebody looking at them!

 

[Six Sides]

This is an "assumption" or "point of view" I have noticed; people are responding to this as if this is something the company is giving to the affected people. The affected people are being pushed out and UPS is not "giving" anything to the individuals. They are the losers in this program. If you still have a job, you are the winner.

I never heard anything from the company that indicated that Supervisor positions were looking to be reduced. The "span of control" (SOC) of supervisors to hourly people is already at an acceptable level. The mismatch of the SOC ratio is at the manager and above level - how many sups report to your manager? If it is less than 7 then that is a red flag.

The SRP it is all about getting rid of non-value added, redundant positions. The individual is irrelevant except UPS has identified the people they want for each position and try and keep them and terminate the less-desirable people.
UPS is simply doing what other companies have been doing for years.


Mods - Sorry if these similar posts I have made seem redundant but I am refining them to each poster I respond to.
Geez - everybody's got somebody looking at them!

Operations center managers at or turning 55 this year will most likely retire. The SPR is added to their retirement package as it is for all full time management in this age group, except the full time sup. So this age group (54+) is being “giving” an extra package.

 

[UPS Lifer]

The part of this buyout for the age group 55 plus or turning 55 in 2010 is offered to all levels of full time management except the full time sup. When companies offer a buyout it must be planned so it does not have an adverse impact on any one group. So by not including the full time sups that are 55 plus or turning 55 this year, it may be open for a legal battle.

Sounds like you are from sue happy California LOL (just kidding)!
But seriously....

You just are not getting it. Drivers and Hub people are not included in this scenario or redundancy and downsizing cuts. AND HOPEFULLY WONT BE IN FUTURE. This is a key point. As stated before... Regions, Districts, Divisions and Centers are being combined so that means your manager may not have a job but your job is still there.

I am reticent to be blunt here, but it seems to me that you are in your 50's and there is some reason why you have not attained the next level... It does not matter what the reason is. You are not a manager so let it go. This does not affect you. YOU and other supervisors are not in the affected group. You will have a real tough time proving the company is discriminating against your group.

Here is what I think is going to happen... **The company is going to identify who they want and where they want them. This is probably already done. The next step is take the offer or take your chances, but your chances are high you will be laid off. **JMO, no inside knowledge, but the company identified a certain age and where they would get the most effective result from the workforce reduction. They have identified who the best candidates are to take on more responsibility from the candidates who are in the age group who are not affected by the reduction. It is also my opinion that there will be transition teams that will help with this process. These people have been identified and will be slotted into areas during and after the transition process has been completed. They are the "bench".



As with any rule, there are always some exceptions but you can be assured that these exceptions will fall into the legal parameters of this downsizing process and will probably remain at the manager level and above.

You can also be guaranteed that there are probably other phases that will kick into gear if the results are not met or the economy gets worse.

This is all going to shake out over a period of months not days.

 

[grgrcr88]

Maybe this is too simple an answer but one could deduce that UPS does not want to get rid of supervisors ... they are needed.
UPS is trying to get rid of positions that are no longer needed.

Hoax, You on the buy out list? How much longer you got?

 

[Mainmast]

Managers will get a buy out.They will get attrition from Supervisors by dumping more work on them until they quit. It is as simple as that.

 

[tieguy]

This is an "assumption" or "point of view" I have noticed; people are responding to this as if this is something the company is giving to the affected people. The affected people are being pushed out and UPS is not "giving" anything to the individuals. They are the losers in this program. If you still have a job, you are the winner.

I never heard anything from the company that indicated that Supervisor positions were looking to be reduced. The "span of control" (SOC) of supervisors to hourly people is already at an acceptable level. The mismatch of the SOC ratio is at the manager and above level - how many sups report to your manager? If it is less than 7 then that is a red flag.

The SRP it is all about getting rid of non-value added, redundant positions. The individual is irrelevant except UPS has identified the people they want for each position and try and keep them and terminate the less-desirable people.
UPS is simply doing what other companies have been doing for years.


Mods - Sorry if these similar posts I have made seem redundant but I am refining them to each poster I respond to.
Geez - everybody's got somebody looking at them!

agreed. I'm kind of amazed that some people view this as some type of lottery that they missed out on. This is a reduction in staffing where the lowest rated managers will be looking for a job.

someone else mentioned that the politicing would start as managers try to position theirselves for those jobs that are left.

Years ago our hub manager read a fictitous pcm to us. It stated that we had lost our biggest customer and that we would soon be cutting jobs by mbc score. He then went into his office and shut the door. I guess its intent was to teach us the importance of achieving our planned results and to teach us that we could be one customer away from losing our jobs.

This exercise is the real thing. The company has decided to cut jobs in a fashion that will keep the best managers and dump the rest. I'm guessing that lower rated divison and district managers will be encouraged to take advantage of the buyout offer.

 

[Six Sides]

agreed. I'm kind of amazed that some people view this as some type of lottery that they missed out on. This is a reduction in staffing where the lowest rated managers will be looking for a job.

someone else mentioned that the politicing would start as managers try to position theirselves for those jobs that are left.

Years ago our hub manager read a fictitous pcm to us. It stated that we had lost our biggest customer and that we would soon be cutting jobs by mbc score. He then went into his office and shut the door. I guess its intent was to teach us the importance of achieving our planned results and to teach us that we could be one customer away from losing our jobs.

This exercise is the real thing. The company has decided to cut jobs in a fashion that will keep the best managers and dump the rest. I'm guessing that lower rated divison and district managers will be encouraged to take advantage of the buyout offer.

If you turn 55 this year you do win the lottery, you get it all the pension, benefits and the SRP cash. I would just like to see the sups given this also.

 

[RoyalFlush]

I see a huge difference in this one vs. the previous two. I could be wrong, but this is what I see.

Before, the buyouts offers basically said that if you choose to not take it, you still have a job. They implied you would need to work harder, but the expectation was that a job loss was not iminent.

This time, the message seems to be if the offer is not taken, the is no assurance of a job, and that forced seperation will be happening.

This time, they have said that jobs will be lost. This time, an individual may have to look around and see if they are one of the 1800 poorest performers. If so, the buyout is better than the alternative.

I do not know this for a fact, but the signs point that way. I believe the poorer performers will be let go as compared to what happened previously. Before, the best performers took the buyour because they had alternatives.

We shall see.

P-Man

This is not a buyout. It's a SRP. The SRP and the 1800 management/admin reductions are not directly connected. 1100 managers are offered the SRP based on age and age alone. After they determine how many took it, they will know how many more need to go. If none take it, they will be getting rid of 1800 people anyway. Just because you are offered the SRP doesn't mean you'll be the one to go. It also doesn’t mean you won't go.

 

[Ms.PacMan]

Our center manager thinks there will be a round 2 which will consist of EBO's for supervisors then demotions for mgrs who did not accept the EBO or severance/termination into the vacated supe positions.