Future of PVD

[brownIEman]

Grievances filed for all hours worked by the SCABS...By Business Agents on behalf of all members. No need to strike, just pay up and stop setting up a parallel workforce..
Your BS about the strike destroying UPS is just that, and everyone knows it.

It very well could be BS. But if so, would you mind telling me why UPS had 80% of the US small package market in 1997 and has just under 24% of that market now?

 

[brownIEman]

Grievances filed for all hours worked by the SCABS...By Business Agents on behalf of all members. No need to strike, just pay up and stop setting up a parallel workforce..
Your BS about the strike destroying UPS is just that, and everyone knows it.

So if you win the grievances will the union refund the initiation and dues they are charging PVDs in those locals? Or do you just want to leave the union open for a class action lawsuit?

 

[35years]

Just an aside...
In 2000 UPS CEO Jim Kelly received total compensation of $1.58 million.
Chump change compared to Abney's $11.7 Million last year...A ten fold increase.

Drivers made $23.05 an hour in 2000, we don't make $230 an hour now.

So don't cry to us about excessive wages.

 

[35years]

So if you win the grievances will the union refund the initiation and dues they are charging PVDs in those locals? Or do you just want to leave the union open for a class action lawsuit?

How about we just win the grievance and stop setting up a parallel work force.

 

[Box Ox]

Now hold on on the less than union wages - Are they? Remember, you cannot compare them to a top rate driver - They just started, most of them won't even drive for 30 days. So, if they are paid more than a brand new pre-seniority driver (and I would add in their mileage compensation because UPS pays for the pre-seniority drivers vehicle) then they would not be at lower than union wages. Unless you are going to come back with Pension and H&W pay

Passing off all maintenance/depreciation/financing/licensing/insurance costs of the delivery vehicle outside of standard IRS reimbursement rate to the PVD does effectively pull their net wages down. And the Company is paying less. They don't even have to pay as much as they would for a rental truck.

Yes, in a bad economy UPS will likely lower their pay, but not that much.

Why not? They've got no set pay rate in the Contract.

The bigger issue with PVD's is not at UPS. If the concept can be adapted to wide scale delivery then a lot of the volume and therefore jobs for union drivers would divert to non union PVDs, but they would not be working for UPS.

Why not? Just take out initiation fees/Union dues and UPS is apparently in the clear.

Personally I really don't see it being scalable enough to be effective for massive volume distribution, but I could be wrong.

Could be. That's a problem.

 

[brownIEman]

Why not? Just take out initiation fees/Union dues and UPS is apparently in the clear.

That only works in the current contract during peak season. If the concept works, other carriers will be using it year round. Amazon is already using it on a limited basis.

 

[brownIEman]

How about we just win the grievance and stop setting up a parallel work force.

You won't win the grievance. They are seasonal employees under the peak season language in the contract. They pay dues in some locals.

What are you prepared to do about the parallel work force Amazon is setting up, and the other companies that will undoubtedly follow if the concept can be scaled?

 

[brownIEman]

Just an aside...
In 2000 UPS CEO Jim Kelly received total compensation of $1.58 million.
Chump change compared to Abney's $11.7 Million last year...A ten fold increase.

Drivers made $23.05 an hour in 2000, we don't make $230 an hour now.

So don't cry to us about excessive wages.

I said nothing about excessive wages.

I merely mentioned that UPS has lost about 56% of its market share, and I will now add most of the loss is due to UPS' higher pricing (according to customers) which is a direct result of the higher cost structure. Imagine how many dues paying Teamster employees would be on the payroll if UPS was still at 80% share of the market.

 

[Box Ox]

That only works in the current contract during peak season.

Wouldn't PVD's be allowed under future contracts as well unless the Company agrees to include new language expressly prohibiting them going forward? All the Company has to do right now is make the PVD pay initiation fees and dues to the Union. What's a future contract gonna do unless UPS trades an express prohibition on them for a giveaway from the Union?

UPS has lost about 56% of its market share, and I will now add most of the loss is due to UPS' higher pricing (according to customers) which is a direct result of the higher cost structure.

Maybe, but that doesn't give UPS a free pass to make bad faith maneuvers around the Union contract.

Imagine how many dues paying Teamster employees would be on the payroll if UPS was still at 80% share of the market.

I don't think the relatively lower ongoing dues associated with packing UPS with PVDs to regain market share would be much consolation or strengthening force to the Union or the hourlies it represents.

 

[brownIEman]

Wouldn't PVD's be allowed under future contracts as well unless the Company agrees to include new language expressly prohibiting them going forward? All the Company has to do right now is make the PVD pay initiation fees and dues to the Union. What's a future contract gonna do unless UPS trades an express prohibition on them for a giveaway from the Union?

No. UPS is implementing the PVD's under the seasonal driver language. The justification for using them under the contract is that they are allowed under the peak season language. The same language that allows them during peak forbids them outside of peak. That is my understanding anyway.

Maybe, but that doesn't give UPS a free pass to make bad faith maneuvers around the Union contract.

I agree with you 100% on this. I would point out however that once UPS reaches 0% of market share, bad faith maneuvers and the contract itself with both be entirely moot.

I don't think the relatively lower ongoing dues associated with packing UPS with PVDs to regain market share would be much consolation or strengthening force to the Union or the hourlies it represents.

Again, I agree. I was not trying to suggest that PVD's, even year round would allow UPS to regain significant market share. That ship has sailed. UPS tried to rein in it's out of control cost growth differential to its competitors back in 1997 - and that effort failed spectacularly.
Since then, UPS has attempted to control cost growth in other ways such as reducing non-union staffing and compensation and through automation and now PVDs at peak. But those are all really just fingers in the dike, they serve only to delay the inevitable. I really believe the leaders at UPS are content running a business model that is profitable but not competitive at this point. They seem to be fine with just riding it out for however many decades it will take for the competition to erode that last 24% of market share.

My comment was purely hypothetical. Had UPS and the Teamsters been able to come to an agreement that would cap cost growth, and UPS held onto the market share, it would be around 3 times the size it is today with about 3 times the number of drives and other dues paying union employees.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

The Union disagrees; Thus non-Union terms.
Nice try though...
SCABS

The basis for their disagreement is that fact that they are using their personal vehicles-----this would not be an issue if they were driving a U-Haul.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Hasn't a prominent member of this forum been predicting a two tiered wage system for new FT hires for as long as we can remember?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

It very well could be BS. But if so, would you mind telling me why UPS had 80% of the US small package market in 1997 and has just under 24% of that market now?

Higher operating costs?

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Just an aside...
In 2000 UPS CEO Jim Kelly received total compensation of $1.58 million.
Chump change compared to Abney's $11.7 Million last year...A ten fold increase.

Drivers made $23.05 an hour in 2000, we don't make $230 an hour now.

So don't cry to us about excessive wages.

The bulk of the increase was stock related.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

How about we just win the grievance and stop setting up a parallel work force.

Too late.

 

[brownIEman]

Hasn't a prominent member of this forum been predicting a two tiered wage system for new FT hires for as long as we can remember?

Now that you mention it, I believe such a member has predicted that very thing. Dude has cute grandkids too.

But personally I don't think that will happen till the very end times. The union will never go for it until UPS is actually operating in the red and circling the drain, and by that point it will be too late, just as it was for the US steel industry in the 70's and GM in '09 (I don't think there will be a TARP for UPS)

 

[3 done 3 to go]

PVDs where i am are lifesavers

like an EU4 vassal swarm for anyone in trouble

We have 2 PVD. We are also 2 for 2 with PVD in accidents in the first snow. Building is charged with accidents. The work that was pulled. Was delivered by the normal driver in both cases. Wondering if they will be around today?

 

[3 done 3 to go]

Too late.

No. Not yet. Only if they will be used after the January rush. Then it will be the end of ft drivers.

 

[The Driver]

Now that you mention it, I believe such a member has predicted that very thing. Dude has cute grandkids too.

But personally I don't think that will happen till the very end times. The union will never go for it until UPS is actually operating in the red and circling the drain, and by that point it will be too late, just as it was for the US steel industry in the 70's and GM in '09 (I don't think there will be a TARP for UPS)

God, you’re right. I’m going to forward my paycheck back to the company. They need help wasting money on Orion 2.0 and more supervisors sitting around watching YouTube 70% of the year.

 

[brownIEman]

God, you’re right. I’m going to forward my paycheck back to the company. They need help wasting money on Orion 2.0 and more supervisors sitting around watching YouTube 70% of the year.

Well, ok. You can do that if you want.
Won't help much so I would suggest you keep your pay and make sure you save a lot of it. It's decades yet before we reach the drain circling imo.
Giving back your paycheck would I think, be an ignorant thing to do. Maybe even more ignorant than assuming one knows the results of a massive nationwide program from just one's own limited and biased view, or that one knows what an entire workgroup one is not part of does with 70% of their time.