Management morale has gone completely to sh**

[beentheredonethat]

Hoaxster....I actually feel very bad for many of the newer full-time supervisors at UPS (they tell me no pensions...significant health premiums, etc.) The young FT supervisors that I talk with plan on using UPS as a stepping stone to a better job. Excellent resume builder in my opinion.

I ​sincerely think that is the plan from Corporate HR.
Consultants were telling UPS this is what they should do in the mid-90's and it seems to have come to fruition.

UPS is just another Corporation and that is the way of corporations.
Not wrong ... just different.

Short term the strategy makes sense. However, long term I don't think it does. However, I think our goal should be to have it somewhere in the middle. BY this I mean, we should have some positions at the local level that are relatively speaking temporary in nature, with natural turnover. We should also have a balance of seasoned veterans. We currently have the balance since a lot of folks in their mid 40's to 50's are hanging on waiting for retirement. The problem is how do you have some amount of turnover while keeping the best and losing the least best?

I see a lot of good people leaving for other jobs that now pay better with less stress then UPS.

I don't have a solution to this yet. Just real concerned the way things are heading.

 

[InsideUPS]

Short term the strategy makes sense. However, long term I don't think it does. However, I think our goal should be to have it somewhere in the middle. BY this I mean, we should have some positions at the local level that are relatively speaking temporary in nature, with natural turnover. We should also have a balance of seasoned veterans. We currently have the balance since a lot of folks in their mid 40's to 50's are hanging on waiting for retirement. The problem is how do you have some amount of turnover while keeping the best and losing the least best?

I see a lot of good people leaving for other jobs that now pay better with less stress then UPS.

I don't have a solution to this yet. Just real concerned the way things are heading.

Not politically correct however IMHO, this issue of keeping the best and losing the "least best" is somewhat complicated by UPS's recent hiring policy of have a "sexually oriented diverse work group".... You know....sort of why UPS stopped supporting the Boy Scouts. While I do believe that diversity is good, I believe that only those that are truly qualified in those diverse work groups should be put in charge of operations, etc... I have encountered extremely difficult issues in my building because of this hiring practice. Once again....NOT against diversity....only against the concept of placement because of orientation rather than qualifications and/or ability.....

 

[curiousbrain]

Not politically correct however IMHO, this issue of keeping the best and losing the "least best" is somewhat complicated by UPS's recent hiring policy of have a "sexually oriented diverse work group".... You know....sort of why UPS stopped supporting the Boy Scouts. While I do believe that diversity is good, I believe that only those that are truly qualified in those diverse work groups should be put in charge of operations, etc... I have encountered extremely difficult issues in my building because of this hiring practice. Once again....NOT against diversity....only against the concept of placement because of orientation rather than qualifications and/or ability.....

I believe you're looking for a "meritocracy".

 

['Lord Brown's bidding']

I ​sincerely think that is the plan from Corporate HR.
Consultants were telling UPS this is what they should do in the mid-90's and it seems to have come to fruition.

UPS is just another Corporation and that is the way of corporations.
Not wrong ... just different.

Why is this a good thing for corporations, to be stepping stones? How does this help their bottom line? On a related note, in another thread you mentioned how the board is actively pursuing a new CEO from outside ranks? How is this a good thing? Unless they are a pro from the industry, how can they help UPS? I get fresh perspectives, but is there a point where the higher-ups realize the plans drawn up by people who really have no idea what goes on outside really stink for the operations they were drawn up for?

 

['Lord Brown's bidding']

Everyone is quick to blame I.E., but I got the feeling from a recent post that part of the problem is operations' mgmt not being willing to put their necks on the line by going against the flawed plan, so that they aren't culpable. The formulas and algorithms and all that jazz that I.E. comes up with and uses are really incomplete; they need tweaking to fit real world conditions. They weren't meant to be the end all, I do not believe. Is there anyway the balance of power can be shifted back somewhat to operations, if some were willing to stand up?

 

[Catatonic]

Everyone is quick to blame I.E., but I got the feeling from a recent post that part of the problem is operations' mgmt not being willing to put their necks on the line by going against the flawed plan, so that they aren't culpable. The formulas and algorithms and all that jazz that I.E. comes up with and uses are really incomplete; they need tweaking to fit real world conditions. They weren't meant to be the end all, I do not believe. Is there anyway the balance of power can be shifted back somewhat to operations, if some were willing to stand up?

It's like Israel in the Middle East.
They can win a war a hundred times but only lose once.

 

[beentheredonethat]

Why is this a good thing for corporations, to be stepping stones? How does this help their bottom line? On a related note, in another thread you mentioned how the board is actively pursuing a new CEO from outside ranks? How is this a good thing? Unless they are a pro from the industry, how can they help UPS? I get fresh perspectives, but is there a point where the higher-ups realize the plans drawn up by people who really have no idea what goes on outside really stink for the operations they were drawn up for?

For a similar reason why many if not most teamsters did not want a different pay scale for Old\new Drivers. Higher pay drivers would think they would have a target on their back due to thier higher pay rate and more vacations. Newer supervisors have a lower pay rate, they have less vacations etc.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

For a similar reason why many if not most teamsters did not want a different pay scale for Old\new Drivers. Higher pay drivers would think they would have a target on their back due to thier higher pay rate and more vacations. Newer supervisors have a lower pay rate, they have less vacations etc.

And less brains!!!I think...they don't...lol

 

['Lord Brown's bidding']

For a similar reason why many if not most teamsters did not want a different pay scale for Old\new Drivers. Higher pay drivers would think they would have a target on their back due to thier higher pay rate and more vacations. Newer supervisors have a lower pay rate, they have less vacations etc.

I know many drivers feel that way, but the truth is most senior, well-paid drivers deliver in such a way as to run circles around a new-hire when it comes to proficiency, and make less mistakes. They may cost more, but in the end their experience and expertise should improve UPS' bottom line, rather than hinder it.

However, thank you beenthere, as now I am beginning to see being a Driver Service Provider, or a productive one anyway, is a "skillset"; it is probably easier (not saying easy, though) to replace lower level supervisory positions than it is to replace an experienced driver who is productive.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

I know many drivers feel that way, but the truth is most senior, well-paid drivers deliver in such a way as to run circles around a new-hire when it comes to proficiency, and make less mistakes. They may cost more, but in the end their experience and expertise should improve UPS' bottom line, rather than hinder it.

However, thank you beenthere, as now I am beginning to see being a Driver Service Provider, or a productive one anyway, is a "skillset"; it is probably easier (not saying easy, though) to replace lower level supervisory positions than it is to replace an experienced driver who is productive.

There is no doubt that a productive veteran service provider is an asset; however, with the "dumbing down" of all hourly positions, including driver, within the company, it is not that hard to get a new driver up to speed. This past Peak I had a young college student as my helper. By the end of the first day he felt comfortable delivering residential stops by himself. By the end of the second day he had no problem delivering basic commercials stops by himself and by the end of the week he felt comfortable with any delivery situation that I put him in, including mulitple left-ats and multiple check COD's. I would have had no problem letting this kid run a delivery area all by himself after just one week of training. Granted, he would not have been nearly as productive, but the work would have gotten done and for much less than $32/hr.

The four year progression is a precursor of things to come. Combine this with the technology that is in place (PAS/EDD) and being implemented (ORION) and you can see why I keep predicting a two-tiered wage structure for new FT hires in the near future (2018?). FedEx Ground has proven that the work can be done in an acceptable manner for about 1/3-1/2 the cost. Five year progression with a lower top out rate and the company will still turn away applicants.

 

[Catatonic]

However, thank you beenthere, as now I am beginning to see being a Driver Service Provider, or a productive one anyway, is a "skillset"; it is probably easier (not saying easy, though) to replace lower level supervisory positions than it is to replace an experienced driver who is productive.

Both are rather easily replaced and both are at least 95% productive within 6 months.
That is the reason I never understood the 2, 3 or 4 year progression period.
Maybe 20 or 30 years ago but not these days with the technology to assist the driver and the supervisor.

 

[beentheredonethat]

Hoax, the progression is simply a way to help lower costs for UPS. As with anything, there's a finite amount the company can give, having a progression allows a higher top rate, or more money towards HW or more money for pension etc. Although, I agree, in the beginning it was based more upon getting a new driver to speed and to offset their lower productivity by having a lower costs. Although somewhat true still, it has morphed to primarily lower cost.

 

[Catatonic]

Hoax, the progression is simply a way to help lower costs for UPS. As with anything, there's a finite amount the company can give, having a progression allows a higher top rate, or more money towards HW or more money for pension etc. Although, I agree, in the beginning it was based more upon getting a new driver to speed and to offset their lower productivity by having a lower costs. Although somewhat true still, it has morphed to primarily lower cost.

I understand that but as an impacted employee, it makes no sense.
The 1 year employee is just as efficient and effective as a 4 year employee.

​We are in agreement ... I just wanted to make sure my point was understood.

In management, there is an evaluation process but in driving there is none.

 

[oldngray]

I understand that but as an impacted employee, it makes no sense.
The 1 year employee is just as efficient and effective as a 4 year employee.

​We are in agreement ... I just wanted to make sure my point was understood.

In management, there is an evaluation process but in driving there is none.

A more experienced driver is still worth more but with new technology like ORION that is changing so everyone is just an interchangeable number that can be plugged into a route. Like the PAS system has dumbed down preload. But real world experience still trumps new technology for the near future. Service will be worse but employee costs will be cheaper with less training required.

 

[Limper]

I understand that but as an impacted employee, it makes no sense.
The 1 year employee is just as efficient and effective as a 4 year employee.

​We are in agreement ... I just wanted to make sure my point was understood.

In management, there is an evaluation process but in driving there is none.

No driver evaluation process?
On a daily basis, UPS measures my stops per hour, pkg car idle time, pick-up compliance, Orion
compliance, number of back-ups, speed of those back-ups, and an ability to recite their Depth of
Knowledge.

 

[Catatonic]

No driver evaluation process?
On a daily basis, UPS measures my stops per hour, pkg car idle time, pick-up compliance, Orion
compliance, number of back-ups, speed of those back-ups, and an ability to recite their Depth of
Knowledge.

I ​recommend you observe discussions where you don't understand what is being discussed.
That way, you don't appear to ignorant.

The evaluation process for management determines whether one gets a raise and how much and what grade that person is in.
It's called merit based pay rate.
​You want that for drivers?

 

[Limper]

I ​recommend you observe discussions where you don't understand what is being discussed.
That way, you don't appear to ignorant.

The evaluation process for management determines whether one gets a raise and how much and what grade that person is in.
It's called merit based pay rate.
​You want that for drivers?

Yes.......I would. Drivers with consistent excess hours only hurt the rest of us.
​

 

[Catatonic]

Yes.......I would. Drivers with consistent excess hours only hurt the rest of us.
​

WoW!
You must hate the Union!

 

[Limper]

WoW! You must hate the Union!

No, just someone is concerned about competitiveness and market share. Management has a hand in this.
Our Take Charge/sales lead committee hasn't met in months. The center manager tells me she's got too many things
on her plate, Orion enforcement being the biggest culprit.

 

[Tough Guy]

The progression system is a slap in the face for new drivers coming up. You shouldn't have to wait 3 (perhaps soon to be 4) years to get to top rate, when most people already have to wait 5,6,7, or more years just to have a chance to get the job to begin with.