I heard something very disturbing today that I'm hoping someone can refute. Does anyone know if Division level and up are on a different benefits package than we are on as front line supervisors and managers. I am really hoping that this is just a rumor and that we don't find out that it is true. It would certainly add a new twist to this benefits discussion.
Management that smokes, 3 days until cold turkey
- Thread starter texan
- Start date
Catatonic
Nine Lives
Staff Level (Level 19 and below) are just worker bees like other management.
It would not surprise me if Level 20 and above had different benefits but I have not heard that.
Pretzelman can answer that for you since he is a Level 18.
Bucket of Boltz
Active Member
All levels of management, from part-time supervisor to CEO,have the same healthcare benefits package.
constructively dissatisfi
Well-Known Member
P o
UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)
Well-Known Member
Please tell me how this new policy does not make sense from a purely business perspective.
Bagels
Family Leave Fridays!!!
Oh, I thought you were a driver.
I agree that many management positions at UPS would make more at other companies if the individual is a top performer.
That is why I sincerely believe it is UPS upper management's desire (HR at least) that people only work for UPS for 3 - 5 years and then move to another company.
In a class I had last semester, we had a "guest speaker" (the husband of the professor) who is the founder/owner of a medium-sized global company. He talked about the challenges of USA-based companies doing business overseas; he said that in the USA, most companies had a 'move up or move on' policy and that the average Gen X/Y worker stays with his company only a brief time; in Europe & South America, once you had a job -- even at the management level -- it was thought to be a right to possess it for life. He wanted to expand operations in Sao Paulo, but said that US companies needed fresh ideas and innovation to keep them competitive, since they can't compete by cost. I didn't know this, but apparently workers in places such as India demand higher rates of pay from US companies. Still must be cheap, otherwise companies with poor reputations like Comcast would't be further increasing their call center presence in India.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
It was the way it was communicated more than anything.
Also, it is another cut in benefits for non-union employees.
For some husband/wife teams, this will decrease their total compensation by as much as $800 per month and for most, an actual reduction in take-home pay by as much as $800 per month.
It's another benefit enhancement that helps the company but not the employee (if impacted).
On the good side, employees not impacted should not see an increase in the cost of their healthcare purchase.
beentheredonethat
Well-Known Member
Short term you are right. It does make sense from a purely business perspective.
In the past we used to hire from within and people stayed with the company for their career. We were (and are) a very successful company. We were unique in many attributes first from being a privately owned company (that changed). It seems that UPS is looking at all the other companies and saying yeah, yeah.. Let's do that too. I think long term that will bite us in the butt.
It reminds me of a chapter in one of Peter Lynch's book ("Beating the STreet", "One up on Wall Street") I'm not sure which one. He was the guy in charge of the Fidelity Magellan fund during some of it's most successful years. He talked about how a lot of Mom and Pop banks had very good fundamentals and had been in business for years. He talked how many of them saw the benefits of risky loans that other banks were doing and the profit it generated and decided to go the "Me too" route. Most of them went under. He looked for the banks that stayed the course, offered reasonable risk loans to their clients and continued to make a reasonable rate of return. Those banks survived the big meltdown and eventually thrived.
I see UPS as one of those banks that is looking for the short term gains (which we are getting). But I see that we will be paying for it later. My opinion is their are a ton of mgmt in their mid 40's and over who have a lot of time in with the company. Most mgmt we have now under that age we've had a lot of turnover with. I see that in 10+ years as our seasoned mgmt team retires we will have a serious vacuum and we will be hurting. It will take a while, then the mgmt team will try to figure out why and what happened.
That's just my 2 cents. I'd rather us continue to be the tortoise and win the race vs being a jackrabbit and showing great results but eventually petering out.
beentheredonethat
Well-Known Member
I agree that the communication was very very poor this time. Not that UPS has done a great job lately in communicating "enhancements" to us lately. But the whole line of you talked, we listened and then telling smokers then had til Sept 1st instead of July 1st was sad.
Truthfully, the smoking penalty I partially agree with. However, I think $1800 is steep. I could see if they told people that we will access a $600 penalty Year 1, $1200 year 2, $1800 year 3 then at least it would be gradual and push people to quit smoking but not such a huge spike in immediate cost to them.
I also see the writing on the wall for other things, (Weight, High risk activities etc). Those will eventually be enhanced too.
The thing that is most disturbing is kicking the spouse off of UPS insurance. That is just soooo wrong. Granted it doesn't impact me right now. But I still don't think it's the right thing to do.
The thing that bothered me the most is that UPS just signed an agreement with "our employees" and for 5 years they get contractually better insurance (at lower cost) then we do. That's ridiculous.
LongTimeComing
Air Ops Pro
They've had better insurance than us the past 5 years too.
I think we need to be careful on what we make noise about. I am a smoker and I do not fault them in the slightest for wanting to force the issue. Quite frankly, it'll probably help my efforts in quitting. But just because I smoke doesn't mean that I don't acknowledge the fact that smoking and tobacco related health problems cause the industry billions every year.
I DO have a problem with the fact that they are considering e-cigarettes as a 'tobacco product' and will enforce the surcharge if you use them. That is plain old short sightedness and blissful ignorance on whomever wrote these policies. There is NOTHING tobacco related in an e-cig. E-cigarettes are just as much a smoking cessation method as the gum, patches, or pills. They kept me from smoking real cigarettes for 3 months until I ran out of the fluid and have been too lazy to order more. Everything in an e-cig is some sort of medical grade or food grade, FDA approved substance that is deemed ok for ingestion. E-cigs are what I planned on using to be able to be free from REAL cigarettes by Sept. 1st...
But to my point...we ultimately need to make as much noise as possible about the "Spouse Clause"....After everything that has slowly been stripped away from our management compensations, they decide to decimate the ONE thing that we could use as a solid reason to validate WHY we decide to commit so much of our time, stress, and efforts towards this company. "At least my family is taken care of".....no longer for many people. Personally, this doesn't affect me FOR NOW....as my wife works for a small medical practice and doesn't get offered coverage. But the implications of this and the thousands of people that will be negatively impacted is unacceptable. This is the biggest kick in the nuts that UPS has given the management since things have been going down hill....yet they fail to address the mountains of negative feedback about it so far.
Again, if we try to make some noise about anything, we need to focus on the spouse coverage problem and let the smoking surcharge be as it may...
I think we need to be careful on what we make noise about. I am a smoker and I do not fault them in the slightest for wanting to force the issue. Quite frankly, it'll probably help my efforts in quitting. But just because I smoke doesn't mean that I don't acknowledge the fact that smoking and tobacco related health problems cause the industry billions every year.
I DO have a problem with the fact that they are considering e-cigarettes as a 'tobacco product' and will enforce the surcharge if you use them. That is plain old short sightedness and blissful ignorance on whomever wrote these policies. There is NOTHING tobacco related in an e-cig. E-cigarettes are just as much a smoking cessation method as the gum, patches, or pills. They kept me from smoking real cigarettes for 3 months until I ran out of the fluid and have been too lazy to order more. Everything in an e-cig is some sort of medical grade or food grade, FDA approved substance that is deemed ok for ingestion. E-cigs are what I planned on using to be able to be free from REAL cigarettes by Sept. 1st...
But to my point...we ultimately need to make as much noise as possible about the "Spouse Clause"....After everything that has slowly been stripped away from our management compensations, they decide to decimate the ONE thing that we could use as a solid reason to validate WHY we decide to commit so much of our time, stress, and efforts towards this company. "At least my family is taken care of".....no longer for many people. Personally, this doesn't affect me FOR NOW....as my wife works for a small medical practice and doesn't get offered coverage. But the implications of this and the thousands of people that will be negatively impacted is unacceptable. This is the biggest kick in the nuts that UPS has given the management since things have been going down hill....yet they fail to address the mountains of negative feedback about it so far.
Again, if we try to make some noise about anything, we need to focus on the spouse coverage problem and let the smoking surcharge be as it may...
Lineandinitial
Legio patria nostra
"Financial rewards are not enough. People, whether managers or workers, whether in business or outside, need rewards of prestige and pride.”
– Peter friend. Drucker The Practice of Management
I came to UPS because they were better than the others. I was recruited by HR to come here. At this phase of my career, I can't believe I have the attitude and concerns that I do. My reports can't focus on their responsibilities because they (we) are constantly told to do more with less and do it faster and better.
No one cooperates or supports one another. It is a daily struggle with no satisfaction or sense of accomplishment at the end of the day. It just keeps coming............
I came to UPS because they were better than the others. I was recruited by HR to come here. At this phase of my career, I can't believe I have the attitude and concerns that I do. My reports can't focus on their responsibilities because they (we) are constantly told to do more with less and do it faster and better.
No one cooperates or supports one another. It is a daily struggle with no satisfaction or sense of accomplishment at the end of the day. It just keeps coming............
Catatonic
Nine Lives
That's because as non-Union employees, you have no bargaining power.
UPS wants people to leave and when you leave (if you are replaced) you are replaced with a person that is glad to be at UPS and has not had anything taken away from them. Lower expectations.
TxRoadDawg
Well-Known Member
lower expectations, lower pay, lower skill set. much easier to convert to drone status.
Anonymous 10
Guest
I love it
Jackburton
Gone Fish'n
I hope it keeps management alive longer, that way you guys can stay here forever with us drivers.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
TxRoadDawg
Well-Known Member
As Hoaxsters voice echoes fore off the 9th tee.......I'm there with you in spirit.
Catatonic
Nine Lives
I don't golf ... I play tennis, hike and take photos.
