After reading this thread, I see how it could make unloaders work harder. The packages would still have to be loaded in the nose of the 58 foot trailers. If they have to walk 5 to 8 feet in a 53 footer now, they will be walking another 5 feet on top of that to get to the rollers. I also get the company wanting to be more profitable, with less feeder work in the yards.Why wouldn't you maximize what one employee can do? That's just good business sense. It gives the company the ability to carry that many more packages, which means increasing revenue for no extra cost. It's free money if you can do it. And if you don't, oh well, you needed to load something in there anyways.
Work you harder? So the extra 10 mins it's going to take to process that trailer is making you work harder? No. It's making you work a little longer. But you also are not doing it for free. You bet they do it to load more volume. It's more efficient. 1 58 footer vs 2 or possibly 3 pups. You're tying up one asset, vs 2 or 3.
We are in the business of getting packages from A to B. Not in the business of providing more union jobs. That's part of the reason they do this kind of stuff. To minimize the amount of personnel needed while maximizing profits. It's called running a business.
People already just throw boxes to the back and build a "throw wall" in front of them.... build it halfway up and keep throwing boxes over the top. The company is going to need to upgrade their facilities too if they want longer trailers to work out.After reading this thread, I see how it could make unloaders work harder. The packages would still have to be loaded in the nose of the 58 foot trailers. If they have to walk 5 to 8 feet in a 53 footer now, they will be walking another 5 feet on top of that to get to the rollers. I also get the company wanting to be more profitable, with less feeder work in the yards.
General disclaimer - contents may settle during shipment.People already just throw boxes to the back and build a "throw wall" in front of them.... build it halfway up and keep throwing boxes over the top. The company is going to need to upgrade their facilities too if they want longer trailers to work out.
It would have to be the other way around I would think? Unless the 53' doesn't have a pintle hook.I was mistaken..
a 48' and a 53' on back
Too much Mexican food, or someone spiked their dinner with prunes?Package drivers have "routes", Feeder drivers have "the runs".
And an awful lot of Ho-Ho's as well!Damn thats a lot of twinkies
It would have to be the other way around I would think? Unless the 53' doesn't have a pintle hook.
I was leaving open the possibility that you would prove me wrongyou said the 53's don't have the pintle.
A friend of mine confirmed it.
I was leaving open the possibility that you would prove me wrong
Prior to 1991 you could by trailers for storage only. I see a few survivors around here also. Now they get crushed.....Speaking of trailer apparently UPS sells the old ones and doesn't scrap them like they do package cars I saw a couple of ones looked like they where painted pink then paint over with white paint by the new owner. There was 4 of them like this at this place.View attachment 38698 View attachment 38699
I think we will see 33' pups before 55' long boxes. There is writing in the transportation bill to allow 33' pups it just needs approved.Well this is fantastic news. Our hub with its 45-door primary has exactly 8 Extendos long enough to adequately handle 53' trailers (all but one of which have been installed in the past year and with no additional replacements slated for the next 12 months at least). It just gives me the warm and fuzzies all over to think that 55' trailers might be lurking in the future when we're running 4 sorts a day on equipment designed for 45' trailers.