Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Bubblehead" data-source="post: 2538197" data-attributes="member: 14176">I&#039;ll take that bet and I will raise you.Not only do half to 3/4 not want the full time opportunity, they don&#039;t even stay a year as a part timer.Turnover is now UPS&#039;s biggest problem in regards to part time hiring.They just can&#039;t keep new hires and admit that training them is now a bigger expense than the wages mitigated in higher wages through raises for those who stay.My building actually has management on staff who&#039;s sole duties are in regards to part time retention, the newest initiative being college tuition reimbursement.Many on this site speak of not being able intent FT driving positions from the part time ranks in their buildings, a notion I most certainly rejected until I saw it for myself in one the buildings in my own Local.Management claimed they actually lobbied the Labor Department to waive the one year requirement in order to hire PTer&#039;s as drivers in this building prior to Peak Season this year in this building.This was reportedly due to a lack of interest from seniority part time employees.One of the damnedest thing I&#039;ve seen in my 30+ years here.I&#039;m with you in part though, while were tweaking things.Instead of combining the part time and full time lists, let&#039;s just get rid of the 6-1 FT hiring ratio and offer all jobs intented through the part time ranks, before ever hiring a single person from off the street?Then would it be fair, at least going forward?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Bubblehead, post: 2538197, member: 14176"] I'll take that bet and I will raise you. Not only do half to 3/4 [I]not[/I] want the full time opportunity, they don't even stay a year as a part timer. Turnover is now UPS's biggest problem in regards to part time hiring. They just can't keep new hires and admit that training them is now a bigger expense than the wages mitigated in higher wages through raises for those who stay. My building actually has management on staff who's sole duties are in regards to part time retention, the newest initiative being college tuition reimbursement. Many on this site speak of not being able intent FT driving positions from the part time ranks in their buildings, a notion I most certainly rejected until I saw it for myself in one the buildings in my own Local. Management claimed they actually lobbied the Labor Department to waive the one year requirement in order to hire PTer's as drivers in this building prior to Peak Season this year in this building. This was reportedly due to a lack of interest from seniority part time employees. One of the damnedest thing I've seen in my 30+ years here. I'm with you in part though, while were tweaking things. Instead of combining the part time and full time lists, let's just get rid of the 6-1 FT hiring ratio and offer all jobs intented through the part time ranks, before ever hiring a single person from off the street? Then would it be fair, at least going forward? [/QUOTE]

Verification