Tensions at UPS are brewing between leadership and unionized drivers as the new CEO doubles down on drivers who make deliveries in their own cars

[Wally]

No paid vacations or paid holidays...

They are temps. They work 3 or 4 weeks, unless the weather is bad, then less.

 

[Wally]

It's a way in,a toehold if you will. PVD's are just one prong of a Multi Pronged attack on Full Time Jobs.:The new cameras are designed to terminate drivers in the name of" safety". Make the job horrible with long hours so old timers will retire. Us e PVD's to reduce the amount of Full Time drivers needed.

Walk the walk union, and none of this happens. Might get messy.

 

[Jkloc420]

R pvd's came in and unloaded and sorted trucks after everyone left

 

[BeefiestMass]

Way better than having a helper.

 

[Jkloc420]

R union employees would sort their stuff into a semi and then the pvds came in unloaded that truck and sent the stuff to the box line after the pvds sorted it to the proper place, they would just drive their truck or cars right into the building, load up and leave

 

[brownIEman]

PVDs probably provide less in the way of direct cost savings than they do agility and flexibility in operations. The fact that UPS is built around the stability provided by the NMA, which is a direct roadblock to flexibility, UPS is looking for ways to compete. I get that this one is fraught with abuse potential, but as far as I know the only way to use PVDs outside of peak is to pay them top driver rate. The notorious tight fists that run UPS are not going to pay that for lower performance unless they are getting something out of it.

And no, screwing the union is not anything they're getting out of it. They'd be happy to screw the union certainly, but not if it costs any money.

 

[Method Mensch]

No way they save money on PVDs...at least not in my center. They aren’t factoring in the fact that a driver still has to go to that area to deliver the larger packages, go back to fix their mistakes...and the simple fact that it takes a PVD 10 hours to do what a package car can do in 2 hours.

There are other factors to consider, not just wages. The PVDs do not have benefits. There's no health and welfare payments, no pension payments, and there are no work rules ( such as seniority). Also important is that since PVDs use their own vehicle, UPS does not tie money up in purchasing and maintaining the vehicle, like they do our package cars. They do not have to pay the mechanics and body shop guys who work for UPS.

While less efficient than us drivers, the cost could be less. The most worrisome thing to me is that now that they've used PVDs, they have a baseline to refer to regarding how much money they made or lost using PVDs. They are now armed with the information on how to run the business without us. Sure, if we strike, it'll hurt UPS, but chances are that throwing waves of PVDs at the volume and adjusting pay to what Amazon has, for example, they may well survive without us.

We should not allow PVDs outside of peak, or it will eviscerate our jobs. This is a strike issue.

 

[silenze]

While less efficient than us drivers, the cost could be less. The most worrisome thing to me is that now that they've used PVDs, they have a baseline to refer to regarding how much money they made or lost using PVDs. They are now armed with the information on how to run the business without us. Sure, if we strike, it'll hurt UPS, but chances are that throwing waves of PVDs at the volume and adjusting pay to what Amazon has, for example, they may well survive without us.

We should not allow PVDs outside of peak, or it will eviscerate our jobs. This is a strike issue.

PVD can't replace us. They cant handle over half the volume ups ships. large packages. Pickups. time committed etc

Amazon isn't using personal vehicles unless it is same day orders.

If we walked out it would take months for them to even hire a bare minimum number of people to even attempt deliveries

 

[brownIEman]

PVD can't replace us. They cant handle over half the volume ups ships. large packages. Pickups. time committed etc

slowly but surely PVD s are already replacing you, they just work for other companies.
UPS' new motto, better not bigger, should be a wake up call. That is a motto of company that has recognized it does not have the flexibility or cost structure to effectively compete in the general market and has to settle for a niche segment of that market.

Amazon isn't using personal vehicles unless it is same day orders.

You are mistaken. Amazon flex, or their PVDs, are used for all types of their deliveries.
If Amazon faces a situation of too many of their regular drivers in the branded vans call out, for example, they can split those routes and offer the pieces to their PVDs. They don't have to overload other routes and face huge overtime costs, or large over 9.5 or management working grievance costs. They can pivot on a dime as it were. UPS cannot compete with that flexibility.

If we walked out it would take months for them to even hire a bare minimum number of people to even attempt deliveries

You are correct in this assessment. A general strike now would destroy UPS quickly.
As opposed to the current slow death through loss of market share which could take several more decades.

 

[What'dyabringmetoday???]

slowly but surely PVD s are already replacing you, they just work for other companies.
UPS' new motto, better not bigger, should be a wake up call. That is a motto of company that has recognized it does not have the flexibility or cost structure to effectively compete in the general market and has to settle for a niche segment of that market.


You are mistaken. Amazon flex, or their PVDs, are used for all types of their deliveries.
If Amazon faces a situation of too many of their regular drivers in the branded vans call out, for example, they can split those routes and offer the pieces to their PVDs. They don't have to overload other routes and face huge overtime costs, or large over 9.5 or management working grievance costs. They can pivot on a dime as it were. UPS cannot compete with that flexibility.


You are correct in this assessment. A general strike now would destroy UPS quickly.
As opposed to the current slow death through loss of market share which could take several more decades.

Lol.

 

[silenze]

If Amazon faces a situation of too many of their regular drivers in the branded vans call out, for example, they can split those routes and offer the pieces to their PVDs. They don't have to overload other routes and face huge overtime costs, or large over 9.5 or management working grievance costs. They can pivot on a dime as it were. UPS cannot compete with that flexibility.


You are correct in this assessment. A general strike now would destroy UPS quickly.
As opposed to the current slow death through loss of market share which could take several more decades.

Not sure why you are trying to pin bad UPS management decisions on union employees. UPS has basically written the last 2 union contracts.
Also UPS delivered most of Amazons early volume allowing them to become what they are today.
Better not bigger is not a new UPS philosophy. UPS has been anti growth for a long time. They let Fedex ground happen. And now Amazon.

 

[brownIEman]

Lol.

While your own analysis is not necessarily wrong, it is certainly lacking in detail...

 

[DELACROIX]

slowly but surely PVD s are already replacing you, they just work for other companies.
UPS' new motto, better not bigger, should be a wake up call. That is a motto of company that has recognized it does not have the flexibility or cost structure to effectively compete in the general market and has to settle for a niche segment of that market.


You are mistaken. Amazon flex, or their PVDs, are used for all types of their deliveries.
If Amazon faces a situation of too many of their regular drivers in the branded vans call out, for example, they can split those routes and offer the pieces to their PVDs. They don't have to overload other routes and face huge overtime costs, or large over 9.5 or management working grievance costs. They can pivot on a dime as it were. UPS cannot compete with that flexibility.


You are correct in this assessment. A general strike now would destroy UPS quickly.
As opposed to the current slow death through loss of market share which could take several more decades.

Much like the old Cold War scenario.. both sides could destroy each other...why risk pushing that button, there is not a major issue now with the Central being bailed out by the Feds.

Things are going good right now and will be running smoothly in the next two years ... unless.
We just came out of a pandemic not seen since 1917...I remember decades ago when it was popular for management to quote a lock out, times have changed, now they are scrambling to find able bodies.

You can imagine just how much dirt both parties have accumulated over the years...neither one wants to go down that road.

 

[brownIEman]

Not sure why you are trying to pin bad UPS management decisions on union employees. UPS has basically written the last 2 union contracts.
Also UPS delivered most of Amazons early volume allowing them to become what they are today.
Better not bigger is not a new UPS philosophy. UPS has been anti growth for a long time. They let Fedex ground happen. And now Amazon.

No, UPS has not "basically written the last 2 union contracts". The contracts are written and agreed to by both parties. So the lack of flexibility is the responsibility of both parties. UPS management made poor decisions in many cases and deserve the blame for those. UPS management made the best operations decisions they could make withing the confines of the NMA in many cases, and blame could arguably be shared. I am certainly not blaming union employees for this. The lion's share of the responsibility is on UPS management, so they get the lion's share of the blame. But there is enough blame to go around on this slow, foundering ship.

UPS did not "allow" fedex ground to happen. RPS grew as a niche service based mostly on price. UPS found it could not get the leverage to undercut their prices, their main competition selling point, without losing money. Part of that analysis showed UPS had a serious need to control rising costs in order to stay competitive. They consolidated support operations and then tried to control rising pension and other costs in the 1997 contract. We all know how that worked. After the strike, Fedex purchased Caliber(Parent of RPS) as they realized UPS could not compete on price and drive them out of the market. That is how Fedex ground happened.

Yes, UPS really gave up on growth about 24 years ago, give or take. At least since that time, their market share has been shrinking. But the market has exploded in that same time however, which has allowed some growth.

Yes, UPS delivered and still delivers Amazon packages. They could have refused as soon as Amazon started delivering their own packages, but that would likely have just deprived UPS of the revenue from those packages and the Teamsters jobs moving those packages while Amazon would have just moved the volume to USPS and local carriers and just accelerated the growth of their logistic arm even faster. Not sure how that would have helped...

 

[rod]

Dip Stick Dave was both a full time driver and a PVD at the same time-- and in charge of recycling and dead cats.

 

[oldngray]

Dip Stick Dave was both a full time driver and a PVD at the same time-- and in charge of recycling and dead cats.

don't forget the safety committee

 

[DELACROIX]

Dip Stick Dave was both a full time driver and a PVD at the same time-- and in charge of recycling and dead cats.

Heard there is good money recycling dead cats...

 

[DELACROIX]

No, UPS has not "basically written the last 2 union contracts". The contracts are written and agreed to by both parties. So the lack of flexibility is the responsibility of both parties. UPS management made poor decisions in many cases and deserve the blame for those. UPS management made the best operations decisions they could make withing the confines of the NMA in many cases, and blame could arguably be shared. I am certainly not blaming union employees for this. The lion's share of the responsibility is on UPS management, so they get the lion's share of the blame. But there is enough blame to go around on this slow, foundering ship.

UPS did not "allow" fedex ground to happen. RPS grew as a niche service based mostly on price. UPS found it could not get the leverage to undercut their prices, their main competition selling point, without losing money. Part of that analysis showed UPS had a serious need to control rising costs in order to stay competitive. They consolidated support operations and then tried to control rising pension and other costs in the 1997 contract. We all know how that worked. After the strike, Fedex purchased Caliber(Parent of RPS) as they realized UPS could not compete on price and drive them out of the market. That is how Fedex ground happened.

Yes, UPS really gave up on growth about 24 years ago, give or take. At least since that time, their market share has been shrinking. But the market has exploded in that same time however, which has allowed some growth.

Yes, UPS delivered and still delivers Amazon packages. They could have refused as soon as Amazon started delivering their own packages, but that would likely have just deprived UPS of the revenue from those packages and the Teamsters jobs moving those packages while Amazon would have just moved the volume to USPS and local carriers and just accelerated the growth of their logistic arm even faster. Not sure how that would have helped...

The last two contracts..2013 was about the company getting out of covering it’s union employees, they were expecting massive increases with their health and welfare cost associated with Obama care. Did not happen now they are forced to provide Monetary Contributions into our Unions’ plans. About 500 a week for a full timer and 350 for part time. Which by the way are doing well financially.

2018 was all about creating these “flexible” 22.4 driving positions. Why continue to have the PVDs when you can run packages 24/7 if you needed to? That contract by the way was voted down by the rank and file.

Do not bring up the “97” strike as a turning point in market share. It was a con to take total control over every member’s pension plans, including the Western Conferences. Study “Defined Pension Plans” and “Monetary Contribution Pension Plans” and how they are funded. That “last best final offer” pension plan would be subject to a SS offset in due time, the benefit level stopped at 35 years, and we all knew were that 50 dollar a month Retiree’s Heath and Welfare would of went.

The market has not only grown but in fact has exploded with this pandemic. All these common carriers can expect growth, the amount is based on the decision making of these companies and organizations.

In due time these non union employees will be organizing maybe not with the teamsters, if it happens we will not continue to hear about the “poor” company being saddled with high Union wages and benefit plans. Frankly it is getting old and a sick excuse to reward corporate greed and the associated perks with the upper echelons...

 

[brownIEman]

The last two contracts..2013 was about the company getting out of covering it’s union employees, they were expecting massive increases with their health and welfare cost associated with Obama care. Did not happen now they are forced to provide Monetary Contributions into our Unions’ plans. About 500 a week for a full timer and 350 for part time. Which by the way are doing well financially.

2018 was all about creating these “flexible” 22.4 driving positions. Why continue to have the PVDs when you can run packages 24/7 if you needed to? That contract by the way was voted down by the rank and file.

Do not bring up the “97” strike as a turning point in market share. It was a con to take total control over every member’s pension plans, including the Western Conferences. Study “Defined Pension Plans” and “Monetary Contribution Pension Plans” and how they are funded. That “last best final offer” pension plan would be subject to a SS offset in due time, the benefit level stopped at 35 years, and we all knew were that 50 dollar a month Retiree’s Heath and Welfare would of went.

The market has not only grown but in fact has exploded with this pandemic. All these common carriers can expect growth, the amount is based on the decision making of these companies and organizations.

In due time these non union employees will be organizing maybe not with the teamsters, if it happens we will not continue to hear about the “poor” company being saddled with high Union wages and benefit plans. Frankly it is getting old and a sick excuse to reward corporate greed and the associated perks with the upper echelons...

The '97 company pension proposal was to create a plan for UPS members controlled jointly by reps from the company and the union. That plan could not have given the company "total control" of the pensions when they would need IBT agreement to make any changes to it. "97 was just a con to take the pension" is just pure IBT cool aide and utter bs.

UPS had an 80% market share of small package delivered circa '97. It's now around 40%. If there's a better turning point, let me know. To be honest, the market share was higher than 80 prior to 97, it was already falling, due to cost to serve.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not poor UPS, boo hoo ing in the slightest. The company is making plenty of money. Their days of being THE dominate player in the US small package delivery company are numbered, if not already over.
22.4s give some flexibility, they do not come close to providing 24/7 delivery, and 24/7 is pretty close to what the market is going to be demanding soon.

 

[IVE GOTTA PACKAGE 4U]

The '97 company pension proposal was to create a plan for UPS members controlled jointly by reps from the company and the union. That plan could not have given the company "total control" of the pensions when they would need IBT agreement to make any changes to it. "97 was just a con to take the pension" is just pure IBT cool aide and utter bs.

UPS had an 80% market share of small package delivered circa '97. It's now around 40%. If there's a better turning point, let me know. To be honest, the market share was higher than 80 prior to 97, it was already falling, due to cost to serve.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not poor UPS, boo hoo ing in the slightest. The company is making plenty of money. Their days of being THE dominate player in the US small package delivery company are numbered, if not already over.
22.4s give some flexibility, they do not come close to providing 24/7 delivery, and 24/7 is pretty close to what the market is going to be demanding soon.

If a company truly wants better not bigger and needed down the Amazon and concentrate on the packages to give them the most profit.
Number two they need a dump friend* a Amazonit's a freaking joke
But keep beating a square peg into the wrong hole It always seems to be the MO around here