UPSPAC & United Way 2012

[brownIEman]

Just because the people currently running Jim Casey's company have decided to spit in the face of the people they used to call partners in no way justifies my doing the same to the less fortunate members of society. My contributions to United Way will continue.

As for UPSpac, it is still vitally important for a corporation as large as UPS to have representation in the political process, so I will be donating 100% of my 2013 raise to UPSpac...

 

[Old Man Jingles]

As for UPSpac, it is still vitally important for a corporation as large as UPS to have representation in the political process, so I will be donating 100% of my 2013 raise to UPSpac...

That is funny since that probably means $0 if you got the same raise as most everyone else.

 

[brownIEman]

That is funny since that probably means $0 if you got the same raise as most everyone else.

Your math is absolutely accurate. Maybe if there is a large percentage drop in contributions someone will get the message... probably not though.

 

[brownmonster]

Your math is absolutely accurate. Maybe if there is a large percentage drop in contributions someone will get the message... probably not though.

I find it ironic that the IE guys and their stops per car and route cutting won't get a raise but do to their input I've elready made 4500 bucks more than last year. Thanks, I think. Maybe I'll increase my DRIVE contributions.

 

[TechGrrl]

Just because the people currently running Jim Casey's company have decided to spit in the face of the people they used to call partners in no way justifies my doing the same to the less fortunate members of society. My contributions to United Way will continue.

As for UPSpac, it is still vitally important for a corporation as large as UPS to have representation in the political process, so I will be donating 100% of my 2013 raise to UPSpac...

Considering the Citizens United decision by the SCOTUS, I doubt that UPSPAC even matters anymore. UPS can take as much of the shareowners' money as they like and dump it to whichever crooked politician they like. I used to give to UPSPAC when I was an active employee, but the CU decision was the last straw. I donate directly to politicians I support, and VOTE. Screw UPSPAC.

United Way is another story; supporting my community is still a priority.

 

[Dragon]

Contributions to the PAC are not dictated, in fact, that is illegal.
The immediate manager does not know how much each person gives up to level 20 or so.
I would think a District Manager (level 22) could get to that info if desired.
I know people that give $10 when their suggested is higher and I know people who give $200 - $300 when their suggested is $120.

I'm not sure how much, if any, I will get this year.
More out of pocket for Health Care, 1/2 month gone and no raises have many I know saying they will not give.
This may be the year UPS begins to see the repercussions of their actions over the last 5 - 6 years.

Exactly...

 

[ajblakejr]

United Way is another story; supporting my community is still a priority.

I respect this statement.

 

[brownIEman]

I find it ironic that the IE guys and their stops per car and route cutting won't get a raise but do to their input I've elready made 4500 bucks more than last year. Thanks, I think. Maybe I'll increase my DRIVE contributions.

Well, that might be ironic, if I was still in IE, and I was ever a package planner that calculated stops per car plans. Neither of those is true however. I am thinking those guys actually got raises. So, on second thought, maybe you are correct, it is ironic.

 

[airops]

To the people that are giving $1, UPS tracks % contributing. Giving zero will have a lot bigger impact. I realize that not hitting the contribution $ goal will get some notice. But to really get noticed you need to go beyond that.

With that said, I do want to say that helping the community is a very important idea. Please find other ways to do it. Volunteering is very rewarding for all involved. Unless it's a UPS event where we spend more on t-shirts and food than it would cost to just hire a professional to help that agency.

I'm sure fundraiser events will be a huge focus. I really like it when UPS spends more on the food that is sold than we make from the event. But hey, it's all about hitting the goal. No reason to look at the "Big Picture".

In regards to PAC's. I wonder how much is given to candidates that support changes that allow corporations to take advantage of us. You know the corporation is looking at everything that cuts cost. It seems like management is at the top of that list. I'm sure they are supporting anyone that wants to get rid of age discrimination lawsuits and similar items. Wouldn't that be ironic if your PAC money went to support the person who made it easier for UPS to take from you?

 

[SignificantOwner]

Just a feeling, but i think contributions may be down this year... And I'm sure FT management will be the bad guys for NOT giving.

Some management people will put themselves on a guilt trip for not giving. If people are giving just because they're worried about what people will think then don't give. Think through whether or not the arguments in favor of giving are logical and then follow through if the decision is no. Worried about retaliation? Have some guts and follow through on your well thought out decision anyway. What's the right decision? Up to you.

 

[SignificantOwner]

There has been a lot of talk from all management (well, the ones that did not get a raise) that they will be donating $1 to UPSPAC and $1 to United Way.

The participation game is a cop out. If the decision is to not give then have some guts and make it $0.

It will interesting to see if they stick to their guns on this.

If you look at past history it's like you stated in your first sentence. Talk talk talk talk talk...

 

[Itsyourchoice]

No raise this year, a salary band and no raise for the next X years and upper management has the gall to ask FT management for contribution $$.

What color is the sky in their world?

Just a feeling, but i think contributions may be down this year... And I'm sure FT management will be the bad guys for NOT giving.

There were raises this year ( unless you received and extremely low performance rating). The bands are not that much different than the grades we have always had. Last time I checked you give to United Way because you want to help people. What does that have to do with whether or not you got a raise?

 

[UPS1907]

Charity starts at home and lack of raise impacts household finances. I think prices of everything is rising. More importantly, the United Way is not MY first choice for a charity. I gave to be part of the team and I could afford to. No raise 2 out of last 3 years and now disposable income has dwindled. Not as easy as it used to be. You can help people and NOT give to the United Way. Question is: do you think UPS agrees with that?

 

[Old Man Jingles]

There were raises this year ( unless you received and extremely low performance rating). The bands are not that much different than the grades we have always had.

Last time I checked you give to United Way because you want to help people. What does that have to do with whether or not you got a raise?

If you are in management then you must be living under a rock or being dicey with your words. About 40% of management with a rating of 1.0 or better did not receive raises because they were reclassified or their salary is at the top of the band (117% of midpoint). It appears that you are the only management person (if you are one) in the whole company who is not aware of this unfortunate fact and so at this point you have zero credibility.

I assume you are a higher up (out of touch) or an old-timer (donates stock a a base cost of $1 a share) since you don't seem to understand that since 2008 if you don't get raises or they are 1% or 2%, your medical benefits out-of-pocket goes up and actual cost-of-living goes up, you don't have disposible income to donate.

We can still give to charities of our choice without supporting the UPS United Way effort. That's the point, since you don't seem to aware of much or able to figure it out.

 

[Bucket of Boltz]

There is no way that 40% of the people who scored a least a 1.0 on their QPR were not given merit increases in 2012 as stated by Mr. Jingles! Over 70% have a QPR rating of 1.0 or greater. It is closer to 4% and the maximum is 130% in the new Base Pay Plan.

 

[FracusBrown]

There is no way that 40% of the people who scored a least a 1.0 on their QPR were not given merit increases in 2012 as stated by Mr. Jingles! Over 70% have a QPR rating of 1.0 or greater. It is closer to 4% and the maximum is 130% in the new Base Pay Plan.

130% of the band pay scale is the maximum. Strong performers were eligible for 2.5% plus an additional 1.5% if they were under the 130% max.

Mid range performers 2.5% eligible.

Poor performers got less and those over the 130% max were restricted.

The first year is always the best when new programs are implemented. I predict more people will get squeezed in the future.

 

[beentheredonethat]

John R. Seffrin, CEO	American Cancer Society	$2,222,272​
Includes $1.5 million in a retention benefit approved in 2001, "to preserve management stability."
Peter G. Cordeiro, M.D., Chief Attending Surgery, Plastic & Reconstructive Service	Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center	$2,050,872​
Edward J. Benz, Jr., M.D., President/CEO​	Dana-Farber Cancer Institute/Jimmy Fund​	$1,252,705​
Jonathan W. Simons, M.D., President/CEO	Prostate Cancer Foundation	$1,233,240​

SupeNazi.
I don't disagree that the overhead of lots of charities seem high. Also the pay for the head officers in charity organizations is also high. I wish it was lower. However, as I said before, since I know a lot of people who have cancer I want my donations to go to helping to prevent and cure cancer. The ACS has 28% of it's money's going to overhead. of which 21% is for fundraising and Mgmt and 7% for general administration. I will admit, I wish it was lower. However, if I give a dollar to the ACS then $.72 goes toward helping people with cancer and\or trying to defeat cancer. If I give a dollar ot the United Way and direct that money to go to the ACS, then $1 - United Way overhead of approximately $.15 leaves $.85 towards the ACS, of that only 72% gets to my goal or $.61 of every dollar.

So if my goal is to help out the ACS, why should I give it to the United Way to give it to the ACS?


What irked me is that it isn't real clear how directed donations still have overhead taken out before being given to the charity.

 

[Catatonic]

130% of the band pay scale is the maximum. Strong performers were eligible for 2.5% plus an additional 1.5% if they were under the 130% max.

Mid range performers 2.5% eligible.

Poor performers got less and those over the 130% max were restricted.

The first year is always the best when new programs are implemented. I predict more people will get squeezed in the future.

My department has not been put in the bands yet so I don't have any first hand experience.
I do know that many in our department did not get raises and the reason they were told is that they were at the top of the scale. All that I know of are good strong performers and a history of good raises and performance.

The post to which I am replying seems to ignore that many of the people in the "band" structure who are maxed out now were moved to a band with a lower pay range. That seems to be the crux of the discontent. Operations management seemed to be getting raises because they remained in their pay band or maybe even raised.

I suppose that Bucket of Boltz was not aware of these facts although I question the 40% myself.
It all depends on one's little world in which they revolve and how they "see" the facts.

 

[Bucket of Boltz]

130% of the band pay scale is the maximum. Strong performers were eligible for 2.5% plus an additional 1.5% if they were under the 130% max.

Mid range performers 2.5% eligible.

Poor performers got less and those over the 130% max were restricted.

The first year is always the best when new programs are implemented. I predict more people will get squeezed in the future.

...and Exceptional Performers were eligible for a 2.5% merit plus 3.0% from the "High Performers Pool". I believe the compensation program will improve in 2013 and provide for some type of increases for those people above the maximum who are rated SP or EP.

 

[beentheredonethat]

...and Exceptional Performers were eligible for a 2.5% merit plus 3.0% from the "High Performers Pool". I believe the compensation program will improve in 2013 and provide for some type of increases for those people above the maximum who are rated SP or EP.

Bucket, Here's the problem that I see. Keep in mind, you are talking exceptional performers for people based on their QPR score. Years ago, I went to the printer in my department to get a report I sent to it. On the printer was QPR scores of mgmt by Dept printed by the HR manager. Why he printed it and didn't come get them immediately, I don't quite understand. Anyways, I brought it over to his office and gave it to him. However, I did take a look before handing it in. What I saw, the least best performer in the HR department had a score higher then the best performance for the Div Mgr of the Hub. What do you think the odds are that the least best Supervisor in HR is better then the best supervisor in the Hub? Here's another one of this year. I'm in an office of a supervisor, he has posted on his bulletin board his QPR. His score? 120%. He maxed out on every item. I commented, great job!!. He said, well the boss likes to make attainable QPR's so people are eligible for good raises. Yet I know of many Div Mgrs who give out QPR goals that are stretch goals. So where is the fairness?