Youngsters Retirement

[FracusBrown]

I certainly do not think you would have posted inaccurate information purposely.

On the other hand, you said "I think" in one sentence and then spent 3 paragraphs on how they are being taken advantage of.

Is your position really balanced, or are you looking for facts to support a one sided opinion?

While you call yourself as having a reality spin, you call others who post facts dishonest....

Allow me to clarify. I was not inferring that any of the posters, in this thread or any of the threads related to compensation, are dishonest. It's not dishonest to post what one believes, if it's done in good faith.

I believe there are ulterior motives that are not announced when changes are implemented. They have the facts, they know the projected financial outcome and they know the intent of the change. In each change that I am aware of, the stated purpose has been spun with ONLY having a positive effect on the affected employees.

My "reality spin" refers to my observation that EVERY change has resulted in a negative financial impact (thus positive cost impact to the company) to the lower level management employee in future years after changes are announced.

 

[pretzel_man]

Allow me to clarify. I was not inferring that any of the posters, in this thread or any of the threads related to compensation, are dishonest. It's not dishonest to post what one believes, if it's done in good faith.

I believe there are ulterior motives that are not announced when changes are implemented. They have the facts, they know the projected financial outcome and they know the intent of the change. In each change that I am aware of, the stated purpose has been spun with ONLY having a positive effect on the affected employees.

My "reality spin" refers to my observation that EVERY change has resulted in a negative financial impact (thus positive cost impact to the company) to the lower level management employee in future years after changes are announced.

Thank you for the clarification.

A common comment from my people is that they do not like sitting in a 1/2 hour meeting to have the changes fed to them. They say "just give me the bad news, and let's move on."

I would appreciate that as well. As a management person, I can accept the changes without the candy coating.

For instance, I looked at old communications. Back in 2005 when the MIP change happened, the presentation included a long list of benefits to the employee. (Employee benefits for the change do exist)

There was only this short list of benefits to UPS (and its shareowners)

There also are significant benefits to UPS:
•Expensing over the restricted period lowers operating costs, especially in the first few years.
•MIP is more closely aligned with the business priorities of UPS and to shareowners interests with additional focus on revenue growth, not just earnings.
•The vesting period rewards people who continue their service to UPS, thus encouraging employee retention.​

I'm certain that more benefits to the company (or losses to employees) exist than what was listed here.

In looking back to communications in 2005, I found an interesting presentation. It showed the results of an independent study.

It said that UPS management in comparison to other Fortune 100 companies pay 2/3 less for health care. In addition, UPS coverage included Medical, Vision and Dental while other companies only included medical coverage for three times the price.

The study also showed that UPS supervisors made 24% more than counterparts in other transportation companies (this assumed a 2.01 MIP).

I do not know how these comparisons stack up today.

Again, thank you for the clarification.

 

[Karma...]

Thank you for the clarification.

A common comment from my people is that they do not like sitting in a 1/2 hour meeting to have the changes fed to them. They say "just give me the bad news, and let's move on."

I would appreciate that as well. As a management person, I can accept the changes without the candy coating.

For instance, I looked at old communications. Back in 2005 when the MIP change happened, the presentation included a long list of benefits to the employee. (Employee benefits for the change do exist)

There was only this short list of benefits to UPS (and its shareowners)

There also are significant benefits to UPS:
•Expensing over the restricted period lowers operating costs, especially in the first few years.
•MIP is more closely aligned with the business priorities of UPS and to shareowners interests with additional focus on revenue growth, not just earnings.
•The vesting period rewards people who continue their service to UPS, thus encouraging employee retention.​

I'm certain that more benefits to the company (or losses to employees) exist than what was listed here.

In looking back to communications in 2005, I found an interesting presentation. It showed the results of an independent study.

It said that UPS management in comparison to other Fortune 100 companies pay 2/3 less for health care. In addition, UPS coverage included Medical, Vision and Dental while other companies only included medical coverage for three times the price.

The study also showed that UPS supervisors made 24% more than counterparts in other transportation companies (this assumed a 2.01 MIP).

I do not know how these comparisons stack up today.

Again, thank you for the clarification.

Considering the changes since going public anything that comes out of corporate lacks sincerity and credence...hr is very adept on giving positive spins.....

 

[Karma...]

Considering the changes since going public anything that comes out of corporate lacks sincerity and credence...hr is very adept on giving positive spins.....

I do think that we should acknowledge that time moves forward and not backward..ups will never be a private company again, our benefits and overall compensation will continue to erode, and at some point we will really be squeezed by continued rising fuel costs and labor costs...unless ups greatly expands outside of america ups faces an uphill battle....i foresee the day when ups decides that keeping current operations on america is no longer economically feasable...perhaps this coincides with the end of a contract.....then what will happen?....these are challenges best faced not with a disgruntled management force......

 

[pretzel_man]

I do think that we should acknowledge that time moves forward and not backward..ups will never be a private company again, our benefits and overall compensation will continue to erode, and at some point we will really be squeezed by continued rising fuel costs and labor costs...unless ups greatly expands outside of america ups faces an uphill battle....i foresee the day when ups decides that keeping current operations on america is no longer economically feasable...perhaps this coincides with the end of a contract.....then what will happen?....these are challenges best faced not with a disgruntled management force......

There really is zero chance that UPS would eliminate current operations in America. While no longer a growth opportunity, its still profitable. It makes no sense to eliminate it.

UPS is going after the logistics market, and you can't really be a player there without the U.S.

Now, I guaranty that there will be changes to residential services. They are growing, and much less profitable.