Buyout in 2013

[OldManAllowance]

Bravo..BrownSuit

 

[Catatonic]

No, but show me another stock that currently has a 3% dividend yield when you can barely get .25% APY in your savings account through the local bank. If you walk into your Operating/Business Unit each day with the mindset that all is lost in your head then you will work as if all is lost and there is no reason to keep going each day.

See below for a small sampling of companies that pay a better dividend yield than does UPS.
I picked these because they are well known companies that have been around and have good fundamentals and excellent credit ratings ... like UPS.

UPS - 2.9%
McDonalds - 3.0%
General Mills - 3.2%
Pepsi - 3.3%
Proctor & Gamble - 3.3%
Johnson & Johnson - 3.5%
Abbott Labs - 3.6 %
Kimberly Clark - 4.0%
Con Ed - 4.1%
Pfizer - 4.1%
Bristol-Myers Squibb - 4.2%
Southern Co - 4.4%
Merck - 4.4%
Progress Energy - 4.8%
Duke Energy - 4.9%
Eli Lilly - 5.3%
Verizon - 5.4%
AT&T - 5.9%

There are many dozens of others above 3.0%.

 

[Dragon]

Casca - It's obvious from some of your posts (Asking the level that Partnership starts) that you are going off what you've heard, or believe to be the case and likely do not have a full story. Hoax mixed the two job levels in his response to you, with reference to the new at which level partnership starts and reference to the old with referencing division managers.

As far as the other comment about negative increases each year that individuals stay around at a certain level, I am not going to go into specifics, but that's simply not the case. Given your knowledge of the subject it's obvious that you were not impacted. Your direct manager should have covered this as part of your 2012 Merit Increase in which there was a brochure that would have explained how this correctly worked. I would suggest if you received it to dust it off and read through it, if you did not to see out your manager for guidance. Even behind the anonymity of the internet, it would be inappropriate for me to discuss it further here.

All is not lost, the company is not dead or dying after going public, far from it. A number of your recent posts give the impression that the world has ended because we are now a publicly traded company.

I would challenge that moving into the 21st century as a company we needed to once again (this is the 2nd time) be a publicly traded company. Have we been much more concerned about our bottom line than before? Absolutely. Are there times where we step over a nickel to save a penny? Unfortunately. The end result though has been a company that is more competitive, nimble in the market, and in the position to expand not just through our own operations, but through acquisitions. Would we have been able to raise funds for an Overnite as a private, employee owned company? What about the largest in our company's history with TnT, just a paltry 5.8B in US Dollars. Are we no longer accountable to each others or fellow partners in the company? I would say absolutely not. If you are a partner, part of your obligation is to uphold your partners, but also hold them accountable. Going public has added another level of accountability that should have been in place with our partners (internal shareowners) with our Class B Shareowners who trade our stock publicly.

Remember, what made many UPSers Millionaires within a short period of time. It was taking our company public and the resulting splits and increases in our stock price. Have we seen that since going public? No, but show me another stock that currently has a 3% dividend yield when you can barely get .25% APY in your savings account through the local bank. If you walk into your Operating/Business Unit each day with the mindset that all is lost in your head then you will work as if all is lost and there is no reason to keep going each day.

Seriously...Another level of accountability...how many people do you need to tell the operators no. When you get your normal 2% pay raise this year please come back and read your post.

 

[pretzel_man]

Seriously...Another level of accountability...how many people do you need to tell the operators no. When you get your normal 2% pay raise this year please come back and read your post.

Raises this year will average 2.75% as previously. (maybe 3%) Is that good? Nope.....

However, contrary to popular belief, the demon is NOT being a public company. Its NOT IE. Its NOT the management committee.

I completed my 37th peak season this year. I don't recall life being a cakewalk when we were private. We worked long hours. Production was king. There were struggles every day. Just like now.

An MIP above 1.5 was considered great, and 2.0 was considered HUGE. The difference was that back then, the stock grew. We got our reward every 3 months when the board met.

Growth was the magic of UPS. The changes that are seen as negative today are unfortunately necessary to get the meager growth (or maintenance) of the stock price.

Another thing.... When we were private, we maintained a PE ratio of 12 to 14. We are well above that now. If net profits grow, so will stock. Its unfortunate that so many complain about things designed to grow net profits when that is what is needed.

The enemy is the competition. We need our packages back. They are being moved by a non-union, contractor workforce.

Finally, there is no point in discussing the money grade 20's and above make. Its immaterial to the overall stock price. Do the math.....

 

[beentheredonethat]

As far as the other comment about negative increases each year that individuals stay around at a certain level, I am not going to go into specifics, but that's simply not the case.

Brownsuit... Currently my job has not been put into the newer bands yet. However, I do know a lot of people who were impacted. While I have not seen anyone with a "negative pay increase" excluding those who are demoted from one job to another (mgr to supv). I do see "negative increases" in the sense that many people are "maxed" out and no longer get a raise. However, when Inflation goes up a few percent and your out of pocket for Health and Welfare goes up. In effect, you get a negative pay raise. You may not see it that way, but it is quite true.

As far as how the pay bands were done.. again, my department hasn't been impacted yet, but I have heard we will be this coming year. I do know a lot of guys in IE in the district. What I think is crazy and makes me realize how screwed up the system is. Every FT IE Supv is the same pay grade (I believe it is a 20E but can't swear to it).

I've done enough IE jobs as a supervisor in the past to know certain IE jobs are a heck of a lot easier then others. Or maybe a better way to put it, needs less skill or knowledge then other IE jobs. Jobs such as Hub IE are relatively easy, pkg IE a bit harder, at the top end of IE jobs are Fdr IE, Air IE, Sales IE, and B&friend IE. (In my opinion in that order). Yet there is no difference in pay band for any of the FT IE jobs. That's ridiculous. I was told, (who knows if it's true or not) that originally corporate had district IE jobs as different pay grades (ie 20D, 20E etc) However, the IE mgrs shot it down, since it made rotating their people harder to manage.

When you think of it and think hard. How can you say the whole pay bands are fair, when every job in a dept has the same pay grade?

 

[Catatonic]

Hoax mixed the two job levels in his response to you, with reference to the new at which level partnership starts and reference to the old with referencing division managers.

Just to be clear:
Casca asked at what level the new partnership starts and I replied Level 20.
He stated after that - "So its Div Mgr and up ?"
To which I replied - "Division Manager is Level 18."

Finally, there is no point in discussing the money "grade 20's and above" make. Its immaterial to the overall stock price. Do the math.....

Until you brought this up, no one else had ...
but ...
I agree with your "out-of-the-blue" statement. I certainly am not interested. These people have a stressful and thankless job and it seems to get even worse at higher levels.
It's the same as the CEO job. It has gone up hundreds of percent but the impact on company profitability is irrelevant.

 

[Karma...]

You folks make many great points....I should have been clearer on the negetive pay increase...If you dont get inflation you have a negetive pay increase.. If the stock doesnt stay even with inflation since the company went public its a negetive pay increase. The BODs sole job is to move the price upwards thus making the stock attractive to investers. It doesnt take a genius with a calculator to see these failures.

 

[pretzel_man]

Just to be clear:
Casca asked at what level the new partnership starts and I replied Level 20.
He stated after that - "So its Div Mgr and up ?"
To which I replied - "Division Manager is Level 18."


Until you brought this up, no one else had ...
but ...
I agree with your "out-of-the-blue" statement. I certainly am not interested. These people have a stressful and thankless job and it seems to get even worse at higher levels.
It's the same as the CEO job. It has gone up hundreds of percent but the impact on company profitability is irrelevant.

Hoax,

With all due respect (and I do have respect for you), when you say partnership starts at grade 20.... Well I think there is an undertone there...

Maybe I misread it.

 

[Catatonic]

Hoax,

With all due respect (and I do have respect for you), when you say partnership starts at grade 20.... Well I think there is an undertone there...

Maybe I misread it.

I'm just going by the changes imposed on UPS when it became public.
Level 20 is the lowest level of VP at UPS which has defined responsibilities and authority.
Consequently, all significant forms at UPS (PDD's, RFCs, etc.) require a Level 20 or higher before it will be acted on.
Most real decisions at UPS (within my purview*) are made at a Level 20 or higher.
Shortly after UPS went public, the level 18's were gathered in Corporate and explained the fact that there would be a significant differences in compensation and benefits going forward (along with increased authority and accountability).
These expressed differences along with my observations (albeit in the Corporate arena) have led me to strongly believe that there is a clear and observable difference in Level 20 and above. I have even spoke of this "apparent" new level of partnership with Level 20's, Level 22's and even one Level 24. They did not object to this way of viewing the partnership and seemed to acknowledge its existence.

Maybe the more acceptable term to be used is Junior and Senior partnership.
I don't really have any strong feelings about this new division in the partnership (It is what it is) as it was always there to some extent. Even a Level 22 (District Manager) did not have freehand to make large expenditures back in the day.

So with that said, I'm not sure about my undertone ... it is apparent and even makes sense to me and probably inevitable within an extremely large publicly-traded corporation.

I am curious as to the undertone you speak of. Perhaps if you expressed what the attributes and consequences of that undertone are, it could be of educational benefit to our younger "partners".

*In this instance, purview means the range of vision, insight, or understanding. It does not imply any aspect of control or authority.

 

[pretzel_man]

I'm just going by the changes imposed on UPS when it became public.
Level 20 is the lowest level of VP at UPS which has defined responsibilities and authority.
Consequently, all significant forms at UPS (PDD's, RFCs, etc.) require a Level 20 or higher before it will be acted on.
Most real decisions at UPS (within my purview*) are made at a Level 20 or higher.
Shortly after UPS went public, the level 18's were gathered in Corporate and explained the fact that there would be a significant differences in compensation and benefits going forward (along with increased authority and accountability).
These expressed differences along with my observations (albeit in the Corporate arena) have led me to strongly believe that there is a clear and observable difference in Level 20 and above. I have even spoke of this "apparent" new level of partnership with Level 20's, Level 22's and even one Level 24. They did not object to this way of viewing the partnership and seemed to acknowledge its existence.

Maybe the more acceptable term to be used is Junior and Senior partnership.
I don't really have any strong feelings about this new division in the partnership (It is what it is) as it was always there to some extent. Even a Level 22 (District Manager) did not have freehand to make large expenditures back in the day.

So with that said, I'm not sure about my undertone ... it is apparent and even makes sense to me and probably inevitable within an extremely large publicly-traded corporation.

I am curious as to the undertone you speak of. Perhaps if you expressed what the attributes and consequences of that undertone are, it could be of educational benefit to our younger "partners".

*In this instance, purview means the range of vision, insight, or understanding. It does not imply any aspect of control or authority.

From my perspective this is unchanged....

In the old days, these people were called region staff managers. They had lots of power in their functions.

You couldn't get an appropriation through without them signing.

They got extra incentives just like today.

Think about it.... How many people in this company are at that level? 300? 400?

That's one out of 1,000 people.

 

[Catatonic]

From my perspective this is unchanged....

In the old days, these people were called region staff managers. They had lots of power in their functions.

You couldn't get an appropriation through without them signing.

They got extra incentives just like today.

Think about it.... How many people in this company are at that level? 300? 400?

That's one out of 1,000 people.

I think we are in agreement essentially ... as I stated in my previous post:
I don't really have any strong feelings about this new division in the partnership (It is what it is) as it was always there to some extent.

Our differences are probably small and more a matter of semantics than true philosophical beliefs.
We are all influenced by our different experiences, expectations and desire to hang on to what was good (the partnership is certainly worthy of hanging on to).
It is what it is and I have not had any problems adapting to or working with the changes over the last decade or so as appears to be the case with you too.

 

[Finner]

Hoaxster posted a good list of companies with 3% dividend or more. And as he stated that list is just a small representation. Though there is always a greater risk with individual stocks when looking to capture a good dividend. Lucent is one that was widely held stok that no longer exists. Others are gone or only valued at a small fraction of what they were a number of years ago.
Another way to capture a good dividend is with a mutual like like Franklin Income, a fund that holds bonds, high dividend stocks, preferred stocks, etc. Over last 10 years the yield (dividend) averaged about 6% and 10 year average return per year was 9.5%. Templeton Bond Fund is another that pays a yield of close to 6% and has average annual return of 11% for last 10 years. Vanguard Dividend Growith is another. Dividend is 2% but 10 year average annual return is 9%. There are many more funds with track records, dividend yield and overall returns just as good. So individual stocks, mutual funds, or other, there are many investment options that over time will likely pay a dividend of 3% or more and have the potential to grow in value as well. Of course, UPS has always been a good investment, though since going public it has more or less only been a good dividend play as the 10 year growth since going public has been tepid. Growth in earnings will drive the stock price.

 

[SignificantOwner]

...Finally, there is no point in discussing the money grade 20's and above make. Its immaterial to the overall stock price. Do the math.....

There's more to life than math pman.

 

[SignificantOwner]

...Until you brought this up, no one else had ...
but ...
I agree with your "out-of-the-blue" statement. I certainly am not interested. These people have a stressful and thankless job and it seems to get even worse at higher levels.
It's the same as the CEO job. It has gone up hundreds of percent but the impact on company profitability is irrelevant.

Stressful? Sure, but there are many very stressful jobs.

Thankless? I don't agree. Nothing says thanks like 7 digits.

 

[Catatonic]

Stressful? Sure, but there are many very stressful jobs.

Thankless? I don't agree. Nothing says thanks like 7 digits.

7 digits?
I've never heard of a Level 20 or 22 making this in one year with all their compensation.

 

[pretzel_man]

There's more to life than math pman.

This is true, but math is also a part of life.

Few can get by without using it.

 

[moreluck]

This is true, but math is also a part of life.

Few can get by without using it.

the government gets by without using it.

 

[SignificantOwner]

This is true, but math is also a part of life.

Few can get by without using it.

Here is some math for you. The get it done mentality of the front line is inversely proportionate to the variance between the grade 20+ pay increases and the <20 pay increases. I see it every day.

 

[pretzel_man]

Here is some math for you. The get it done mentality of the front line is inversely proportionate to the variance between the grade 20+ pay increases and the <20 pay increases. I see it every day.

So, you think that there is a different merit pool for <20 and 20+ ??

That is untrue.

 

[Catatonic]

So, you think that there is a different merit pool for <20 and 20+ ??

That is untrue.

When you say merit pool, you are not including the $250,000 annual bonus that Level 20's are "eligible" for?

This was what the Level 18's were told in Corporate back in circa 2007 or 2008 (really unsure about the year).

Not sure what merit pool means so I am fishing (pun intended) to some extent.