In regards to FedEx2000's post...
A well balanced and bias free assessment, kudos!
Issues...
1) A few months before I left, there was much fuss raised about how "goal" was going to be an ACTUAL statistical mean expectation - there was a hand out to all the Couriers explaining how the goal was going to be a true statistical average, with the average being 100%. Some particular days would result in the Courier being above the calculated goal, some days would result in the Courier being below the calculated goal. The goal was the TRUE statistical average of expected performance. In theory, the goal on a week time scale should've been very close to actual performance, and over a longer time scale, the Courier should've nailed the expected goal within a percentage point.
From what is going on now, that all seems to have been thrown out the window and the goal now is not a statistical average, but rather a MINIMUM expectation that is to be met not on a weekly basis, but rather a DAILY basis. The absurdity of this is obvious. I know there wasn't a readjustment of the goal numbers from a year ago to now, so a situation exists where Couriers are being forced to cut corners whenever they are delayed for some reason, just to make sure they hit that minimum number - which in the past was an average number.
I'm glad you have made a point of this publically.
2) You seem to confirm something that I've heard in non-public conversation.
Senior managers AREN'T able to replace vacant Full-time positions without jumping through a variety of hoops, so they resort to replacing the FT position with a Part-time employee, quoting "or they don't want to put in the extra work and take the easy way out by just asking for a PTer".
The suggestion in non-public discussion is that the administrative morass to replace a vacant full-time position with a full-time hire is deliberate - is in large part due to the desire to gradually shift the proportion of Couriers from being weighted towards full-time positions to that of being part-time positions.
I'm not asking you to confirm if this is the intention of Express, but rather is this the net effect of the administrative burden that is placed on senior managers to indeed fill vacant full-time positions with full-time employees? If the overall net effect is indeed a shift in the proportion of Couriers away from full time to part-time, the reader can decide if this is deliberate.
3) Forced breaks....
Are you willing to state that the now seemingly common practice of management telling employees to take unpaid breaks when they are waiting for freight is a violation of either the letter or intent of previous Express policy (PEOPLE) in regards to the use of the paid code 43 (delay).
If an employee is forced to take a break under this policy, are they free to leave the building and attend to whatever business they please?
If the employee isn't free to leave the building, they are NOT on a break, since they do not have discretion as to what they'll do or where they may go (as if they were on an hour long "lunch break"). This is where the code 43 comes in - the employee is on "standby" for incoming freight, isn't engaged in doing any other activity but is NOT free to leave the work area and is still on the clock. Forcing an employee to go off the clock but then stating the employee has to remain in the work area is a clear violation of practically every (if not all) state's labor law.
I had many instances when management wanted me to take a break - I told them fine, I'd code in a break, leave the building and be back around a certain time. They stated, no, you have to remain in your work area. Presto, code 43, you're paying me. Never once had them try to alter my time card to put in an unpaid break in there - they knew I photocopied my time cards to prevent "corrections" from occurring which shorted me paid time.
4) You appear to point out the difficulty Express is having in readjusting its manning levels to match volume. Some stations have employees barely making minimums, other are playing the games with employees that have been written about here.
Are you stating the Express is so poorly organized, that they don't either trust, or have confidence in their district managers to assess the staffing levels at their stations and make appropriate assessments in regards to presence of either excess or deficient staffings and gradually make adjustments as needed? Stated another way, do district managers run their districts, or does Memphis micromanage the districts?
This would include making determinations of stations being overstaffed (for the volume they are handling) and either making reductions in force (as was done in 2009 in many locations), or offering some incentives for employees to transfer to stations with chronic understaffing?
What is going on is that Express is using a sledgehammer to try to adjust mismatches in staffing/work levels - and the results are having consequences which are showing up in forums such as this, as well has causing massive morale problems in the stations.
5) You stated you won't "sell your soul", to Express. You seem to have drawn a psychological line in the sand when it comes to Express. You more or less state you see things as "the glass is half full" - what would Express have to do, to make you decide that they have crossed that psychological line in the sand?
You already stated you are picking up work that in the past, you wouldn't otherwise be doing (filling in for missing wage employees or filling in to keep from going over budgeted hours). Do you honestly expect this to change - especially since there are strong indications that this is indeed the "new normal"?
You are now receiving (on an actuarial basis) about one-third of what you did in the past with regards to a pension. Your health insurance is being constantly diminished to the point where it is resembling what used to be referred to as "supplemental insurance". If you or a member of you family has a catastrophic medical event ($50,000+ in medical bills), you will spend months fighting (either Anthem or CIGNA) to have them indeed pay up to the amounts stated in your employee handbook.
I have first hand knowledge regarding this. Both Anthem and CIGNA are making absurd claims when high dollar amount events come in - that certain procedures weren't "pre-approved" or a particular provider isn't "in-network" when the physical facility is listed as being "in-network". It's not like you are in a positon when a patient to determine if a provider is "in network", after you've had you're chest cut open or are in traction. This can't be blamed on the health plan administrators, since Express is self paid when it comes to claims, the administrators are merely following the directives that Express stipulated in their contract.
What do you see as moving in a postive direction?
You have 11 years with Express, you have seen how the company has undergone a radical transformation from the company which was Federal Express (changed right before you started), to the company which is being molded right now.
What gives you hope that things will move in a positive direction for either yourself (as a salaried employee) or for the wage employees?
Rico, wow....you read WAY too much in to what was simply my opinion, no deep dark look in to the inner working.
1) Nothing happens if someone doesn't hit their SPH daily, other than perhaps a discussion with their mgr. Hitting it monthly is still the expectation in regards to any PIP. It's just the usual push to achieve perfection every single day, sorry if that was unclear. It's not about cutting corners, it's about being consistent everyday, at least to the extent of what is within your control. The numbers have not been readjusted corporate wide, but locally SR Mgrs have the ability to adjust them with proper documentation/data/checkrides. The vast majority of SPH goals that were adjusted went down, not up.
2) I would not be able to confirm if this is the intent of FedEx or not, as this is simply my opinion. The engineers/directors have a responsibility to assess each request to replace a position and determine if it is truly needed. See the posts about FTers not getting minimums, doesn't make sense to approve a FT replacement in this situation. All I know is that whenever we have really needed to replace a FT position with another FT position we have been able to do so, sometimes needing to provide more justification in order to make it happen. Just seems like smart business to me rather then just blindly replacing everyone with looking at the situation locally. It may become a "net-effect", as you said, only in cases where the Sr knows they really don't need a FT replacement, or don't want t o put in the work necessary to justify it.
3) Not even close. I was never told to do so while I was a courier, nor have I ever done so as a mgr. I was simply referring to the claims of a few on here that have claimed to have had this happen to them. This seems to be a local issue at their respective stations. I have worked at 4 different stations in 3 different districts and have never seen this be the case.
If you are on break, I could care less if you leave, as long as you are back by a certain time if say we are going to have a 2nd sort at a specific time. In my experience, most don't want to waste the gas/time to drive home or wherever, they just hang out in the break room or chat with their mgrs.
4) With the speed at which our volumes have declined since around May, approx. 300k per day, yes it is difficult to adjust to that size of drop in a short time. If you over-react and the volume comes back in 3 months you are short-handed.....and what would have been the solution? Layoffs? Volume has been this much lower Yr over Yr going on 5 months now, something has to be adjusted. Part of this is making sure you have proper staffing, and not replacing FT positions if you don't need them. This is where the trust in the directors to determine staffing comes in, this is who is approving the replacements, prior to the region. So yes, I believe they do have confidence in the directors to do so. On the other end of the stick, what do you suggest if there is over staffing? Layoffs? We have simply chosen to not replace rather then cut deeper. Is that not preferable from an hourly standpoint? They are gradually making adjustments, whether it be through replacing FT with PT or attrition.
As for playing games with employees/hours.....that is just stupid and will burn them eventually. We are required to use the additional hours sign-up sheets and we have to track everything. Who got the hours, why, was in done in proper order due to seniority, etc. This is then audited by the district/region/corporate. They may be able to float under the radar for a while, but eventually someone will see it and legal will be all over them.
The "sledgehammer" approach, I think, is due to the desire to be "fair" with everyone by applying a blanket policy. If it was done another way, someone, somewhere, would complain that it's done differently somewhere else. (I'm looking at you California) So, in an effort to be fair and consistent, there are situations where it seems ridiculous, but must be done. The problem arises when mgrs/Srs make a decision at a local level that does not fall in line with what FedEx has put out there as the expectation.....this is often confused with FedEx not being consistent or not following policy, when in reality it is a lone mgr/Sr doing it.
5) I don't have a specific "line in the sand", but I'll know what it is when it happens.
Do I expect it to change, in regards to the "New norm"? I have no idea, all I know is that I will continue to do whatever I have to do to get the job done. I could care less if that means I unload ULDs or whatever.
Yes, the pension thing sucks, but I have been contributing to my 401k almost from day 1 thanks to another courier who took me under their wing when I first started and had very good knowledge of the company as a whole, so that helps. I can understand the frustrations of those that depended almost solely on their pension for retirement, but that has never been my approach. Also, many companies offer no pension whatsoever these days, so it could be worse.
I am in my low 30's, not married, no kids.....insurance has been more than adequate thus far in my life. I think I have been to urgent care once in the time I have been at FedEx, cost me a whopping $50 for an IV and some meds. My parents are self-employed......they would kill for my insurance, they are paying over $1,000 month for 2 people. I think the real problem lies with the insurance companies and health care providers that charge outrageous amounts for simple things..............but that is a whole other issue. This may change as i get older, but so far I have no complaints.
Positive direction? A resolution to mid-range pay and top out times would be a good start.....for both hourly and salaried. If you think the hourly top-out time is crazy, the salaried is just as bad or worse. I worked with a mgr who use to be a Sr and stepped down to an Ops, 27 years as a Sr/Ops manager, still not at top out. Oh, and ditch the SFA.....I believe it's a noble thought, but it just doesn't serve its stated purpose anymore. Hourlies use it as a means of "getting back" at their managers, and managers don't do with it what they are supposed to. It's failure is a joint effort.
What gives me hope? We continue to become more efficient, sometimes to a fault, and have cut a lot of fat corporate wide. We have invested heavily in emerging markets around the globe, hopefully that will pay off with higher inbound volumes to the US as well as improving our yield per package. More efficiency, higher revenue, and lower costs will hopefully equal improved pay/compensation for everyone involved when the economy finally stabilizes and improves.
We still have a lot of great people that do it right everyday regardless of the circumstances.........that gives me hope.