New Region and District Managers named

SignificantOwner

A Package Center Manager
No it is none of our business ... Being a partner has nothing to do with it. If you are a center manager you would realize that the entire district including you works for the District Manager! If he wants a certain office or parking spot or what ever, he/she only answers to the Region Manager and the Region Manager is not going to dictate what parking spot the District Manager uses.

So what is the benefit of my partner status? Don't say a paycheck because that only explains my employee status.

By the way, I don't care where they park as as long as they don't keep lecture us on servant leadership. Have to throw the hypocrite flag on that one.
 

OVERBOARD

Don't believe everything you think
So what is the benefit of my partner status? Don't say a paycheck because that only explains my employee status.

By the way, I don't care where they park as as long as they don't keep lecture us on Servant Leadership . Have to throw the hypocrite flag on that one.

Servant Leadership, Now that’s funny, that’s has to be the biggest oxymoron going on at ups.
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
So what is the benefit of my partner status? Don't say a paycheck because that only explains my employee status.

By the way, I don't care where they park as as long as they don't keep lecture us on servant leadership. Have to throw the hypocrite flag on that one.

Partnership just denotes the fact that you are awarded stock and own stock in UPS. Years ago only top managers got stock. It was not until the late 1960's/early 1970's that stock was even awarded to supervisors. Partnership lost it's "shine" when the company became public. As far as I am concerned, anyone who owns stock is a partner. The term means nothing like what it meant 20-30 years ago.
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
Uh, OK, I know I'm getting ready to have a stroke here, as somebody so eloquently put it, but just when, exactly, is the "end of discussion"?

Is it today? Yesterday? Or the day before? How many "end of discussions" are we allowed?

Is that like the FINAL LAST CALL?????

Race - GOOD POINT! Touche! I used a poor choice of words PERIOD!:wink2:
 

SignificantOwner

A Package Center Manager
Partnership just denotes the fact that you are awarded stock and own stock in UPS. Years ago only top managers got stock. It was not until the late 1960's/early 1970's that stock was even awarded to supervisors. Partnership lost it's "shine" when the company became public. As far as I am concerned, anyone who owns stock is a partner. The term means nothing like what it meant 20-30 years ago.

The partnership was what made UPS special and successful. Now we don't have "determined men working together," and results show it.
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
The partnership was what made UPS special and successful. Now we don't have "determined men working together," and results show it.

I understand where you are coming from and do agree with" the determined men/women" part... but there was a big drawback with that premise as well. It tends to pit us versus them. It promotes an elitist attitude which I used to see a lot of. I was one of the minority when it came to opening up stock ownership to all back in the late nineties. I was part of a group that had to present a letter to the management committee discussing the upside of opening up stock ownership. I still believe that we are all in this together management and non-management and RETIREES!
 

SignificantOwner

A Package Center Manager
I understand where you are coming from and do agree with" the determined men/women" part... but there was a big drawback with that premise as well. It tends to pit us versus them. It promotes an elitist attitude which I used to see a lot of. I was one of the minority when it came to opening up stock ownership to all back in the late nineties. I was part of a group that had to present a letter to the management committee discussing the upside of opening up stock ownership. I still believe that we are all in this together management and non-management and RETIREES!

update: "Determined men working together will make money for wall street or they'll be let go so as not to reduce wall street profits."
 

705red

Browncafe Steward
I do not deal with many district managers, but I have gotten to know severl in passing and from how I see the operation get handled under their leadership. I met our current DM once recently at a circle of honor PCM. We were consilated in to metro ditrict about 2 years ago from the North district and I can tell you that our currrent DM is aAfreican American but he is also respected unlike the Dm from North that could have gotten this position. I do not think that race played a part in this district and that the better man filled the shoes. My 2 cents.
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
I do not deal with many district managers, but I have gotten to know severl in passing and from how I see the operation get handled under their leadership. I met our current DM once recently at a circle of honor PCM. We were consilated in to metro ditrict about 2 years ago from the North district and I can tell you that our currrent DM is aAfreican American but he is also respected unlike the Dm from North that could have gotten this position. I do not think that race played a part in this district and that the better man filled the shoes. My 2 cents.

I don't know the people you are talking about but I think you are making an astute observation. UPS is well diversified. There are good managers in every race, color, creed, and sex... etc etc etc! The company (has already) pick the top people based on qualifications and previous results. People that think otherwise are showing their true feelings and bitterness toward the past diversification process.
 

constructively dissatisfi

Well-Known Member
I don't know the people you are talking about but I think you are making an astute observation. UPS is well diversified. There are good managers in every race, color, creed, and sex... etc etc etc! The company (has already) pick the top people based on qualifications and previous results. People that think otherwise are showing their true feelings and bitterness toward the past diversification process.

If you don't know any of the people involved, the facts would seem to raise a question mark. The top operations job in the US has been held by a string of people from the same ethic group for a very long time. This ethnic group represents a relatively small percentage of UPS management in total, and a relatively small percentage of the overall population. About 12% if I'm not mistaken. At the same time, this same ethnic group is WAY over-represented in senior management positions in operations. This doesn't necessarily mean any or all of them aren't qualified. But it would seem to raise a big question mark in the mind of a logical person looking at the facts as to whether their ethnicity was a factor in selecting them. Do you believe that people from this ethnic group posess some genetic traits that make them good managers and leaders? Do you believe it's just a coincidence? Bitterness has nothing to do with it. I believe people should be allowed to succeed or fail based on their own actions and abilities, not their ethnicity, gender or anything else. A capable person from this same ethnic group shouldn't be too happy about it either. How would you like to always wonder in the back of your mind if you were put in a job because you were the best person, or because of the color of your skin? It seems to me the only people who would like this sort of thing are unqualified people who are able to move up without earning it.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
If you don't know any of the people involved, the facts would seem to raise a question mark. The top operations job in the US has been held by a string of people from the same ethic group for a very long time. This ethnic group represents a relatively small percentage of UPS management in total, and a relatively small percentage of the overall population. About 12% if I'm not mistaken. At the same time, this same ethnic group is WAY over-represented in senior management positions in operations. This doesn't necessarily mean any or all of them aren't qualified. But it would seem to raise a big question mark in the mind of a logical person looking at the facts as to whether their ethnicity was a factor in selecting them. Do you believe that people from this ethnic group posess some genetic traits that make them good managers and leaders? Do you believe it's just a coincidence? Bitterness has nothing to do with it. I believe people should be allowed to succeed or fail based on their own actions and abilities, not their ethnicity, gender or anything else. A capable person from this same ethnic group shouldn't be too happy about it either. How would you like to always wonder in the back of your mind if you were put in a job because you were the best person, or because of the color of your skin? It seems to me the only people who would like this sort of thing are unqualified people who are able to move up without earning it.

What'choo talkin' 'bout, Willis?
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
I think you are missing a big point about the psychology of people in general... We tend to surround ourselves with people of have the same likes and dislikes as we do... For example, I had a boss who was a womanizer, golfer, and a drinker and he surrounded himself by the same kind of men. These guys fit into his social circle. I survived only because I of my performance value to him. NOW, at the management committee level there could is probably a common thread that binds the decision maker(s) to the others. There could be political, religious, fiscal as well as racial, (etc., etc.) overtones that attracts and binds people together. This is human nature.

You can justify this anyway you want but if you look inside yourself, you will see that you and I do the same thing. Our closest friends and people we associate with think and act like us to a large degree!

Let's take Japanese business.... up until recently, you probably never worried about your ethnicity in that culture. If you were anything but a Japanese male, forget about it! LOL! I am not trying to make disparaging comments about Japanese.... I am just trying to take the focus off of the white male and show that this happens everywhere.

Look at the Fashion industry - Is there a typical profile you can point to? How about professional sports? etc etc etc. What binds these people together? For those of you who have to pick a thesis to write on, this may be a very interesting subject to tackle!!!!

So, what I am saying is that change is slow going depending on who is in charge. The fact that this topic comes up repeatedly, shows just how deep racial and ethnic tension go. It is my contention that until most of Americans are homogeneous, America will not be able to have a true identity of and for itself. It may take hundreds of years. For this to happen world wide it will take generations beyond that.
 
If you don't know any of the people involved, the facts would seem to raise a question mark. The top operations job in the US has been held by a string of people from the same ethic group for a very long time. This ethnic group represents a relatively small percentage of UPS management in total, and a relatively small percentage of the overall population. About 12% if I'm not mistaken. At the same time, this same ethnic group is WAY over-represented in senior management positions in operations. This doesn't necessarily mean any or all of them aren't qualified. But it would seem to raise a big question mark in the mind of a logical person looking at the facts as to whether their ethnicity was a factor in selecting them. Do you believe that people from this ethnic group posess some genetic traits that make them good managers and leaders? Do you believe it's just a coincidence? Bitterness has nothing to do with it. I believe people should be allowed to succeed or fail based on their own actions and abilities, not their ethnicity, gender or anything else. A capable person from this same ethnic group shouldn't be too happy about it either. How would you like to always wonder in the back of your mind if you were put in a job because you were the best person, or because of the color of your skin? It seems to me the only people who would like this sort of thing are unqualified people who are able to move up without earning it.

You're walking a fine line and your post is ripe with contradictions. You're speaking out of both sides of your mouth as you note that these individuals are a small percentage of the overall management base, yet, are abundant in senior management. Is it not possible that they could've possibly earned their worth?

Then you question their "genetic traits" and then gloss over a "quota" with the whispers of "coincidences". You then go on to state that actions and abilities should hold precedence. Although, you would think one's merit and obvious competency would allow them to retain their position.

Why should anyone think in the back of their mind if they got their positon because of color? The only people who jump to these conclusions are the BITTER. As if a person of color is assumed inferior, one strike, and must prove their worth instead of taking their title at face value.

It's complete BS. You are right on one account. The idea that a person of color who is capable should not be happy about the idea of another person of color recieving a promotion due to a quota. However, why should it matter when all are lumped in the category.

It takes too much energy to change perceptions and actions speak louder than words. These men and women, black, white, and the rest are earing their worth.
 

pretzel_man

Well-Known Member
If you don't know any of the people involved, the facts would seem to raise a question mark. The top operations job in the US has been held by a string of people from the same ethic group for a very long time. This ethnic group represents a relatively small percentage of UPS management in total, and a relatively small percentage of the overall population. About 12% if I'm not mistaken. At the same time, this same ethnic group is WAY over-represented in senior management positions in operations. This doesn't necessarily mean any or all of them aren't qualified. But it would seem to raise a big question mark in the mind of a logical person looking at the facts as to whether their ethnicity was a factor in selecting them. Do you believe that people from this ethnic group posess some genetic traits that make them good managers and leaders? Do you believe it's just a coincidence? Bitterness has nothing to do with it. I believe people should be allowed to succeed or fail based on their own actions and abilities, not their ethnicity, gender or anything else. A capable person from this same ethnic group shouldn't be too happy about it either. How would you like to always wonder in the back of your mind if you were put in a job because you were the best person, or because of the color of your skin? It seems to me the only people who would like this sort of thing are unqualified people who are able to move up without earning it.


Certainly you are right that the top US operations person has been held by individuals of the same race for a while.

So, you assume that that was due to ethnicity being a factor in their selection..... If your assertion is true then...

I would guess it also must be true that ethnicity played a part in the fact that...

Every one of our CEO's were of the same ethnicity. Every one of our CIO's were of the same ethnicity.

I'm sure that there are other positions where the ethnicity has been the same for quite a while.

P-Man
 

tieguy

Banned
the debate here as to whether a person of color earned their spot or were awarded it as an effort to meet quota's certainly highlights the problem we face with quota systems.

I've been at those meetings where it was stressed that we needed to find minority promotion canidates to fast track to upper positions.

So now the minority candidate not only has to metally deal with the hopefully occasional bigot but must also now deal with the knawing fear in the back of his /her mind that the position they earned may have been for what they are rather then what they have done.
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
Certainly you are right that the top US operations person has been held by individuals of the same race for a while.

So, you assume that that was due to ethnicity being a factor in their selection..... If your assertion is true then...

I would guess it also must be true that ethnicity played a part in the fact that...

Every one of our CEO's were of the same ethnicity. Every one of our CIO's were of the same ethnicity.

I'm sure that there are other positions where the ethnicity has been the same for quite a while.

P-Man

I know in this post there is a message somewhere amongst the pollically correct phrasing and I think I understand it.
I will be more blunt with my opinion.
Affirmative actions, while on the surface seem necesssary in past decades, only serve to perpetuate the cultural and racial divides in this country.
It was a mistake from the beginning.
It will never be possible to make ammends for the injustices of the past.
To try and do so now is not fair to anybody.
 

pretzel_man

Well-Known Member
I know in this post there is a message somewhere amongst the pollically correct phrasing and I think I understand it.
I will be more blunt with my opinion.
Affirmative actions, while on the surface seem necesssary in past decades, only serve to perpetuate the cultural and racial divides in this country.
It was a mistake from the beginning.
It will never be possible to make ammends for the injustices of the past.
To try and do so now is not fair to anybody.

I absolutely agree with you. But, what does that have to do with the specific people mentioned in this thread?

I am very much against affirmative action.

I am also against bigotry, racism, sexism, and the other ism's.

I believe these people who made it to the very top of the organization got there on their own merit. Just as I believe our previous CEO's did as well. Some of these people are minorities, and our previous CEO's were not. One is not due to a quota, and the other is not due to racism.

P-Man
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
I absolutely agree with you. But, what does that have to do with the specific people mentioned in this thread?

I am very much against affirmative action.

I am also against bigotry, racism, sexism, and the other ism's.

I believe these people who made it to the very top of the organization got there on their own merit. Just as I believe our previous CEO's did as well. Some of these people are minorities, and our previous CEO's were not. One is not due to a quota, and the other is not due to racism.

P-Man
I don't know any of these specific people. Chances are, I like most of the Brown Cafe community, never will. I was simply commenting on speculation that some of these assignments were somehow driven by demographics. To be clear as a lowly service provider, I have no evidence of this being the case. I was merely voicing my disgust with the practice, past and present. Perhaps this isn't were this thread was going and I mistakenly read something that wasn't there?
 

RoyalFlush

One of Them
the debate here as to whether a person of color earned their spot or were awarded it as an effort to meet quota's certainly highlights the problem we face with quota systems.

I've been at those meetings where it was stressed that we needed to find minority promotion canidates to fast track to upper positions.

So now the minority candidate not only has to metally deal with the hopefully occasional bigot but must also now deal with the knawing fear in the back of his /her mind that the position they earned may have been for what they are rather then what they have done.

Been there too Anyone that believes that it's an equal playing field is mistaken. There are two lists for promotion candidates; minority and non-minority. When a minority is needed to fill the quota or adjust the representation, the qualifications of the non-minority are irrelevant.
 

island1fox

Well-Known Member
Certainly you are right that the top US operations person has been held by individuals of the same race for a while.

So, you assume that that was due to ethnicity being a factor in their selection..... If your assertion is true then...

I would guess it also must be true that ethnicity played a part in the fact that...

Every one of our CEO's were of the same ethnicity. Every one of our CIO's were of the same ethnicity.

I'm sure that there are other positions where the ethnicity has been the same for quite a while.

P-Man


P-man,
You shock me with this response !!!!
First of all while our Top operations person has been black for the past twenty five years ---yes that is questionable --because the U.S. consisists of approx 12.5% black.
You have claimed that all CEO's have been the same ethinicity !! I imagine you mean white !! --Not how many Irish,Italian, Polish, German ETC ??? Since you lumped them all together --what % of the total population do they represent ???
Very poor comparison on your part !!

I t is very obvious that UPS has played a polically correct card with C.T.--C.D.--J.W. --M.G. AND FUTURE TO BE NAMED G.B. --all black as top operations manager ---12.5% of total population -----but 100% control of ops for over 25 years --PLEASE !!!!:dissapointed:
 
Last edited:
Top