Telematics and peak

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
P.S. UPS can't justify the expense to retrofit package cars with 3 point seatbelts, yet can spend on this system? Saftey First?? Doesn't seem to be the case does it?

A dead driver can be replaced with a new hire who will save the company at least $10k per year in labor costs. There is no financial incentive for the company to spend $50 on a belt that will keep a high-seniority driver alive.
 

pretzel_man

Well-Known Member
P-Man,
Are any of these new tools going to increase accountability on the center management to actually implement and use the tools to eliminate dispatch deficiencies?
Sober says management is being told now but they don't do anything about it. Possibly because there is no automated audit capability of actual dispatch.
An automated analysis tool for dispatch could point out problems with the loop as well.

Through corporate contacts I am aware of some of the things on the drawing board. They always warn me that nothing is a magic bullet.

So, I don't know if anything can really show AUTOMATICALLY who is inept.

In the old days, we used to say "go look". Remember MBWA? I don't see it as much more than "back to the basics".

P-Man
 

What'dyabringmetoday???

Well-Known Member
P-Man,
Are any of these new tools going to increase accountability on the center management to actually implement and use the tools to eliminate dispatch deficiencies?
Sober says management is being told now but they don't do anything about it. Possibly because there is no automated audit capability of actual dispatch.
An automated analysis tool for dispatch could point out problems with the loop as well.
Part of the problem could be the "tools" that are actually allowed to do dispatch. Also the idea of an untrained preload that can simply look at a sticker and all is well. The place seems to keep running though, and the blue and white envelope shows up each week, so I am happy.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
Yes, some expectations are unrealistic (like pickup compliance). Most of the others though can be met through good management. Management's job is to plan, execute, and analyze the operation (so the plan can be updated).


P-Man

P-man...

I've been here for 23 years and have seen a lot of "new programs" implemented.

I was here when we went from 50-liners to the first DIADS back in '91. I was here for CACD, sales leads, TEAM concept, Remote Initiative, PAS/EDD, satellite centers, bicycle helpers, and Telematics.

There is a typical pattern that emerges during the implementation of all these new programs.

Nobody in lower-level management ever wants to be "that guy" who confronts the higher-ups with the flaws or impossible expectations in their plans. Instead they play it safe; if the program doesnt work they simply pretend that it works and do whatever they must...no matter how stupid or counterproductive it might be... to maintain the illusion of success, meet the quotas and spoon-feed the desired numbers to their superiors.

As a result, problems never get fixed; they simply get ignored or the data gets falsified in order to make them disappear.

We saw this in the Remote Inititiative, where drivers were required to sheet a predetermined number of stops as "remote" in order to meet a quota even when it wouldnt add any miles to deliver them.

We see this in the 80% pickup compliance mandate, where drivers are instructed to record pickups within the required timeframe rather than when they are actually done.

We see this in the quota of 40 stops per helper DIAD where drivers simply prerecord the required number of stops into the board in order to generate the desired statistic, with no regard towards whether or not any time is actually saved.

Satellite centers, PAS/EDD and Telematics are no different. Front-line management basically gets the new programs crammed down their throats, with little or no regard for common sense or reality, and are tasked to "make them work" with no questions asked.
 
Last edited:

Catatonic

Nine Lives
P-man...

I've been here for 23 years and have seen a lot of "new programs" implemented.

I was here when we went from 50-liners to the first DIADS back in '91. I was here for CACD, sales leads, TEAM concept, Remote Initiative, PAS/EDD, satellite centers, bicycle helpers, and Telematics.

There is a typical pattern that emerges during the implementation of all these new programs.

Nobody in lower-level management ever wants to be "that guy" who confronts the higher-ups with the flaws or impossible expectations in their plans. Instead they play it safe; if the program doesnt work they simply pretend that it works and do whatever they must...no matter how stupid or counterproductive it might be... to meet the quotas and spoon-feed the desired numbers to their superiors.

As a result, problems never get fixed; they simply get ignored or the data gets falsified in order to make them disappear.

We saw this in the Remote Inititiative, where drivers were required to sheet a predetermined number of stops as "remote" in order to meet a quota even when it wouldnt add any miles to deliver them.

We see this in the 80% pickup compliance mandate, where drivers are instructed to record pickups within the required timeframe rather than when they are actually done.

We see this in the quota of 40 stops per helper DIAD where drivers simply prerecord the required number of stops into the board in order to generate the desired statistic, with no regard towards whether or not any time is actually saved.

Satellite centers, PAS/EDD and Telematics are no different. Front-line management basically gets the new programs crammed down their throats, with little or no regard for common sense or reality, and are tasked to "make them work" with no questions asked.

I was going to reply that our jobs as management is find a way to make these new systems and programs work .. and we are proud of that.

And then I saw in your last sentence that you already knew that.

And by the way, you forgot about our first scanning systems for NDA. Want to talk about a cluster***. But we made it work, got the bugs out and now it just happens in the background.
If we waited until every system was perfect (or even very good) we would never deploy anything. The right question is always, "Is it good enough?"

I think we do a much better job than Microsoft.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
And by the way, you forgot about our first scanning systems for NDA. Want to talk about a cluster***. But we made it work, got the bugs out and now it just happens in the background.
If we waited until every system was perfect (or even very good) we would never deploy anything. The right question is always, "Is it good enough?"

I think we do a much better job than Microsoft.

In order to get the bugs out you must first admit that they exist.

This involves being honest about the fact that the new program may not be working exactly as its designers envisioned....which at UPS means telling someone who is higher up than you that they are wrong.

You dont get promoted by telling your superiors that they are wrong. You get promoted by pretending that they are right.
 

Catatonic

Nine Lives
In order to get the bugs out you must first admit that they exist.

This involves being honest about the fact that the new program may not be working exactly as its designers envisioned....which at UPS means telling someone who is higher up than you that they are wrong.

You dont get promoted by telling your superiors that they are wrong. You get promoted by pretending that they are right.

Or making them work.
Never met a boss yet that did not like someone making them look good.
Guess it's just a difference in approach.
 

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
Or making them work.
Never met a boss yet that did not like someone making them look good.
Guess it's just a difference in approach.

The difference is that if I truly have your best interests at heart I'm not going to tell you what you want to hear...I'm going to tell you what you need to hear.
 

pretzel_man

Well-Known Member
P-man...

I've been here for 23 years and have seen a lot of "new programs" implemented.

I was here when we went from 50-liners to the first DIADS back in '91. I was here for CACD, sales leads, TEAM concept, Remote Initiative, PAS/EDD, satellite centers, bicycle helpers, and Telematics.

There is a typical pattern that emerges during the implementation of all these new programs.

Nobody in lower-level management ever wants to be "that guy" who confronts the higher-ups with the flaws or impossible expectations in their plans. Instead they play it safe; if the program doesnt work they simply pretend that it works and do whatever they must...no matter how stupid or counterproductive it might be... to maintain the illusion of success, meet the quotas and spoon-feed the desired numbers to their superiors.

As a result, problems never get fixed; they simply get ignored or the data gets falsified in order to make them disappear.

We saw this in the Remote Inititiative, where drivers were required to sheet a predetermined number of stops as "remote" in order to meet a quota even when it wouldnt add any miles to deliver them.

We see this in the 80% pickup compliance mandate, where drivers are instructed to record pickups within the required timeframe rather than when they are actually done.

We see this in the quota of 40 stops per helper DIAD where drivers simply prerecord the required number of stops into the board in order to generate the desired statistic, with no regard towards whether or not any time is actually saved.

Satellite centers, PAS/EDD and Telematics are no different. Front-line management basically gets the new programs crammed down their throats, with little or no regard for common sense or reality, and are tasked to "make them work" with no questions asked.

Sober:

You quoted three initiatives that were mishandled.

Remote Residential - This was initially planned to be a remote delivery intitiative (RDI). It ended up being a residential delivery initiative and was eventually removed. The original idea was (and still is) good. We just could not manage it.

Pickup Compliance - There are some stops that need to be picked up within 30 minutes. The majority do not. We use the same measure for each and this causes poor behavior. This one is still being measured and I'm hopeful it will change.

40 Stops in a Helper Board - This is so stupid, I won't even go into the reason they do it.

Those three don't make the others stupid.

PAS / EDD has saved the company a tremendous amount of money and enabled new services. It has also improved our service. Even though the use is not consistent, overall it has been a good thing and has been highly scrutinized.

Telematics - Has reduced cost signficantly as compared to non-telematics centers. This has also been highly scrutinized.

I get to see lots and lots of centers and speak with lots of management and drivers. My point is that if something is stupid, I'll say so. Telematics does not fall into that category.

P-Man
 

What'dyabringmetoday???

Well-Known Member
Something must be going right because the joint is still running after all these years. Some people just don't like change. I like change. I'd like to change into a feeder driver. Whoops, getting off topic.
 

CharleyHustle

Well-Known Member
"Get to see lots and lots of centers and speak with lots of management and drivers. My point is that if something is stupid, I'll say so. Telematics does not fall into that category.

P-Man"

I certainly do appretiate your honest answers. I'll say that most of the initiatives were not stupid, even RDI. I can count endless times when if I could let this empty Dish Network return box go today, I could save 5 miles and 15 minutes. But that's it. I was never trusted with that decision. Soon, we had now unfrozen hams or turkeys to deliver on Monday because I wasn't trusted with deciding which pkg shouldn't get deliverd on Friday.

Pas/Edd, could be the greatest package delivery tool ever invented. The only requirement is you need detailed delivery trace information to make it work. I don't get the feeling that any supervisor would trust any information that I or any other driver would provide. Maybe that is unique to my center, but from reading BC I don't get that idea. Telematics is next in line. Is it used to make routes more efficent and drivers safer? Or just to intimidate "inappropriate" behavior by drivers?
 

UnconTROLLed

perfection
"Get to see lots and lots of centers and speak with lots of management and drivers. My point is that if something is stupid, I'll say so. Telematics does not fall into that category.

P-Man"

I certainly do appretiate your honest answers. I'll say that most of the initiatives were not stupid, even RDI. I can count endless times when if I could let this empty Dish Network return box go today, I could save 5 miles and 15 minutes. But that's it. I was never trusted with that decision. Soon, we had now unfrozen hams or turkeys to deliver on Monday because I wasn't trusted with deciding which pkg shouldn't get deliverd on Friday.

Pas/Edd, could be the greatest package delivery tool ever invented. The only requirement is you need detailed delivery trace information to make it work. I don't get the feeling that any supervisor would trust any information that I or any other driver would provide. Maybe that is unique to my center, but from reading BC I don't get that idea. Telematics is next in line. Is it used to make routes more efficent and drivers safer? Or just to intimidate "inappropriate" behavior by drivers?

By intimidating inappropriate behaviours it inherently forces drivers to become more efficient and safer.
 

brownmonster

Man of Great Wisdom
40 Stops in a Helper Board - This is so stupid, I won't even go into the reason they do it.


They do this because after 100+ years the company still thinks you can drop off a helper on a bike/sled/handcart/etc and leave them with a diad and they can deliver by themselves. The reality is, you put the stops in the extra board to pacify upper mgmnt and use the helper as a runner.
 

Bubblehead

My Senior Picture
Pas/Edd, could be the greatest package delivery tool ever invented. The only requirement is you need detailed delivery trace information to make it work. I don't get the feeling that any supervisor would trust any information that I or any other driver would provide. Maybe that is unique to my center, but from reading BC I don't get that idea. Telematics is next in line. Is it used to make routes more efficent and drivers safer? Or just to intimidate "inappropriate" behavior by drivers?

I tend to agree that PAS, in theory, is a great system.
The problem I see in my center is the inability to maintain the loops.
They spent millions to implement the system but don't want to spend anything to maintain it.
For reasons I am not a privy, my route falls out of the preferred delivery order as well as entire shelves going unutilized in the load plan.
My theory is that it happens as they push and pull splits prior to start of the sort.
By the time I realize there is a problem, it's to late for that day.
Then when I try to get the preload supes ear, he's so busy and beat up wrapping up his day all I get is a cussing or an empty promise.
Then that plan gets put away wet so I can relive it again the next time they pull it out.
Come in at night and try to get the On Car to help and he can do no more than send an email to the preload supe because they took away his ability to get into the system.
Something about too many cooks in the kitchen or something.
And round and round we go.
Most drivers have given up and don't even try to get it fixed anymore.
It really is a shame, because it's a great concept, but without proper maintenance, any perceived advantages are negated when the system is neglected.
 

Overpaid Union Thug

Well-Known Member
40 Stops in a Helper Board - This is so stupid, I won't even go into the reason they do it.


They do this because after 100+ years the company still thinks you can drop off a helper on a bike/sled/handcart/etc and leave them with a diad and they can deliver by themselves. The reality is, you put the stops in the extra board to pacify upper mgmnt and use the helper as a runner.

I haven't used a helper board in over a week. The part-time sups in the office fix my timecard to show that I used a helper. I don't understand why they don't just do this for everyone's helper. When I do have a helper board I've usually already completed 40 stops long before I actually meet them.
 

brown bomber

brown bomber
To stop would mean to admit that a mistake was made.

Admitting mistakes has never been a strong point of this organization.

Look at how often we wind up stuck with an operational "plan" that has been imposed upon us from above and that has no basis in reality. If the plan wont work, we will simply pretend that it works rather than changing it to reflect what is happening in the real world.

In my building we have been saddled with sattelite centers that are costing us more money than they purport to save...but there is no way to get rid of them because the individual(s) from Corporate who mandated them would first have to admit that they were wrong about them in the first place.
 

Pkgrunner

Till I Collapse
I tend to agree that PAS, in theory, is a great system.
The problem I see in my center is the inability to maintain the loops.
They spent millions to implement the system but don't want to spend anything to maintain it.
For reasons I am not a privy, my route falls out of the preferred delivery order as well as entire shelves going unutilized in the load plan.
My theory is that it happens as they push and pull splits prior to start of the sort.
By the time I realize there is a problem, it's to late for that day.
Then when I try to get the preload supes ear, he's so busy and beat up wrapping up his day all I get is a cussing or an empty promise.
Then that plan gets put away wet so I can relive it again the next time they pull it out.
Come in at night and try to get the On Car to help and he can do no more than send an email to the preload supe because they took away his ability to get into the system.
Something about too many cooks in the kitchen or something.
And round and round we go.
Most drivers have given up and don't even try to get it fixed anymore.
It really is a shame, because it's a great concept, but without proper maintenance, any perceived advantages are negated when the system is neglected.

I worked on mine at least 15 times before it was implemented...when it finally was implemented it was the original dyslexic loop that I was asked to work on in the first place. After implementation and my 3 day ride the "team" fixed 10 % of the errors...I have worked on it 15 more times since....but after about 2 days, it reverts back to some sort of default original dyslexic loop. I gave up and only follow trace when I have to(too bulky to start on shelf 8,7 6). When trace is followed within in the 95% range it adds 30 miles and about 1 hr. to my plan and paid day....the over/under allowed is roughly the same either way...so, if I feel like making an extra $250.00 per week for doing the same amount of work, I follow trace:whiteflag:
 
Top