Telematics and peak

[govols019]

Is this your normal route?

There are two likely scenarios.

One, you have a bad DIAD.

Two, (and this is especially true if this is not your normal route) whoever has been delivering the route has not been following methods. If this is the case, DIAD would think an address is at a different place than it really is.

P-Man

Yes, my normal bid route and it's the same DIAD I always use.

 

[hellfire]

I have the same route everyday, same DIAD and deliver to the exact same locations, and some days the GPS will bark at me for several stops. It's good technology but not perfect 100% of the time. I would hate to be fired because of it.

listen,,,,dont be silly, , gps , telematics,, edd,, pas,,its all perfect,,i have read several articles about it ,

 

[MC4YOU2]

The annoying GPS alarm squealing at me on correct locations has sure happened to me as well on different days at different stops. I recently got a refurbished diad due to my old one failing to hold a charge, and so far no false alerts. Maybe it was due to an internal malfunction, possibly age related as the units get road weary as they seem quite fragile.

 

[SignificantOwner]

the brow beating you post about is not my experience.

On the other hand, based on the positive results, I guess you are making the argument that brow beating works.

P-Man

Are the results really positive if people were treated like crap to drive them? Not according to our policy book.

You sound like either a region or corporate employee so I wonder if you can answer a question. What is the corporate design for management staffing of a package center? # data sup, p/t (or friend/t) PDS, OMS, on-road sup, etc. Should the PDS also be accountable for the preload? Who should handle CHSP work, etc? Reason I ask is that I'm not convinced there is a coherent strategy.

 

[DS]

Reason I ask is that I'm not convinced there is a coherent strategy.

DUH

 

[pretzel_man]

Are the results really positive if people were treated like crap to drive them? Not according to our policy book.

You sound like either a region or corporate employee so I wonder if you can answer a question. What is the corporate design for management staffing of a package center? # data sup, p/t (or friend/t) PDS, OMS, on-road sup, etc. Should the PDS also be accountable for the preload? Who should handle CHSP work, etc? Reason I ask is that I'm not convinced there is a coherent strategy.

Owner:

I've worked in many, many centers over the last few years. I've never gotten results by treating people like crap. Of course, about 5% of the drivers thought I treated them like crap. I say its because they did not fulfill their part of the bargain.

I promised to work on misloads, better load quality, better trace, and better dispatch. Their part was to either come in earlier or complete more stops. About 5% chose to not comply.

As far as a center strategy, have someone show you the iGate. There is a section called Package Management Assistant. It has tons of information including JBA's, tools, training, etc.

There is also a staffing tool that helps determine proper center staffing. Here is a quote from the user guide:

"The Package Center Analysis Tool identifies tasks that are completed in a package center. Some of these tasks occur in all centers while other tasks are unique to only certain centers – extended facilities versus metro facilities. The Package Center Analysis Tool will generate a staffing model...."

You question was whether there was a strategy. I say yes.. Absolutely. Is everyone following it. No. Like everything else, it varies.

Finally, there are many in corporate who think we should reduce staffing in the center. They think that tools like Telematics make it easier to do the work with less people. I do not happen to agree.

P-Man

 

[CharleyHustle]

I have the same route everyday, same DIAD and deliver to the exact same locations, and some days the GPS will bark at me for several stops. It's good technology but not perfect 100% of the time. I would hate to be fired because of it.

P-Man,

Could this happen because the DIAD is not capturing enough sattelite signals in the right configuration to give it an accurate reading? I to have had the DIAD blink red with the alarm when I'm at the right place. I've also had it scan at delivery correctly and while I'm walking away hit stop complete then have the alarm go off.

I also have customers where I always deliver their pkgs where they work using the "left at" option, and when you go to their house on days when work is closed the alarm will sound. With an extended route I do this for quite a few people, so anyone subbing could have this happen several times a day.

 

[pretzel_man]

P-Man,

Could this happen because the DIAD is not capturing enough sattelite signals in the right configuration to give it an accurate reading? I to have had the DIAD blink red with the alarm when I'm at the right place. I've also had it scan at delivery correctly and while I'm walking away hit stop complete then have the alarm go off.

I also have customers where I always deliver their pkgs where they work using the "left at" option, and when you go to their house on days when work is closed the alarm will sound. With an extended route I do this for quite a few people, so anyone subbing could have this happen several times a day.

Charley,

I usually get the corporate people to help me with individual situations. Here is the best that I can explain it.

The DIAD will show a RED target when the expected Lat / Lon for a delivery is more than 250 feet away from the current DIAD Lat / Long.

I do not think that the number of satellites is really an impact for the current DIAD reading. They tell me that the DIAD ignores these low confidence readings and shows a YELLOW target then? Has that been your experience?

If you have a bad DIAD where the radios antennae are misaligned, the DIAD lat / lon may look valid, but its not. I personally have not seen much of these, but people on this board say they have.

The other side of the coin is that a DIAD is getting a good Lat / Lon from GPS, but the expected Lat / Lon for an address is off.

If you deliver an package to a location different than where its addressed, the DIAD will say you are at the wrong place.

Now, if you consistently deliver a package to a different address than on the package, the expected location now becomes the "left at" location. If the next driver delivers that package to the address on the package, he / she will be told they are at the wrong place.

Its a "learning system" After two deliveries (within 250' of each other) it creates the expected lat / lon. The third delivery will move the lat / lon a little. The fourth, etc. will move it again.

After many deliveries (especially consistent ones), the delivery location is very, very good.

P-Man

 

[hellfire]

talking to other drivers it seems to happen to all of us at the same times on the same days

 

[DS]

consistantly recording an address at the wrong place will make the DIAD think the wrong place is the correct spot.
P-Man

The diad can be taught to lie?
I'm not trying to be facetious,I find this stuff amazing too,

 

[SignificantOwner]

Owner:

I've worked in many, many centers over the last few years. I've never gotten results by treating people like crap. Of course, about 5% of the drivers thought I treated them like crap. I say its because they did not fulfill their part of the bargain.

I promised to work on misloads, better load quality, better trace, and better dispatch. Their part was to either come in earlier or complete more stops. About 5% chose to not comply.

As far as a center strategy, have someone show you the iGate. There is a section called Package Management Assistant. It has tons of information including JBA's, tools, training, etc.

There is also a staffing tool that helps determine proper center staffing. Here is a quote from the user guide:

"The Package Center Analysis Tool identifies tasks that are completed in a package center. Some of these tasks occur in all centers while other tasks are unique to only certain centers – extended facilities versus metro facilities. The Package Center Analysis Tool will generate a staffing model...."

You question was whether there was a strategy. I say yes.. Absolutely. Is everyone following it. No. Like everything else, it varies.

Finally, there are many in corporate who think we should reduce staffing in the center. They think that tools like Telematics make it easier to do the work with less people. I do not happen to agree.

P-Man

Pman,

I am familiar with this igate stuff but noone cares about it or uses it to determine staffing. Who is the owner of this strategy? Who is responsible ensures adherence? Treating people like crap includes witholding proper resources and coming down on the management teams to get the results anyway.

Are you aware that the NCR said the districts could use almost zero p/t sups on new year's eve? What igate model did they get this from? Many families paid for this decision, but not the families of the decision makers.

 

[pretzel_man]

Pman,

I am familiar with this igate stuff but noone cares about it or uses it to determine staffing. Who is the owner of this strategy? Who is responsible ensures adherence? Treating people like crap includes witholding proper resources and coming down on the management teams to get the results anyway.

Are you aware that the NCR said the districts could use almost zero p/t sups on new year's eve? What igate model did they get this from? Many families paid for this decision, but not the families of the decision makers.

The strategy and guidelines is from Corporate. That's what's on the iGate. Its up to the local operations to properly execute the strategy.

BTW, the iGate staffing sheets outline how many people are needed to complete the identified tasks. If a district uses less people, they would do less of the tasks. That is acceptable.

iGate of course does not say what you would do on New Year's Eve. That's up to the local operations.

I would suggest you use the iGate information to your advantage. Show the tasks being done, and compare it to the current staffing. If there is not enough staffing, ask what work will not be completed.

I've done this successfully over the years.

P-Man

 

[RoyalFlush]

Data is minuplated to shows whatever gains are promised by the project leaders. Once they're gone the true numbers will surface. Same as evey other project I've seen at UPS. The costs on the other end often exceed the so called savings or the cost is just shifted to another area that is not within the focus.

 

[soberups]

Data is minuplated to shows whatever gains are promised by the project leaders. Once they're gone the true numbers will surface. Same as evey other project I've seen at UPS. The costs on the other end often exceed the so called savings or the cost is just shifted to another area that is not within the focus.

+1


Or to put it another way...its perfectly OK to spend $50 to save a dime.... as long as that dime shows up on your report and the $50 shows up on someone elses.

 

[pretzel_man]

Data is minuplated to shows whatever gains are promised by the project leaders. Once they're gone the true numbers will surface. Same as evey other project I've seen at UPS. The costs on the other end often exceed the so called savings or the cost is just shifted to another area that is not within the focus.

As far as Telematics goes, your assertion is wrong and not logical....

Telematics has been monitored at the highest levels. When the source of the data is cost statements over the long term (its been monitored for over two years) there is no place to hide.

In addition, those people deciding on the fate of Telematics are Grade 20's and higher who are incented to reduce true cost. Manipulated numbers will not help their incentive.

Yes, some UPS numbers can be fudged for the short term. Service via SEAS, and Telematics are not in that category.

P-Man

 

[RoyalFlush]

As far as Telematics goes, your assertion is wrong and not logical....

Telematics has been monitored at the highest levels. When the source of the data is cost statements over the long term (its been monitored for over two years) there is no place to hide.

In addition, those people deciding on the fate of Telematics are Grade 20's and higher who are incented to reduce true cost. Manipulated numbers will not help their incentive.

Yes, some UPS numbers can be fudged for the short term. Service via SEAS, and Telematics are not in that category.

P-Man

What’s illogical is thinking that the cost can’t be manipulated. If the only change were the addition of telematics we could get a real cost comparison. When you apply additional pressure, additional tracking, shift management staffing, use a handful of special assignment people to get the job done, and make other changes at the same time the figures are manipulated.

It is impossible to measure accurately. Some of the cost is absorbed by the district, region and corporate. Center cost may appear to be reduced, while actual cost is increased. The grade 20's making the decisions only know what they are being told by the project leaders. Centers have a different view and first hand knowledge.

 

[pretzel_man]

What’s illogical is thinking that the cost can’t be manipulated. If the only change were the addition of telematics we could get a real cost comparison. When you apply additional pressure, additional tracking, shift management staffing, use a handful of special assignment people to get the job done, and make other changes at the same time the figures are manipulated.

It is impossible to measure accurately. Some of the cost is absorbed by the district, region and corporate. Center cost may appear to be reduced, while actual cost is increased. The grade 20's making the decisions only know what they are being told by the project leaders. Centers have a different view and first hand knowledge.

So, you have looked at the Telematics cost analysis? What in the analysis gives you the conclusion you are drawing. I've seen the analysis, and have the opposite opinion...

P-Man

 

[soberups]

So, you have looked at the Telematics cost analysis? What in the analysis gives you the conclusion you are drawing. I've seen the analysis, and have the opposite opinion...

P-Man

I cant speak to the true long term cost/vs benefit of Telematics yet because it is so new, and because I'm just a lowly driver.

What I can say...is that utterly ridiculous amounts of time, effort and money are now being wasted to "resolve" non-issues such as 90-second lunch discrepancies, package cars moving 3 feet with unlatched bulkhead doors, and irrelevant or inaccurate perceptions that a driver is somehow "breaking trace" by a trivial amount.

Human...and by extension corporate...nature is that if money is expended on something, that expense must be justified by any means necessary.

In our case...we spent a fortune on a something that generates data, so we are by God going to do something with that data. Whether that "something" even leads to increased efficiency is irrelevant.

We have more data, we print more reports, and we spend lots and lots of time talking about that data and those reports. I havent seen where any of that is making the packages get delivered any faster.

 

[soberups]

What’s illogical is thinking that the cost can’t be manipulated. If the only change were the addition of telematics we could get a real cost comparison. When you apply additional pressure, additional tracking, shift management staffing, use a handful of special assignment people to get the job done, and make other changes at the same time the figures are manipulated.

It is impossible to measure accurately. Some of the cost is absorbed by the district, region and corporate. Center cost may appear to be reduced, while actual cost is increased. The grade 20's making the decisions only know what they are being told by the project leaders. Centers have a different view and first hand knowledge.

This is true with almost any of the new programs that UPS has initiated over the last few years.

PAS/EDD has finally...after 5 years....gotten to the point where it constitutes a net improvement over what we had before. When first implemented, it was an abysmal failure and it cost us huge sums of money in terms of increased miles, paid days, overallowed days, and service failures. We may still be "in the hole" in terms of increased efficiency offsetting the initial cost of installation and resulting chaos.

Satellite centers...at least in my location...are also net money-losers. Management is aware of this, but the individuals who mandated them are high enough up the corporate ladder as to be unaccountable, so we are stuck with them for the forseeable future. Even a dumb driver like myself can spend 5 minutes crunching the numbers to prove that they cost us money, but there is no way that a simple thing like the truth will ever change the minds of those who implemented them.

Bike helpers are the same thing. I think we are doing the bike helper thing as a form of PR....and thats OK as long as we can be honest with ourselves about the fact that the bikes arent actually saving us money, time or miles....they are only shifting these costs around to different parts of the operation.

Its all about being honest and getting the "big picture" rather than focusing only on whatever data supports your position.

 

[pretzel_man]

This is true with almost any of the new programs that UPS has initiated over the last few years.

PAS/EDD has finally...after 5 years....gotten to the point where it constitutes a net improvement over what we had before. When first implemented, it was an abysmal failure and it cost us huge sums of money in terms of increased miles, paid days, overallowed days, and service failures. We may still be "in the hole" in terms of increased efficiency offsetting the initial cost of installation and resulting chaos.

Satellite centers...at least in my location...are also net money-losers. Management is aware of this, but the individuals who mandated them are high enough up the corporate ladder as to be unaccountable, so we are stuck with them for the forseeable future. Even a dumb driver like myself can spend 5 minutes crunching the numbers to prove that they cost us money, but there is no way that a simple thing like the truth will ever change the minds of those who implemented them.

Bike helpers are the same thing. I think we are doing the bike helper thing as a form of PR....and thats OK as long as we can be honest with ourselves about the fact that the bikes arent actually saving us money, time or miles....they are only shifting these costs around to different parts of the operation.

Its all about being honest and getting the "big picture" rather than focusing only on whatever data supports your position.

I've said before that looking for 90 second discrepancies is stupid. On the other hand, attention to detail is not.

There are well over 10,000 drivers on Telematics. There is a site in every district.

I have no axe to grind. I say what I have seen when it comes to Telematics You mention getting the "big picture". I think I've seen many more instances of telematics usage than you.

By the way, DPS / PAS started paying for itself within the first year, just not nearly as much as was asserted. In that first year, about 1/3 of the sites did great. About 1/3 did horrible. Overall, there was still an improvement.

Then they went and "re-deployed" the 1/3 that did poorly...

If you were in the 1/3 that was poor, you would say the whole program was stupid. If your looked at the overall picture, you would have a different opinion.

I think I've seen the "overall" picture". This includes the good, bad, and ugly.

P-Man