telematics?

[fxdwg]

This Thread needs to go away....HUmmm!!!!

 

[pretzel_man]

You speak as if everything you say is fact. I certainly don't mean to offend you or anyone else, however your "facts" are not accurate. It is this kind of repeated rhetoric that has people believing telematics can do magic. I can provide specific evidence of your inaccuracies, but I'd be violating the terms of service of this site. In the mean time, I suggest you go the the Igate. Look up the most recent bulletins. If you are as honest and accurate as you claim to be you'll report that you are 100% incorrect in your "for instance" statement above.

This Thread needs to go away....HUmmm!!!!

Okay... I'll try to give it a chance to die after this one....

I decided to look around the iGate this evening as you suggested. Its a very big place.....

I looked everywhere and I can find no information to contract what I said. I checked out everything I could think of. I also checked the Corporate and Region Sharepoint sites. Again, nothing to contradict what I said.

Now, if you are speaking of an automotive meeting from mid-August, I did read that. All that said is that they are not at 100% effective. The business case was not based on being 100% effective. They also mention the % effective on Telematics equipment. That is not new news either.

Of course, if you were talking about a different piece of information, I could not find it.. I did my due diligence I just didn't see it.

I did see that the next phase of deployment is getting ready to begin. That was contingent on the previous phase working and based on all the other reports I saw. All which supported what I said.

P-Man

 

[stevetheupsguy]

Okay... I'll try to give it a chance to die after this one....

I decided to look around the iGate this evening as you suggested. Its a very big place.....

I looked everywhere and I can find no information to contract what I said. I checked out everything I could think of. I also checked the Corporate and Region Sharepoint sites. Again, nothing to contradict what I said.

Now, if you are speaking of an automotive meeting from mid-August, I did read that. All that said is that they are not at 100% effective. The business case was not based on being 100% effective. They also mention the % effective on Telematics equipment. That is not new news either.

Of course, if you were talking about a different piece of information, I could not find it.. I did my due diligence I just didn't see it.

I did see that the next phase of deployment is getting ready to begin. That was contingent on the previous phase working and based on all the other reports I saw. All which supported what I said.

P-Man

Where?

 

[pemanager]

Where?

STUG,
The next phase will be much larger than the previous ones by quantity of buildings. Not sure by package car though since the larger buildings came earlier.

 

[JustTired]

Don't forget savings on accident and injury expense from the reduction of risky behaviors.

Although there are savings in many areas, according to the training I received the biggest part of the payback will come from productivity gains.

In my opinion the problem is that there has been zero visibility up to this point so current drivers have gotten used to not following the methods. In many cases they've actually been trained to follow wrong methods. Drivers that start their careers with Telematics - and get properly trained on the methods - won't think twice about it.

Have to agree with you there. In fact, I'll go a step further and say that they won't have to think at all. I'm of the opinion that this is the goal of all recent programs. The company no longer wants an employee who thinks (union or lower management). They are trying to achieve a more "zombie-like" workforce. I realize that this is a radical statement.....but think about it (if you can)......doesn't it appear to be so?

 

[FracusBrown]

Okay... I'll try to give it a chance to die after this one....

I decided to look around the iGate this evening as you suggested. Its a very big place.....

I looked everywhere and I can find no information to contract what I said. I checked out everything I could think of. I also checked the Corporate and Region Sharepoint sites. Again, nothing to contradict what I said.

Now, if you are speaking of an automotive meeting from mid-August, I did read that. All that said is that they are not at 100% effective. The business case was not based on being 100% effective. They also mention the % effective on Telematics equipment. That is not new news either.

Of course, if you were talking about a different piece of information, I could not find it.. I did my due diligence I just didn't see it.

I did see that the next phase of deployment is getting ready to begin. That was contingent on the previous phase working and based on all the other reports I saw. All which supported what I said.

P-Man

This is all readily available information:
Some locations have greater than 50% of units not working properly
Average across the country, somewhere around 25% are not working properly
Parts are still changed based upon time, not telematics
The part change intervals were recently reduced significantly (parts changed more often, not less)
The maintenance inspection interval was reduced significantly earlier this year (more inspections, not less)
Break downs on the parts you claim the system monitors are increasing
Cost is up

The specific bulletin I refereed to reduced the starter replacement interval to 1 year from 2 years. The fact that there is a time interval clearly illustrates the system doesn't do what you say.

Telematics has been installed on approximately 20K vehicles. If it was able to reduce cost and reduce on road failures, wouldn't we see a significant reduction in the total cost and total number of on road failures? Everyone knows you can easily reduce one bucket by increasing another. Look at the totals of any element, not the so called savings reported.

What else do you need? It seems odd that you claim to be doing research and don't know the basics. Get out of the office (cubical). Talk to the people with the facts, not the people who are trying to save face by reporting their own success.

 

[pretzel_man]

You speak as if everything you say is fact. I certainly don't mean to offend you or anyone else, however your "facts" are not accurate. It is this kind of repeated rhetoric that has people believing telematics can do magic. I can provide specific evidence of your inaccuracies, but I'd be violating the terms of service of this site. In the mean time, I suggest you go the the Igate. Look up the most recent bulletins. If you are as honest and accurate as you claim to be you'll report that you are 100% incorrect in your "for instance" statement above.

This is all readily available information:
Some locations have greater than 50% of units not working properly
Average across the country, somewhere around 25% are not working properly
Parts are still changed based upon time, not telematics
The part change intervals were recently reduced significantly (parts changed more often, not less)
The maintenance inspection interval was reduced significantly earlier this year (more inspections, not less)
Break downs on the parts you claim the system monitors are increasing
Cost is up

The specific bulletin I refereed to reduced the starter replacement interval to 1 year from 2 years. The fact that there is a time interval clearly illustrates the system doesn't do what you say.

Telematics has been installed on approximately 20K vehicles. If it was able to reduce cost and reduce on road failures, wouldn't we see a significant reduction in the total cost and total number of on road failures? Everyone knows you can easily reduce one bucket by increasing another. Look at the totals of any element, not the so called savings reported.

What else do you need? It seems odd that you claim to be doing research and don't know the basics. Get out of the office (cubical). Talk to the people with the facts, not the people who are trying to save face by reporting their own success.

This will be my last post on this so you can go ahead and have the last word. I'm certain that we are boring everyone else....

First, you are not correct on the % of telematics units not working. If you read the latest minutes from the Region Automotive managers' meeting, you will see that their MAR is 97.5%. The 50% and 75% numbers are in regard to % effective in using the system....
I am in centers all the time and use Telematics all the time. If the units didn't work the % of time you say, I would see that because I would not be able to pull statistics. If you are correct, then drivers here would know it because they would not be seeing Telematics reports.

The benefits for Telematics are based on a comparison of telematics sites vs. non telematics sites. I am correct about the reduction in cost across all elements. I have seen the reports and done the work myself in many cases.

As far as the change in policy on replacing starters... I don't really know about that. I do not know if that is the PMI policy or if it applies to Telematics sites. Maybe you are correct on that one point.

UPS will be investing more money in Telematics as the Region Automotive Managers' minutes say. UPS is doing so based on cost analysis done by an independent group, BIA. Why would UPS continue to spend money on a system if it didn't work??? The people making the decisions have a vested interest in this saving UPS money because their pay is based on those incentives.

Your assertion that they are manufacturing numbers makes no sense from that standpoint. I have been in many of those meetings. Spoken with those people. Looked at the information myself. I'm sorry but my cubicle has access to more information than your dark corner of the world.

Again, you can have the last word. I won't respond so you can say whatever you wish.

P-Man

 

[stevetheupsguy]

This will be my last post on this so you can go ahead and have the last word. I'm certain that we are boring everyone else....


P-Man

How's about me getting in the last word? I only find 37% of what you're talking about, to be boring.

 

[Catatonic]

This will be my last post on this so you can go ahead and have the last word.

Again, you can have the last word. I won't respond so you can say whatever you wish.

P-Man

You certainly have my respect for your patience and perseverance ... I guess you feel there are some out there that are listening.

Seems you are just wasting your time with the responders.

 

[pretzel_man]

You speak as if everything you say is fact. I certainly don't mean to offend you or anyone else, however your "facts" are not accurate. It is this kind of repeated rhetoric that has people believing telematics can do magic. I can provide specific evidence of your inaccuracies, but I'd be violating the terms of service of this site. In the mean time, I suggest you go the the Igate. Look up the most recent bulletins. If you are as honest and accurate as you claim to be you'll report that you are 100% incorrect in your "for instance" statement above.

You certainly have my respect for your patience and perseverance ... I guess you feel there are some out there that are listening.

Seems you are just wasting your time with the responders.

Hoax,

I learned long ago that you can't argue with a wall.... but...

I may make the argument just so those observiing can hear information. I believe strongly in the silent majority. A % of employees will be positive no matter what. A % will be negative no matter what (the walls). The remaining % are relatively quiet and make up their own minds. They will go either way based on facts.

Those are the ones to reach. I also love hearing their opinions.

P-Man

 

[iamupser]

UPS is doing so based on cost analysis done by an independent group, BIA. Why would UPS continue to spend money on a system if it didn't work???

Is that the independent group that sells the telematic units to UPS?

I would like to speak with management official(s) who thought installing re-manufactured starters vs. new, banned dielectric grease, eliminated electrical tests, spaced out PMIs on some to almost a year. THEN when their hard work came to fruition, which experienced mechanics warned AHEAD of time that these were not good choices for the fleet, they choose to whine on weekly conference calls and ask why are our road calls up, why is cost up, why so many down cars? Lets ask the genius who implemented the cuts, Oh yeah he was PROMOTED last year, now we're stuck answering for his/her choices.

That's the raw feeling from the floor in my area.
​

 

[I GOT ONE MORE]

I've been reading this post with much interest!

I certainly gain some insight reading some of the posts from members who I presume to be in management. I, for one , appreciate all the contributory posts from forum members in the ranks of management.

Telematics has now been completed in my building. Management training is complete with the drivers now being enlightened, a half dozen or so at a time, in early meetings. The "switch" has been or will be flipped shortly. We will see if the clipboard cops show up, as I've read in other posts. I will remain objective and pass judgement after a few chapters of this adventure.

One thing is for sure and this is a loose quote from a previous thread.

UPS does not purchase a system and then find ways on how to apply it,

UPS finds out what UPS wants, then creates an application to implement it.

 

[stevetheupsguy]

You certainly have my respect for your patience and perseverance ... I guess you feel there are some out there that are listening.

Seems you are just wasting your time with the responders.

Ouch!

Hoax,

I learned long ago that you can't argue with a wall.... but...

I may make the argument just so those observiing can hear information. I believe strongly in the silent majority. A % of employees will be positive no matter what. A % will be negative no matter what (the walls). The remaining % are relatively quiet and make up their own minds. They will go either way based on facts.

Those are the ones to reach. I also love hearing their opinions.

P-Man

Let me see now, 37%+37%+37%=? Hey, wait a second!

 

[hellfire]

This will be my last post on this so you can go ahead and have the last word. I'm certain that we are boring everyone else....

First, you are not correct on the % of telematics units not working. If you read the latest minutes from the Region Automotive managers' meeting, you will see that their MAR is 97.5%. The 50% and 75% numbers are in regard to % effective in using the system....
I am in centers all the time and use Telematics all the time. If the units didn't work the % of time you say, I would see that because I would not be able to pull statistics. If you are correct, then drivers here would know it because they would not be seeing Telematics reports.

The benefits for Telematics are based on a comparison of telematics sites vs. non telematics sites. I am correct about the reduction in cost across all elements. I have seen the reports and done the work myself in many cases.

As far as the change in policy on replacing starters... I don't really know about that. I do not know if that is the PMI policy or if it applies to Telematics sites. Maybe you are correct on that one point.

UPS will be investing more money in Telematics as the Region Automotive Managers' minutes say. UPS is doing so based on cost analysis done by an independent group, BIA. Why would UPS continue to spend money on a system if it didn't work??? The people making the decisions have a vested interest in this saving UPS money because their pay is based on those incentives.

Your assertion that they are manufacturing numbers makes no sense from that standpoint. I have been in many of those meetings. Spoken with those people. Looked at the information myself. I'm sorry but my cubicle has access to more information than your dark corner of the world.

Again, you can have the last word. I won't respond so you can say whatever you wish.

P-Man

ok,,here is my issue...i would say in the past10 yrs i have seen a growing trend with ups high level management regarding the ability of its operations managers and hourly people.We are all incompetent,, we have no concept how to build the company,, we are too stupid to understand the long term goals of ups. THE NUMBERS YOU REFER TO AS ABSOLUTE ARE CONTRIVED TO APPEASE THE HIGHER UPS.....the best thing to keep ups going for another 100 yrs would be have every corporate bigwig and ie know it all assume a operations position....then,, real numbers would only be fixed by correct motivation and letting operations manage

 

[FracusBrown]

This will be my last post on this so you can go ahead and have the last word. I'm certain that we are boring everyone else....

First, you are not correct on the % of telematics units not working. If you read the latest minutes from the Region Automotive managers' meeting, you will see that their MAR is 97.5%. The 50% and 75% numbers are in regard to % effective in using the system....
I am in centers all the time and use Telematics all the time. If the units didn't work the % of time you say, I would see that because I would not be able to pull statistics. If you are correct, then drivers here would know it because they would not be seeing Telematics reports.

The benefits for Telematics are based on a comparison of telematics sites vs. non telematics sites. I am correct about the reduction in cost across all elements. I have seen the reports and done the work myself in many cases.

As far as the change in policy on replacing starters... I don't really know about that. I do not know if that is the PMI policy or if it applies to Telematics sites. Maybe you are correct on that one point.

UPS will be investing more money in Telematics as the Region Automotive Managers' minutes say. UPS is doing so based on cost analysis done by an independent group, BIA. Why would UPS continue to spend money on a system if it didn't work??? The people making the decisions have a vested interest in this saving UPS money because their pay is based on those incentives.

Your assertion that they are manufacturing numbers makes no sense from that standpoint. I have been in many of those meetings. Spoken with those people. Looked at the information myself. I'm sorry but my cubicle has access to more information than your dark corner of the world.

Again, you can have the last word. I won't respond so you can say whatever you wish.

P-Man

No need to respond. I'll give the facts. Take your time. Do some research.

97.5 is the installation verification MAR. This is the percentage of units that worked correctly at least one time after installation. All center were required to meet this before going live.

The current percent with comm errors is much higher. A unit with a comm error means at least one of the measured elements contains a device error. Some centers are over 50%. Corporately the number was 15.11% in August. I stand corrected, but there are many areas over 30% as I stated. Ask your partners for the comm error report. They send it out the the world weekly to be posted and shared.

Cumulative measured (engine, start, fuel, etc) on road failures for telematics sites is up by 24. Relatively flat considering the number of installed units. No reduction.

Starters, alt, and other parts are on the same time interval nationwide in both telematic and non telematic sites.

With no reduction in parts use and no reduction in breakdowns there can be no related cost savings.

Your assertion that you have access to more information is based upon what?

As far as the performance of the people making these decisions, you have to be joking...the worst decisions in history are being made and the results show it.

 

[jalnar]

We are told if you go off trace your lunch starts when you start even if the wheels are rolling. You can only go 1 mile of trace for break. SO bottom line is your lunch can be shortened by you going to a restaraunt instaed of eating in the truck

 

[grgrcr88]

Have to agree with you there. In fact, I'll go a step further and say that they won't have to think at all. I'm of the opinion that this is the goal of all recent programs. The company no longer wants an employee who thinks (union or lower management). They are trying to achieve a more "zombie-like" workforce. I realize that this is a radical statement.....but think about it (if you can)......doesn't it appear to be so?

This way they have a good excuse to try to get a two tier top pay rammed thri on the next contract. Drivers don't have to think so they don't deserve the high wage anymore. I would bet my left arm that will be something the company tries to get in the next one!!

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

This way they have a good excuse to try to get a two tier top pay rammed thri on the next contract. Drivers don't have to think so they don't deserve the high wage anymore. I would bet my left arm that will be something the company tries to get in the next one!!

..and people thought I was nuts when I first mentioned this sometime last year.

 

[22.34life]

Have to agree with you there. In fact, I'll go a step further and say that they won't have to think at all. I'm of the opinion that this is the goal of all recent programs. The company no longer wants an employee who thinks (union or lower management). They are trying to achieve a more "zombie-like" workforce. I realize that this is a radical statement.....but think about it (if you can)......doesn't it appear to be so?

this is true,in the building we are seeing more changes that take away the need to think.in the small sort we have ngss that tells you where the package goes when you scan it,the next generation of scanners in the outbound will have check charts loaded on them and will alert you if you scan a bad package.all these changes are for one thing and one thing only,to improve production.in todays ups production is god,if you dont have to think than you can move faster,thats what they want faster,faster,faster.

 

[Catatonic]

this is true,in the building we are seeing more changes that take away the need to think.in the small sort we have ngss that tells you where the package goes when you scan it,the next generation of scanners in the outbound will have check charts loaded on them and will alert you if you scan a bad package.all these changes are for one thing and one thing only,to improve production.in todays ups production is god,if you dont have to think than you can move faster,thats what they want faster,faster,faster.

Sounds about right ... kudos.