UPS Basic expanding?

[Red Dawn]

This week we had a new change our labels on preload. We are told that if a package has a + sign in between the drivers name and sequence number, then it is to be sorted to small sort. No matter the size.

In small sort their is 6-7 IE workers sorting the packages into a new bags. They are not the same bags we use for smalls. They also us Velcro to close them up with.

Have been told that this volume is going to the United States Post Office. They will now be delivering this volume. My sup. said he was told it is going to take 1/5 of volume off our drivers.

I also asked one of the IE guys if this was a temporary, or test....he said "no, this is on from here on out"

I'm sure our package car drivers will like this for now. But will cost us in new drivers now and later they will cut more drivers as this grows.

Anyone else seen this? Looked at shipers..all dif. companys abc ltd landsend etc

 

[Catatonic]

This week we had a new change our labels on preload. We are told that if a package has a + sign in between the drivers name and sequence number, then it is to be sorted to small sort. No matter the size.

In small sort their is 6-7 IE workers sorting the packages into a new bags. They are not the same bags we use for smalls. They also us Velcro to close them up with.

Have been told that this volume is going to the United States Post Office. They will now be delivering this volume. My sup. said he was told it is going to take 1/5 of volume off our drivers.

I also asked one of the IE guys if this was a temporary, or test....he said "no, this is on from here on out"

I'm sure our package car drivers will like this for now. But will cost us in new drivers now and later they will cut more drivers as this grows.

Anyone else seen this? Looked at shipers..all dif. companys abc ltd landsend etc

Are you SURE about this POST?

 

[curiousbrain]

Might be the new SurePost?

Some vague details can be found via Google, and also on this thread, starting around post #9.

I could be mistaken, though.

 

[pretzel_man]

Are you SURE about this POST?

 

[over9five]

Are you SURE about this POST?

x2

 

[Anonymous 10]

Are you SURE about this POST?

+3

 

[UPSGUY72]

Are you SURE about this POST?

My SUP mentioned this Thursday and Friday. Starting this week when you deliver to the post office you only need to scan the label on the out side of the new burlap type bag you don't need to scan all the packages in the bag. As for the volume increase to the post office as I see it the post office is going to be paying alot more OT or have to hire more drivers to cover the increase in volume. Either way it just adds to thiee problem they can't even get close to paying their overhead now even with all the early retirements and consolidations.

 

[pretzel_man]

My SUP mentioned this Thursday and Friday. Starting this week when you deliver to the post office you only need to scan the label on the out side of the new burlap type bag you don't need to scan all the packages in the bag. As for the volume increase to the post office as I see it the post office is going to be paying alot more OT or have to hire more drivers to cover the increase in volume. Either way it just adds to thiee problem they can't even get close to paying their overhead now even with all the early retirements and consolidations.

I don't know a lot about this, but why will it increase drivers? They already go to every address? Unless their trucks are overfilled, It will not cost them extra?

Seems to me that if you had an extra 3 packages to deliver, and every one was just one more to an address you were already going to, it would not add time?

Its about the same impact to them (if my math is close)

 

[curiousbrain]

Seems to me that if you had an extra 3 packages to deliver, and every one was just one more to an address you were already going to, it would not add time?

The drivers here can speak to this with more authority than I can, but if the logic your proposing is true, then a 180 stop route with 1 package for each should not take any longer then a 180 stop route with 5 packages for each? Not that you asked for my opinion, but I seem skeptical of that.

edit: Although, with a little further thought, it does stand to reason that three extra packages total would not be a problem; it was the three extra per stop I was considering when I wrote the initial post.

 

[UPSGUY72]

I don't know a lot about this, but why will it increase drivers? They already go to every address? Unless their trucks are overfilled, It will not cost them extra?

Seems to me that if you had an extra 3 packages to deliver, and every one was just one more to an address you were already going to, it would not add time?

Its about the same impact to them (if my math is close)

It take more time to deliver packages then envelopes. How many package can a mailman carry in his satekel not many but he can car hundreds of letters. Also have you seen the size of a postal service car. I have more space in my cab they they have in there whole car.

 

[Anonymous 10]

This week we had a new change our labels on preload. We are told that if a package has a + sign in between the drivers name and sequence number, then it is to be sorted to small sort. No matter the size.

In small sort their is 6-7 IE workers sorting the packages into a new bags. They are not the same bags we use for smalls. They also us Velcro to close them up with.

Have been told that this volume is going to the United States Post Office. They will now be delivering this volume. My sup. said he was told it is going to take 1/5 of volume off our drivers.

I also asked one of the IE guys if this was a temporary, or test....he said "no, this is on from here on out"

I'm sure our package car drivers will like this for now. But will cost us in new drivers now and later they will cut more drivers as this grows.

Anyone else seen this? Looked at shipers..all dif. companys abc ltd landsend etc

What comes to mind when I hear about this new service and partnership. Train wreck

 

[UPSGUY72]

The drivers here can speak to this with more authority than I can, but if the logic your proposing is true, then a 180 stop route with 1 package for each should not take any longer then a 180 stop route with 5 packages for each? Not that you asked for my opinion, but I seem skeptical of that.


edit: Although, with a little further thought, it does stand to reason that three extra packages total would not be a problem; it was the three extra per stop I was considering when I wrote the initial post.

great analogy brownbaggin

 

[pretzel_man]

The drivers here can speak to this with more authority than I can, but if the logic your proposing is true, then a 180 stop route with 1 package for each should not take any longer then a 180 stop route with 5 packages for each? Not that you asked for my opinion, but I seem skeptical of that.

edit: Although, with a little further thought, it does stand to reason that three extra packages total would not be a problem; it was the three extra per stop I was considering when I wrote the initial post.

It take more time to deliver packages then envelopes. How many package can a mailman carry in his satekel not many but he can car hundreds of letters. Also have you seen the size of a postal service car. I have more space in my cab they they have in there whole car.

It depends on the scale. There are 338,000 mail carriers there. 1 million smalls is about three extra smalls per mail carrier. To an address they are already going to.

I seriously doubt it will add any extra people.

 

[curiousbrain]

It depends on the scale. There are 338,000 mail carriers there. 1 million smalls is about three extra smalls per mail carrier. To an address they are already going to.

I seriously doubt it will add any extra people.

That's assuming an equal distribution throughout the whole network of mail carriers, though. I would be more apt to consider that metropolitan carriers would be weighed down with ... and I'm making this number up out of whole cloth ... 10% or so? That is to say, urban mail carriers would see a disproportionate increase.

 

[pretzel_man]

That's assuming an equal distribution throughout the whole network of mail carriers, though. I would be more apt to consider that metropolitan carriers would be weighed down with ... and I'm making this number up out of whole cloth ... 10% or so? That is to say, urban mail carriers would see a disproportionate increase.

Rural carriers will see the largest increase. Even if my numbers are off by 100%, a million packages is 6 per affected carrier. 6 smalls total....

 

[curiousbrain]

Rural carriers will see the largest increase.

Why would you say that? It's possible I just missed something in this thread or the other one or two threads that discussed this topic, so I reserve the right to be wrong, but my basic question is why would rural carriers see the increase not the urban ones - proximity of stops or ... ?

 

[Anonymous 10]

Why would you say that? It's possible I just missed something in this thread or the other one or two threads that discussed this topic, so I reserve the right to be wrong, but my basic question is why would rural carriers see the increase not the urban ones - proximity of stops or ... ?

I think ups just might have found there next form of rural remote.

 

[pretzel_man]

Why would you say that? It's possible I just missed something in this thread or the other one or two threads that discussed this topic, so I reserve the right to be wrong, but my basic question is why would rural carriers see the increase not the urban ones - proximity of stops or ... ?

Maybe you are correct. Its certainly a product for residential deliveries, but I did not see anything that said Rural.

 

[UPSGUY72]

I think ups just might have found there next form of rural remote.

What package get delivered by the post office isn't determined by UPS the shipper who has the ability to ship basic packages determines that.

 

[Anonymous 10]

What package get delivered by the post office isn't determined by UPS the shipper who has the ability to ship basic packages determines that.

Oh ok keep telling yourself that.