Who's Stupid Idea Was "Stops Per Car"?

[cosmo1]

- Technology has changed many things at UPS including the job but one area, as mentioned above, is the ability to, measure almost anything.
This has created a certain waste because measurement is data and creating information requires additional effort. It seems to me that UPS now measures things that has little or no value.
That additional effort includes the input of human judgment - lacking at times, no doubt.

In a nut shell.

 

[Re-Raise]

I'll use my center this week as an example of how the meeting the SPC numbers trumps common sense.

I show up Monday and my route is cut. No surprise there because volume is usually light on Mondays and being Columbus Day many businesses were closed.

I ran the combination route and had a pretty light day. A little over 8 hrs with 95 (three towns with rural routes) stops and I ran it scratch. All the drivers had light days.

Tuesday they said because our SPC was too light Monday they were running the same number of routes because they got their ass chewed for sending us out too light. I went out on the same combo route with 125 stops and about 100 more pcs.

So all you managers like P-man who think this is just a tool, and managers can make adjustments and change the trace and all that other feel good crap don't understand the reality of it.

I was the second driver in with 9.8 Tuesday and brought two driver's air with me who were out almost 11 hours. I know we blew businesses and air that day because I talked to the drivers that couldn't make the commits.

And why did they do it? Because we didn't make the number the day before......

 

[Re-Raise]

I have said before, the problem is not the SPC. It is the dispatch. I have seen many centers raise the SPC and lower the paid day, just by fixing the trace, loads, and dispatch.

P-Man
,

I was just re-reading this thread and came across this gem. I am going to print this one out.

I believe he believes it. Makes perfect sense behind a desk.

How could eliminating routes and dividing the stops between the remaining drivers possibly increase the paid day?

 

[Catatonic]

I was just re-reading this thread and came across this gem. I am going to print this one out.

I believe he believes it. Makes perfect sense behind a desk.

How could eliminating routes and dividing the stops between the remaining drivers possibly increase the paid day?

Reducing on-area miles.
If you have 30 routes with 50 on area miles with an on-area MPH of 22 miles per hour = 1500 miles / 25 MPH = 68.2 hours driving time

If the trace can be improved by 12 % then the number of hours is reduced by 8.18
Add the to-from for the one route eliminated at 1 hour and the other am, PM and other time and you can eliminate 9.5 hours or thereabouts.

In theory of course but you did ask.

 

[rod]

Reducing on-area miles.
If you have 30 routes with 50 on area miles with an on-area MPH of 22 miles per hour = 1500 miles / 25 MPH = 68.2 hours driving time

If the trace can be improved by 12 % then the number of hours is reduced by 8.18
Add the to-from for the one route eliminated at 1 hour and the other am, PM and other time and you can eliminate 9.5 hours or thereabouts.

In theory of course but you did ask.

It always looks so good on paper--------then reality kicks in. You forgot to factor in the part where the drivers that got extra work said screw it and slowed down to a snails pace.

 

[JustTired]

- Technology has changed many things at UPS including the job but one area, as mentioned above, is the ability to, measure almost anything.
This has created a certain waste because measurement is data and creating information requires additional effort. It seems to me that UPS now measures things that has little or no value.
That additional effort includes the input of human judgment - lacking at times, no doubt.

Technology has changed......but the drivers' job really hasn't. His/her job is to deliver and pick up pkgs. The vehicle he/she uses is basically unchanged with the exception of auto transmission, lower profile, power steering, etc., in the newer ones.

While technology (if implemented correctly) could help to a point......the basics of the job have always been the same. It still requires driving to the delivery point. It still requires taking pkgs out of the vehicle and carrying them to the door.

While I agree the job requires "the input of human judgment" , in recent years there has been a shift from allowing the driver to use his/her judgment towards that judgment being directed from miles (if not hundreds of miles) away. Heck, judgment is being taken away from the local center and possibly higher.

It seems to me the lack of judgment gets greater the higher you go.I'm not saying that drivers don't make bad calls. I'm not saying that CMs don't make bad calls. What I am saying is that the further removed from the situation you are....the more likely it becomes to make a bad call. And that call generally effects more people.

Technology should be an aid and not an answer. As far as I know, technology has never delivered a single pkg to anyones door.

 

[Re-Raise]

Reducing on-area miles.
If you have 30 routes with 50 on area miles with an on-area MPH of 22 miles per hour = 1500 miles / 25 MPH = 68.2 hours driving time

If the trace can be improved by 12 % then the number of hours is reduced by 8.18
Add the to-from for the one route eliminated at 1 hour and the other am, PM and other time and you can eliminate 9.5 hours or thereabouts.

In theory of course but you did ask.

How does improving the trace get me magically to a town I didn't go to before?

I tie the two routes together because I have lived here my whole life.

Monday I went 175 miles , Tuesday 217 miles. You probably believe if I made only right hand turns they could cut a couple of more routes

 

[Jones]

It always looks so good on paper--------then reality kicks in. You forgot to factor in the part where the drivers that got extra work said screw it and slowed down to a snails pace.

Come on now, you and I both know that never happens.

 

[brownrod]

Th
Assuming an accurate trace. Here are other questions that need to be asked and answered. Drivers and supervisors can make these observations:

1) Not counting going to and from your route - How many drivers do you see or pass during the day? 1a) Is there justification for this? 1b) Can something be done to improve this?

2) How many drivers go to the same pick up or delivery point daily? (doesn't matter whether it is air or ground)

3) Does the center have to use air drivers - pu drivers - shuttle drivers - Extra vehicles ??

4) Is there an imbalance in pick up volume and delivery volume and stops?

I can absolutely guarantee anyone of you that there are major gains to be made in just about every area above that could meet company objectives of cost reduction which could also improve your job.



I would start with the dispatch supervisor (and back up) and determine if they understand their job thoroughly and have the skill to do it.

Then I would develop an individual center plan to attack the challenges above.

What you've listed above are the major problems that I see as a driver. Our routes are friend-ing retarded (That is the only way to properly describe the routes). I'll get a neighborhood with 30 stops. But one street with 2 stops in the middle of that neighborhood is given to the next route over. This is one example of countless...

Another example I see too often is this. Route 14B is dispatched with 130 residential stops. Route 14C is dispatched with 130 commercial stops. Of which maybe 90 can be delivered before pickups.

Residential on shelf 1. Can't even open the bulkhead door and you have 70 business stops you need to del before pickups but can't.

I could go on and on ...

I agree, fix the stupid trace and and stupid dispatch and we could easily handle more stops per car.

 

[Dragon]

What you've listed above are the major problems that I see as a driver. Our routes are friend-ing retarded (That is the only way to properly describe the routes). I'll get a neighborhood with 30 stops. But one street with 2 stops in the middle of that neighborhood is given to the next route over. This is one example of countless...

Another example I see too often is this. Route 14B is dispatched with 130 residential stops. Route 14C is dispatched with 130 commercial stops. Of which maybe 90 can be delivered before pickups.

Loop principle - think of a petal of a flower, 14a has the top stuff, 14b has the middle 14c the bottom. Unfortunately all the business fall on route 14c because that is all thats in that "area".

Residential on shelf 1. Can't even open the bulkhead door and you have 70 business stops you need to del before pickups but can't.

Following the same concept -14b has to much work - PDS takes work in sequence order and gives to you (14C) to get 14b in range - this is the lowest sequence number for you and is the "beginning" sequence number for you, that is how it ends up on shelf 1000 .

I could go on and on ...

I agree, fix the stupid trace and and stupid dispatch and we could easily handle more stops per car.

The PDS should have a plan built for every route level. Were you get screwed is when we start cutting these planned routes and start piecing them out to different routes to make SPC. SPC may have been fine at 40 cars but is to high for 38 cars.

 

[pretzel_man]

I was just re-reading this thread and came across this gem. I am going to print this one out.

I believe he believes it. Makes perfect sense behind a desk.

How could eliminating routes and dividing the stops between the remaining drivers possibly increase the paid day?

Yes, I believe it, and I have done it. Many times.

If trace and loops are improved, select time in the vehicle reduces and so does miles. People on this board have complained about their ineffective dispatch and trace. Of course, fixing this should reduce time and miles.

I replace some of those miles with stops.

Therefore, I could increase stops and also reduce paid day.

Yes, I sit behind a desk. But I also go into the centers. I was there yesterday and also today. Saw this first hand again.

 

[Nimnim]

Yes, I believe it, and I have done it. Many times.

If trace and loops are improved, select time in the vehicle reduces and so does miles. People on this board have complained about their ineffective dispatch and trace. Of course, fixing this should reduce time and miles.

I replace some of those miles with stops.

Therefore, I could increase stops and also reduce paid day.

Yes, I sit behind a desk. But I also go into the centers. I was there yesterday and also today. Saw this first hand again.

So just to get this straight, and possibly help others understand. You're saying if it's improved and you take say 10 miles off a route that would take a driver going 50mph, without any traffic, 12 minutes 30 seconds. You could then add another stop or two that does not increase the distance and would reduce the paid day if said stops could be completed in less than 12 minutes 30 seconds.

Am I correct in this understanding of what you're saying pretzel_man?

 

[Re-Raise]

Yes, I believe it, and I have done it. Many times.

If trace and loops are improved, select time in the vehicle reduces and so does miles. People on this board have complained about their ineffective dispatch and trace. Of course, fixing this should reduce time and miles.

I replace some of those miles with stops.

Therefore, I could increase stops and also reduce paid day.

Yes, I sit behind a desk. But I also go into the centers. I was there yesterday and also today. Saw this first hand again.

You can't trace my route better than I can. I have ran it for over twenty years. More stops adds time to my paid day. It is pretty simple.

It is amazing how you can convince yourself we are clueless and all we need is your wisdom.

 

[JustTired]

If trace and loops are improved, select time in the vehicle reduces and so does miles. People on this board have complained about their ineffective dispatch and trace. Of course, fixing this should reduce time and miles.

I replace some of those miles with stops.

Therefore, I could increase stops and also reduce paid day.

OK....in theory that sounds pretty good.
Here's my question.....
Let's say every driver has a more or less fixed area that they deliver every day. The trace of that area is tweaked and is reduced by an average of 5 miles per day. Now, where are these "extra" stops coming from and won't they add to the miles you just saved? If it's 5 miles for 5miles, then yes, it should work. But, rural areas would seldom work out that way considering that those stops would be coming from an adjacent area that you would have to drive to before you even started delivering.

The problem I seen is that when I would get work off of the adjacent driver, it was loaded and traced exactly as that driver would have ran it. In my case, that would have involved dead-heading about 5-6 miles and then working my way back to where I started from. I had enough sense to set it up so that I was delivering down to that point and delivering back up to my area. I don't think that EDD can make those adjustments to a trace received from another area. I guess my point is the same one I've made for years....that a good driver saves this company miles every day. Unless, of course, they decide to follow a trace set up by someone who hasn't much of a clue combined with a system that can't adjust a trace to compensate for another driver delivering it.

You just can't take the human factor out of the equation without sacrificing some efficiency. If you want a zombie-like figure driving the car and delivering the pkgs.....you better have an almost perfect trace and load.

 

[Re-Raise]

OK....in theory that sounds pretty good.
Here's my question.....
Let's say every driver has a more or less fixed area that they deliver every day. The trace of that area is tweaked and is reduced by an average of 5 miles per day. Now, where are these "extra" stops coming from and won't they add to the miles you just saved? If it's 5 miles for 5miles, then yes, it should work. But, rural areas would seldom work out that way considering that those stops would be coming from an adjacent area that you would have to drive to before you even started delivering.

The problem I seen is that when I would get work off of the adjacent driver, it was loaded and traced exactly as that driver would have ran it. In my case, that would have involved dead-heading about 5-6 miles and then working my way back to where I started from. I had enough sense to set it up so that I was delivering down to that point and delivering back up to my area. I don't think that EDD can make those adjustments to a trace received from another area. I guess my point is the same one I've made for years....that a good driver saves this company miles every day. Unless, of course, they decide to follow a trace set up by someone who hasn't much of a clue combined with a system that can't adjust a trace to compensate for another driver delivering it.

You just can't take the human factor out of the equation without sacrificing some efficiency. If you want a zombie-like figure driving the car and delivering the pkgs.....you better have an almost perfect trace and load.

Thank you for some common sense. When they give me 20 extra stops from an area next to mine that has been cut, I still have the same number of miles on my area plus the stops and miles from the other area.

How can they not even concede this point?

 

[Catatonic]

Thank you for some common sense. When they give me 20 extra stops from an area next to mine that has been cut, I still have the same number of miles on my area plus the stops and miles from the other area.

How can they not even concede this point?

Most likely because what you bring up is the first time this has come up. I don't know of anyone that would not concede this - I think everyone that has been very patiently trying to explain this to you understands 9 + 1 = 10


As has been said many times before ... the savings will be in the to-from mileage to get to the split stops, the AM-PM times, turn in time, etc and you have to include the to-from from the original route to get to the split area and then back to get on trace for the original route, from the driver that was cut. - if the driver trace is not 100% right (yeah I know - I never met a driver that did not run his/her route 100% the best way) there may be some time to be gained there which is part of the equation that P-Man was answering.

Originally Posted by JustTired
OK....in theory that sounds pretty good.
Here's my question.....
Let's say every driver has a more or less fixed area that they deliver every day. The trace of that area is tweaked and is reduced by an average of 5 miles per day. Now, where are these "extra" stops coming from and won't they add to the miles you just saved? If it's 5 miles for 5miles, then yes, it should work. But, rural areas would seldom work out that way considering that those stops would be coming from an adjacent area that you would have to drive to before you even started delivering.

The problem I seen is that when I would get work off of the adjacent driver, it was loaded and traced exactly as that driver would have ran it. In my case, that would have involved dead-heading about 5-6 miles and then working my way back to where I started from. I had enough sense to set it up so that I was delivering down to that point and delivering back up to my area. I don't think that EDD can make those adjustments to a trace received from another area. I guess my point is the same one I've made for years....that a good driver saves this company miles every day. Unless, of course, they decide to follow a trace set up by someone who hasn't much of a clue combined with a system that can't adjust a trace to compensate for another driver delivering it.

You just can't take the human factor out of the equation without sacrificing some efficiency. If you want a zombie-like figure driving the car and delivering the pkgs.....you better have an almost perfect trace and load.

As to what JustTired posted - there is the same logic to this, you have to account for the the to-from from the original route to get to the split area and then back to get on trace for the original route and it seems reasonable to assume that the stops will not be loaded in the new trace that you will have to be running.


Now to make a point for you, if the stop density is decreasing in a route area (especially if it is a rural route) then the miles per stop could increase enough to make an impact. I don't know if this is happening.

 

[Re-Raise]

Most likely because what you bring up is the first time this has come up. I don't know of anyone that would not concede this - I think everyone that has been very patiently trying to explain this to you understands 9 + 1 = 10


As has been said many times before ... the savings will be in the to-from mileage to get to the split stops, the AM-PM times, turn in time, etc and you have to include the to-from from the original route to get to the split area and then back to get on trace for the original route, from the driver that was cut. - if the driver trace is not 100% right (yeah I know - I never met a driver that did not run his/her route 100% the best way) there may be some time to be gained there which is part of the equation that P-Man was answering.
.

Ugh Are you talking about the center as a whole or individual route?.

The impression I got from P-Man's comments were that he could increase an individual driver's stops while also reducing his paid day by magically retracing his route to cut miles.

Now if you are talking about the center's total paid hours you might be able to save some TOTAL hours by cutting a route and having the existing drivers absorb his hours at time and a half.

But at what cost? I am tired of wasting my time here and at work trying to understand this plan. Just pay me.

 

[Catatonic]

Ugh Are you talking about the center as a whole or individual route?.

The impression I got from P-Man's comments were that he could increase an individual driver's stops while also reducing his paid day by magically retracing his route to cut miles.

Now if you are talking about the center's total paid hours you might be able to save some TOTAL hours by cutting a route and having the existing drivers absorb his hours at time and a half.

But at what cost? I am tired of wasting my time here and at work trying to understand this plan. Just pay me.

My interpretation was that P-Man was talking about the entire center; talking about the redispatching of the center to achieve a SPC. At least that is what I thought he was talking about.

I can see your point when the center has to cut a route after the preload is down - typically not going to be that great a dispatch because of yours and Justtired's points.

However, there should be a center-wide dispatch put into the plan that reflects the projected volumes/stops - I remember having at least 5 dispatches based on project volume/stops although only 3 would be used outside of Peak Season.

 

[browniehound]

My interpretation was that P-Man was talking about the entire center; talking about the redispatching of the center to achieve a SPC. At least that is what I thought he was talking about.

I can see your point when the center has to cut a route after the preload is down - typically not going to be that great a dispatch because of yours and Justtired's points.

However, there should be a center-wide dispatch put into the plan that reflects the projected volumes/stops - I remember having at least 5 dispatches based on project volume/stops although only 3 would be used outside of Peak Season.

I say "No cutting of routes after the preload is down or the plan is in place!" This is my order and philosophy. Problem is, I'm not sure I spelled
Philososphy correctly and I have zero say in the matter because I'm just a driver!

However, its been my obserevation over the years that once you start messing with the plan and the preload, service failures run amuck. The question then becomes: does the differenting from the plan and added service failures offset the gains in profit created by the change in plan at the last minute?

We come to work everyday to make money, right? Not to make a number ? Or do we? I understand making a number consistently will produce a profit and an efficent business. However, when you have to manipulate tens of people and hundreds to low thousands of parcels in the final hour or two to make a number that is profitable in general and when executed properly, too many things go wrong.

For example, add/cuts don't get pulled forcing extra miles, fuel, and labor on road to get the right work to the right people. Also, maybe pulling the route at the last second forces extra labor costs on the preload and the driver ranks? Add to this, the missed schools and small businesses because these are never considered when moving a split. Even when servicable, the driver must break trace to do so again wasting, time, fuel, miles, and labor.

If its my business, I leave the route in just to service all the parcels and satisfy the customer. Less service failures, less overtime, less problems appears to be a nice outcome.

For people in the know (Hi Pretzelman!), how far off base am I?

Thanks in advance,
Brownie

 

[Anonymous 10]

So, we've had the stops per car metric for a little while now but its really getting out of hand. I was wondering exactly who it was that came up with the idea. They should be given an award for worst idea EVER! If they insist that we continue to have centers with two thirds of their drivers over 9.5 AND 10.5 then they should at least set forth realistic goals per center. Its idiotic to think that a center with 40 routes (10 of which are rural routes that average less than 90 stops) can satisfy a goal of 133 stops per car without cutting too many routes and having excessive over 9.5s. Who is responsible for this? Were they ever a driver? Did they just get a little crazy when they learned how to use a spreadsheet? What college taught them this nonsense? I'm just curious.

it was not my idea