Question

<font color="0000ff">There is a factory in our town that makes magazines. Usually a package car driver will go there and pick up a truck full of them and then we unload them on the reload shift. Sometimes there will be 5-12 skids and if so our feeder driver will go pick them up and either bring them to our center for us to unload (which we aren't equipped to do) or he'll take it straight to the hub. When the load is taken directly to the hub...who gets credit for the profits from the load? Our center or the hub? Anyone know the answer?</font>

The center gets credit for the revenue.

Drooler

<font color="0000ff">So when they send it to the hub instead our center IS NOT losing credit for the profits? That would mean that when they make us unload it here that they are just trying to get the extra scans right?</font>

480- Is there a big differance in the amount of volume when the load is sent straight to the hub?? I know in our center( small extended) that we have an account whom ships out flower bulbs &amp; another that ships t-shirts &amp; shorts for the armed forces. Alot of the time there maybe 200- 300 boxs &amp; to save having to off load them in a 1 belt center the trailer is just sent to the hub &amp; all scanning is taken care of there. Just a thought I know it saves our p.m. crew alot of pain in the neck..Be Well...CoolHand

<font color="0000ff">On average there is not a huge difference. With the exception of last night that is. Its usually 4 or 5 skids which is usually about 500 or so small 25 pound boxes. Our bulding is just a one belt center and just to be able to unload a trailer on our shift we have to set up some portable rollers that are not capable of being secured in place. Its very dangerous. The trailer HAS to be a flatbed and can't be a pup. They say that by unloading the thing here that it creates jobs. That is BS because no jobs have ever been created here by doing so and the supposed extra profits made by doing it here doesn't seem to improve our unsafe working conditions we have here. </font>

500 packages processed on your local sort equates to just about one person worked. It won't get you a state of the art extendo to unload it with but it will get you one more person.

A large volume account is moved to a hub for processing in order to reduce the number of "handles" for the packages. The fewer the "handles", the lower the cost to process each package. The cost to transport the packages to the hub is factored in, and a decision is made whether to bring them to the hub or the extended center for processing.

Drooler

<font color="0000ff">Tieguy....we have yet to get one more person as a result of unloading that trailer. </font>

You telling me your local sort plans to work the same number of people each day regardless of the volume?

<font color="0000ff">Been doing it since it opened.</font>

My undrstanding is whether or not it is processed by the hub or center---whatever the SLIC number is assigned to the shipper in CRIS is who will get credit for the volume/reveune. It may be less costly for our hub to process because of less handles, but ultimately the volume/revenue would be credited to the SLIC number assigned to that shipper number.

The center gets credit for the revenue for sure, just as stated by upsdawg. The load could go directly to the hub for a number of reasons. It could be the distribution of the packages in the load is known to be abnormally targeted to one area and would blow out one of your local sort splits. It could be that the hub needs the trailer because they're out of balance. It could be the hub needs your feeder driver to do a couple of local runs to/from the hub or shifting, planned or unplanned. It could be a combo of all of those things. That's what comes to mind off the top of my head.

<font color="0000ff">I asked one of our managers during and arguement about it and they said that our center loses money if the load is taken to the hub instead. My complaint was that we are not properly or safely equipped to unload a trailer on our shift. Its not as bad when its 4 or 5 skids but they are trying to get us to unload 16 skids lately. Our center is just a tiny rectangular building with 3 unload doors at one end. There is one belt running down the middle of the building from one end to the other. The belt gives way to metal rollers that go into an added wing. The belt starts directly in front of one of the unload doors and connects to another seperate belt that run along the other two doors. We just turn the middle belt on backwards and load the one trailer that way and back another one in like its a package car and load it that way. In order to unload those skids of magazines we have to bring out those ladder looking portable rollers that don't even connect to each other and set them up on jacks. They are all bent up and warped and fall allot. Sometimes we have to use the skids that have already been unloaded to help keeps those rollers from falling. Its very dangerous but all they care about is the volume.</font>

The loss to the local sort is the volume. That hurts production numbers for sure, especially in light of what you said earlier about not adjusting the staffing due to lighter volume. Lower volume + same number of hours = lower pph It would not surprise me that there would be pressure to keep the load on the local sort to keep production numbers up. I've seen feeders unloaded in the setup you've described often. With a good set of rollers, it should work acceptably and safely. I readily admit it's not the optimal way to unload but it can be effective if the equipment is in good shape.

Although it doesn't sound as if your relationship with your your sort manager is exactly rosey, you might ask for a new set of rollers in the name of safety. You could also help sell the idea by stating that the unloading would become more productive with a set of rollers that would stand up reliably since less time would be spent tending to the rollers. It sounds like production numbers are at the heart of this so that could appeal to him/her. Another selling point would be reduced damages and breakopens caused by the rollers falling. I know it's not always easy but focusing on the positives is the way to make things happen.

When the volume goes down the staffing can remain the same with no loss in productivity if there is a reduction in the paid day. This can be accomplished by starting later, finishing earlier, staggering start and finish times, etc. It is also important to maintain an optimum flow per hour through your facility, one that allows for the flow to be "pulled" through the building rather than "pushed" through. This facilitates the safety of the people and the packages.

Drooler

<font color="0000ff">We have been pushing for new equipment for over a year now. The portable rollers are all bent and warped. There are also some rollers missing like in the trailers. We've taken pictures of the situation many times and you'd think that after seeing pictures of many boxes rolling off the side of the rollers and ripping open and damaging the magazines would at least get them to consider getting new rollers. It hasn't. We even took pictures of the mess that was created after the rollers collapsed many times and almost landed on us. No matter how many skids there are on that trailer it takes 10 times longer to unload it compared to a place that has the proper equipment. It should take 30-40 minutes to unload a 16 skid trailer at a hub but takes an hour here. Then they bitch about productivity. Even the rollers we use to unload the vans are messed up. One set is warped and the other set sends packages back towards you because once you have them pulled all the way into the van it dips down towards the floor. I almost broke my finger the other night as a result of that set. We have "safety meetings" but they are a waste of breath and time because NOTHING is ever done about the things we mention. We have been mentioning the same things for over a year and that's sad. </font>

You're right, that is sad. What are you doing with the pictures? It's tough to know if the local management is doing the best thing with this volume without more info. If what you're saying is true, it sure doesn't seem they don't have the big picture. How long is your typical sort? How many employees? How much volume is a typical night? Do you encounter "slow" times during your sort? With this info, I can analyze more closely your situation and perhaps give you some insight into the production picture.

Drooler, I agree with what you're asserting. I probably assumed too quickly that there are other factors reducing utilization. With the questions above answered, we'll soon see.

<font color="0000ff">Our typical sort is 2.5-3 hours except during peak. We only load two trailers and one package car gets 90% of the next day airs. It has to be loaded by 8:15 to be shutled to a local mall where the driver meets a feeder from another center and they transfer all of our air to the feeder which goes to Louisville. One of the two trailers we load has to be pulled at 9:15. So we have to get all the air off the vans and loaded to be shuttled before 8:15 and then whats left needs to be done before 9:15. When we unload a flatbed full of skids not only is it dangerous but it can really press us for time because of the way our sort is set up with those that trailer and shuttle run. We have 9 people on our shift (unloader, splitter, 2 loaders, smalls, clerk, 2 car washers, clerk). We are usually one man short because one guy is a driver sometimes so we are usually stuck with 8 people. When we get the trailer of skids sometimes the customer counter guy will help unload it depeding on if he is still there or not. The smalls guy is usually pretty busy because he doesnt just do smalls. He has to sort and load the air for the shuttle run and also moves package cars in and out of the building so we can always have one to unload instead of stopping to go find one. Its kind of like a no win situation because sometimes we have enough people to unload the trailer quickly but it never really helps because we never have enough to keep up with the loading. Plus whenever two people unload it the belt starts to slip off and their are sometimes so much wieght on the belt it sputters. We end up having to stop it a bunch of times so the loaders can keep up or because the belt is comming off. One of the trailers doesn't have a belt running to it and is parked up to the dock like a package car. thats the one that gets behind so much. Add the problem of the portable rollers being warped and dangerous to all that and it is just a huge hassle. </font>

Without knowing the typical volume, it's tough to tell for sure but I'm betting that without that trailer load, utlization is low. If you don't know the volume, can you tell me what percentage the outboud loads usually are from what you load into them each night? Are they pups or 48 footers?

"We have "safety meetings" but they are a waste of breath and time ...."

Sad, but so true. UPS talks and talks safety, but does not actually do anything. Which is why I say anyone involved in a UPS safety committee should be ashamed.

<font color="0000ff">Over9fife...we call the safety meetings here "Scam Meetings" because they promise prize drawings and such for the shifts that go certain amounts of time with no injuries. Well, we have gotten corny hats and t-shirts that are given away at hubs for doing nothing and we've had a drawing for a tv but the guy that won it has yet to recieve it and its been 7 months.

UPSScorpis...We load two pups. On average one trailer is 60-75% and the other, which is what I usually load, is just a full belly. The magazines were comming on a package car 90% of the time over the past year and there would usually be around 300. Somtimes allot more and sometimes allot less. I think there is a certain number that has to be reached for them to make it a feeder pick up (which comes here and not the hub) because of the wieght of them I guess. Sometimes they'd just have another driver help and not send the feeder. If it was gonna be 5-8 skids worth they'd make it a feeder pick up but anything more than that would go to the hub. Well lately they are wanting us to unload it here no matter how much it is. Tonight they switched from the usuall 28 ft trailer to a 53 ft. trailer!! There were 8 skids on there tonight but supposedly the reason for the switch was so that they could fit 16 or more skids on one load instead of having to send one trailer to the hub and bringing the other one here. </font>

On the safety meetings being a scam.... I agree all management ratings or raises are based on 12 items. 1 of the 12 is loss ime injuries. If a center has an injury they will not make their goals and thus get a smaller raise if even a raise. Then the Division manager will not make their goal. We all know that Division Mgrs. don't like to see a cut in pay as well as look bad.They also don't like to have to explain it on a conference call. The more injuries the more conference calls. It's a joke!

<font color="0000ff">Hmmm. I didn't know that about raises for sups. Do they get bonuses for things like running certain ammounts of volume through or anything like that? </font>

To say UPS doesn't care about safety is foolish. When people gripe about safety not being addressed, they like to point out that it will cost more so the company won't do anything to address it. The reality is a safe work place reduces overall costs. Did you ever think about what losing one injury law suit would cost vs. the cost to avoid it to begin with? There can be honest debate over whether prescribed work methods designed for safety are adequate vs. providing some other remedy, i.e. equipment or facility modifications. This will always exist since everyone has an opinion. I'm not going to say that all local management teams adhere to safety as an overall goal. I understand that type of short sightedness exists. In a very large orginization, it's not hard to imagine some bad apples in the bunch but realize that goes for management and non-management alike. However, the premise that UPS doesn't care about safety is plain wrong.

As far as raises being based on operational performance, why would that be surprising? If lost time due to injury is on my evaluation, wouldn't that motivate me to have a safe workplace? I'm sure production numbers are part of the picture as are misloads, damages, load quality, etc. Trying to achieve good production and quality results in a safe workplace? What's not to like about that? There are no bonuses like you described, upslocal480. Why are conference calls aimed at holding people accountable and resolving problems a joke? Would you rather that problems go unaddressed? You'd surely complain then.

Back to my orignal reason for responding to this thread: It sounds like your total volume is 1600-2000pcs. With that many folks on the sort, you definitely are underutilized. Not counting clerk and wash hours, a 3 hour sort at 2000pcs is 133pph. Add another 500-800 pcs provided by the feeder load in the same span and production jumps to 167-187pph. Normally, one person unloading should be optimal, if the rollers stay put. As previosly mentioned, pushing the volume down the belt with not enough folks to catch it is counter-productive as you end up chasing the volume down the belt to the load/pickoff positions. One unloader, one pickoff, and two loaders should work well, provided that the volume is not overwhelmingly going into one feeder such that one loader can't handle the flow.

If you can estimate a time savings with good rollers, you can come up with a compelling case to get new ones. For example, say you can save 10 minutes on the sort span x 5 people = 50 minutes (.83hrs) each night. If the volume is 2500pcs nightly with the trailer, that equates to 177pph with a span of 2.83hrs with new rollers vs. 166pph with a span of 3.0hrs with broken rollers. .83hrs saved nightly times the hourly rate (including benefits), estimate $20, and the rollers are payed for over a short period of time. Add in the additional avoided damages and safety elements and it's a no brainer.

I'd like to respond to the issue of safety at UPS. First off, it's not a perfect world and none of us gets everything we want so keep that in mind also.

When CHSP was first formed in the mid-1990's our company wide LWDII was in the mid 20's with the industry itself at about 14. By 1997' the UPS LWDII was in the upper teens and many felt we had reached success so the focus on CHSP was scaled back. The next year the LWDII started trending back up so UPS refocused CHSP and since then the LWDII has trended down to last year around that 14 mark which drove the industry number down as well. UPS saw value added results from this and pushing safety is not only important from a human standpoint but it's also extremely cost effective.

Another area where UPS has IMO gone "WAY" overboard has to do with conveyor guarding. OSHA has guarding standards set but UPS goes way beyond those standards and for me they are a royal pain in the A##! However, I do understand and appreciate why UPS does this so if you want to belly ache about a lot of things at UPS I'll belly ache with you I'm sure but when it comes to safety, from a Corp standpoint, I'll defend them all day long because of firsthand experience. JMO!

mac