Daniel Bryant
Active Member
He said zero chance it is here to stay. I was saying it would be great for it to be gone!
Contract proposals from my local
- Thread starter bigmistake
- Start date
He said zero chance it is here to stay. I was saying it would be great for it to be gone!
Daniel Bryant
Active Member
Dang I think I read it wrong. Sure post needs to go asap!
I was gonna say.
beentheredonethat
Well-Known Member
Champion, Many of our customers want a lower cost option to get their merchandise to their customers. FDX has Smartpost and many companies use this service. A large majority of the customers who use Surepost will switch to SMartpost if UPS said nope, we aren't offering that service anymore. (Let me be clear, there will be some that stay with us, but many will leave, similar to how many currently use Smartpost). Is that a win for UPS Teamsters? Sure you may even win that battle, but WE ALL will lose the war. There are many companies that used a FDX service and came to us because of Basic\Surepost. The other benefit is those same companies tend to give their commercial ground, air and intl pkgs to us as well.
The BD folks are paid (partially) on commissions. Part of what they look at is total revenue (year over year). When a customer switches from ground to Basic\Surepost, it is not a win for the sales person. However, they do it, since they know it's better to keep the customer and lose a little revenue then it would be to lose the customer entirely.
If this was 20 or 30 years ago, where we really had no competition to speak of, I would agree with your statement. But... in today's environment you are DEAD Wrong.
THink of something that hits closer to home. You go to fill up your tank. You usually go to Brand X to get your gas. Across the street Brand Y is there and they offer it for the same price. This goes on for a while. Then you notice across the street Brand Y gas is 5 cents cheaper, do you switch and go across the street? Maybe, maybe not. What if it's 10cents a gallon? Now I'm thinking probably you will. Well, if you have a tank like mine you get 15 gallons of gas during a fill up. So at 10 cents cheaper you go to the other station for a $1.50 cent total savings. With gas approachigng $4/gal again. You saved 1.5 on a 60 dollar purchase. or 2.5%
Now I'll admit, some motorists will always stay with their brand for whatever reason. But, the shippers are the same way, if they see a lower price they will try it out and switch. BTW, FDX Smartpost is WAAAAAY more then a 2.5% savings for customers. We offer SmartPost to try to bring the rates in line so customers keep shipping with us.
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
And I listen to all of our spoiled (by management) drivers complain and whine about how the union "does nothing for them". Then five minutes later are comparing how much money they've made so far this year with others like them.
Daniel Bryant
Active Member
You clearly know the whole ins and outs tot he surepost thing more than I do. What I do know is that ups has never advertized or said it was the cheapest option for shipping. Ups USE to pride itself on being the best and I am a firm believer as well as many others as to you get what you pay for. Now when a customer pays for ups shipping and then gets it by the post office whenever they get done sorting it and feel they have time to deliver it, is that the ups way? Lets be real ups isn't hurting to make a dime and when I see us sub-contracting work out and it affects the lives of many of my fellow upsers, yes it needs to go. If brand x gas station is always reliable and always meets my needs as a customer I sure will buy from them every time over someone who doesn't provide the same service. IMO ups needs to get back to what has made it so successful for all these years. Being the best and quit worrying about cutting this and that to save a penny.
beentheredonethat
Well-Known Member
UPS used to be the only viable game in town. But companies everywhere are looking at how to reduce costs. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about the small company that ships out 1-10 pkgs a day. I'm talking the very large companies out there, Amazon, Walmart, QVC, Staples, JC Penney, Costco, LL Bean, Target etc. Those companies have procurement departments looking to cut costs. They don't know Bob the UPS driver, they don't deal day in day out with the shipping department. They sign large multi million dollar contracts. Yes, they want good quality service. I know, my brother has been a Sr VP Procurement officer at many large companies (State Street Bank, Met Life etc). He considers them (UPS v FDX) roughly equal. So he looks for the lower cost alternative. (Granted he doesn't use Surepost being in a financial industry). But if he worked at a retailer he would). I'm sure that if you could convince a large FDX Smartpost shipper to quit Smartpost and come to UPS but they have to ship Ground. The UPS sales force would love you. But they won't. You see, once a shipper decides for a lower cost (ie Smartpost type service). They they will accept a service lower then what UPS ground could offer due to the significant savings afforded. Keep in mind. You said you won't switch gas for 10 cents a gallon. I think you are in the minority. Keep in mind, I'm not talking about going from Exxon to Billy Bob's gas station. I'm talking going from an Exxon to a Shell (or BP, or Mobil, or Irving, or Texaco, or Marathon gas). Both offer and sell a decent product. I know myself, I tend to go to one station and won't change for a few pennies. But if it gets to 5 or 10 cents. Yup, I'll switch. (My gut feeling is you will too, you just don't want to admit it).
Brownslave688
You want a toe? I can get you a toe.
I agree that sure post needs to have a lid put on it some of the packages are getting a little big.
TechGrrl
Space Cadet
MY Prediction:
IF President Obama is re-elected, THEN the 2013 contract is negotiated fairly easily, although the company WILL attempt to put some of the cost of healthcare on the employee. (They've been squeezing this out of management for the last several years, so there is no more blood in that turnip.) They will spend a lot of time talking about non-union competition pricing us out of a lot of markets. (They are right, BTW, so some flexibility in this area would probably be a good idea. It would be nice if some creative cooperation between the company and the union figured out a way to compete with FedEx and other non-union carriers.)
On the other hand,
IF Mitt Romney is elected, THEN you guys are screwed. With a hard-right administration in control, the company may very well go all-in, even taking a strike to cripple the union. Doubt me? Go google what Caterpillar just did to its employees. Cat made no bones about it; they are profitable, they are solid, everything is looking good for them. Didn't matter. They were going to squeeze the troops and make more profits, and they did.
The Teamsters won in 1997 because Bill Clinton's Labor Department was sympathetic to, like, actual labor, not the corporatocracy. That won't happen in a Romney administration. The Romney Labor Department will be working out of the ALEC playbook, where "RIGHT TO WORK" is paragraph 1. Not to mention the economy is totally different this time around. Last time, customers equated "UPS" to "my really nice driver". This time around, it will be, "Why should my rates go up to pay this guy $28 an hour? My customers won't pay my prices now."
-AND- let's not forget how technology has made it MUCH easier for non-trained people to do even the delivery driver job. Just follow the DIAD, dude!
If Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers can make believable "thugs" out of kindergarten teachers, imagine how much easier it will be when the word "Teamsters" is in play. Get used to the phrases "gold-plated benefits" and "outrageous pensions for early retirement", because you will be hearing them a lot.
At this point, you guys are about the last well-paid union jobs with benefits left out there in the private sector. You can't be outsourced to China, so you have to be brought to heel some other way. Why do you think the GOP in Congress is trying to destroy the USPS and all its union employees?
By all means, vote for Mitt Romney and the local TEA Party congresscritter. Then kiss your pay and benefits goodbye.
I'm not suggesting this is fair, or ethical. I think it stinks. I also think it will happen, because too many working people just can't figure out how the right wing is screwing them. I don't want my niece and nephew, and their kids, growing up as corporate serfs. But that is where this country is headed: a corporate plutocracy where the 1/10th of 1% take it all, and we get the 'tinkle down' from the 'job creators'. Bah...
On the other hand,
IF Mitt Romney is elected, THEN you guys are screwed. With a hard-right administration in control, the company may very well go all-in, even taking a strike to cripple the union. Doubt me? Go google what Caterpillar just did to its employees. Cat made no bones about it; they are profitable, they are solid, everything is looking good for them. Didn't matter. They were going to squeeze the troops and make more profits, and they did.
The Teamsters won in 1997 because Bill Clinton's Labor Department was sympathetic to, like, actual labor, not the corporatocracy. That won't happen in a Romney administration. The Romney Labor Department will be working out of the ALEC playbook, where "RIGHT TO WORK" is paragraph 1. Not to mention the economy is totally different this time around. Last time, customers equated "UPS" to "my really nice driver". This time around, it will be, "Why should my rates go up to pay this guy $28 an hour? My customers won't pay my prices now."
-AND- let's not forget how technology has made it MUCH easier for non-trained people to do even the delivery driver job. Just follow the DIAD, dude!
If Karl Rove and the Koch Brothers can make believable "thugs" out of kindergarten teachers, imagine how much easier it will be when the word "Teamsters" is in play. Get used to the phrases "gold-plated benefits" and "outrageous pensions for early retirement", because you will be hearing them a lot.
At this point, you guys are about the last well-paid union jobs with benefits left out there in the private sector. You can't be outsourced to China, so you have to be brought to heel some other way. Why do you think the GOP in Congress is trying to destroy the USPS and all its union employees?
By all means, vote for Mitt Romney and the local TEA Party congresscritter. Then kiss your pay and benefits goodbye.
I'm not suggesting this is fair, or ethical. I think it stinks. I also think it will happen, because too many working people just can't figure out how the right wing is screwing them. I don't want my niece and nephew, and their kids, growing up as corporate serfs. But that is where this country is headed: a corporate plutocracy where the 1/10th of 1% take it all, and we get the 'tinkle down' from the 'job creators'. Bah...
bigblu 2 you
Well-Known Member
remember how we had to live on chicken backs and rice during the Reagan years?
Coldworld
60 months and counting
I think customers(large corporate ones) just want the price to drop so they can pocket the extra money. Company xyz use to charge 7.00 for delivery...now with this service they pay 5.00 and instead of passing that onto the end customer for 5.00 they stillcharge 7.00 and pocket the 2.00 ...do that over and over ,that's easy money
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
Most democrats and die hard union folks always put themselves and their union above the needs of the country as a whole.
U
uber
Guest
Ummm, thats not just a Democrat and Union thing..
Overpaid Union Thug
Well-Known Member
Primarily anyway.
Oh it doesn't matter who's elected President. I will say Obamacare has hurt our bargaining chip, in that why should UPS give us raises AND give us free healthcare. I may be biased but no reason at all PT'ers are making so little. Many of my friends have either quit or have gone into management just in a cash grab. But as a college student just maybe $50 more a week would go so far, especially with gas prices. This job is so perfect for school it's unreal, especially as an employee on the daysort and weekends free. All I'm asking is $11 an hour starting, it'd make production so much better and people wouldn't quit after 5 days
TechGrrl
Space Cadet
You nailed the new reality. That is the new business model. And, not only does none of the money go to the customer, it doesn't go to their employees, either.
beentheredonethat
Well-Known Member
You are exactly right. Doesn't everyone want to pay for less for an "acceptable" level of service (Note: different people's definition of acceptable varies). Companies that make that 2 dollar savings per package and ship as little as 200 pkgs per day save $400 per day, $2000 per week and roughly $100,000 per year. That's a lot of money. Now multiply that 100 or 200 or 1000 fold for our larger shippers.
beentheredonethat
Well-Known Member
TechGrrl, Really? how many employees don't get paid? The more a company can reduce it's cost, the more profit it has to grow the business. Jim Casey did quite well for himself back in the early 1900's. He could have taken those profits and paid his employees more and rest on his laurels, keeping a tidy sum for himself to live comfortably. Instead, he reinvested profit of his company and expanded. He reinvested and reinvested all the while paying his employees a good wage. If he didn't keep his overhead low, he would not have had the profit to do this. So.. do you think Jim Casey is wrong? Should he just paid his employees a bit more way back then and not have expanded?
I don't get why people get upset when their company makes a profit. Profit is good. I'd much rather work for a company that makes a profit then for one that loses money. Am I in favor of CEO's making ten's of millions of dollars? NO.. Do I like how Scott's total pay has gone up in the last few years? No. However, keep this in mind, we pay our drivers the highest rate in the industry. After the raises Scott has had, he still is no where near the highest paid CEO of a fortune 500 company.
The UAW member made a great pay rate for many years. However, their pay rate, and poor management dragged down the auto industry. The thought was, what will the consumer do, they only have a choice of 3 companies all with bad management all with UAW employees. Then what happened, they got competition and they are hurting. Tens of thousands of employees were let go. The pay rate is not as good as it was, the pension they had is reduced.
Yet, it seems many in the teamsters don't want to learn the lesson of the UAW. FDX is a good company. They offer good services. They have been growing at a much faster rate then UPS. They had revenue of 42 billion dollars last fiscal year. UPS had 53 Billion dollars in revenue the last fiscal year. FDX drivers don't make the same amount of money that a UPS driver makes. (Especially their ground contract drivers). Somehow, people want to deny it.
TechGrrl
Space Cadet
I live in a fact-based reality. Over the last 35 years, worker productivity has soared. Median worker pay has been flat. Profits aren't a bad thing. But, the actual people working for the company enable the company to make profits. And, for the last 35 years, those actual workers haven't been getting a fair share. Go read this article, and follow the links to the original paper and Paul Krugman's take on the situation.
Economist's View: The Wedge between Productivity and Wages
Let me pose a question: the company is very profitable and has a large chunk of change in the piggy bank. Why not give out some raises? If not raises, bonuses. (Thereby not raising costs permanently) It has lots of money for dividends, which I certainly appreciate every quarter, why not let the worker bees participate in the good times?
I find your invoking Jim Casey a hoot. Jim Casey actually believed in sharing the profits of the company with the people he hired. Ever hear of 'brown shares'? Jim Casey has probably drilled a hole to China, he is spinning in his grave so fast from watching the current batch of yahoos destroy his legacy.
The UAW did not run the Detroit car companies into the ground, the MANAGEMENT of the Detroit car companies ran them into the ground. That's why they are called MANAGERS. The UAW did not design crappy cars, nor market crappy cars crappily. MANAGEMENT did all that. And MANAGEMENT negotiated crappy contracts that gave away the store and destroyed their own competitiveness.
Here's a question for you: why is it that Japanese and German car makers compete just fine on the world auto market with cars built by UNION LABOR in Japan or Germany, but need non-union labor to compete here in the US? Just askin'
I've posted elsewhere on this board that the Teamsters need to figure out some way to help the company compete against FedEx.
Similar threads
