"Fred Shrugged"

vantexan

Well-Known Member
He may very well be involved at that level. There aren't 2000 VP's.

Who said there were? But you did say that Fred has very little to do with the running of the business. If he's in on the selection of VP's and giving them direction then he's very much involved. Maybe not meeting with them on a daily basis but I bet they get memo's from him and he gets updates from them. I doubt seriously he's out of the loop.
 

quadro

Well-Known Member
Who said there were? But you did say that Fred has very little to do with the running of the business. If he's in on the selection of VP's and giving them direction then he's very much involved. Maybe not meeting with them on a daily basis but I bet they get memo's from him and he gets updates from them. I doubt seriously he's out of the loop.
Van, why do I have to spell everything out for you??? The VP thing was to do with my statement that Fred is involved in hiring/firing less than 1% of the employees. I guestimated that 1% of the employees = 2000. Someone said he is involved with hiring/firing VP's so I said he may well be but there aren't 2000 of them. So even if he is involved with hiring/firing them, he's still involved with less than 1%. You've combined two different things into one. I never said Fred has very little to do with running the business. I said he has little to do with the day to day operations as in what your goals are, giving you feedback, followup, etc, etc.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
We seem to be arguing over semantics. I'll give you that Fred S isn't looking at reports of what couriers did onroad at a particular station. And much of what he does is meeting with planners to decide long range goals such as location of next hub in Asia, etc. Or discussing with lobbyists how best to present case to get this or that from Congress. And I'm sure he's in demand to attend functions. But I think we're saying that many of the things that affect us directly like terminating the pension plan has his involvement. It's hard to imagine something like that or slowing our pay progression way down happening without his knowledge or approval. In that regard I think we can safely conclude that it's more than some mid-level guys who are the source of our discomfort. You say potato, I say po-tah-toe.
 

Cactus

Just telling it like it is
Facts too difficult for you to comprehend? That's ok we'll use smaller words and type slower for you.

Not in the least.

You act like Fred has little or no influence on what's goes with the workforce.

Vantexan sums it all up on post number 46.

I suggest you read it.
 

quadro

Well-Known Member
We seem to be arguing over semantics. I'll give you that Fred S isn't looking at reports of what couriers did onroad at a particular station. And much of what he does is meeting with planners to decide long range goals such as location of next hub in Asia, etc. Or discussing with lobbyists how best to present case to get this or that from Congress. And I'm sure he's in demand to attend functions. But I think we're saying that many of the things that affect us directly like terminating the pension plan has his involvement. It's hard to imagine something like that or slowing our pay progression way down happening without his knowledge or approval. In that regard I think we can safely conclude that it's more than some mid-level guys who are the source of our discomfort. You say potato, I say po-tah-toe.
I agree with everything you said and you proved my point, thank you. Everything you listed is not part of the day to day operations. Terminating the pension plan, pay raises, etc are not day to day operations. Fred doesn't come up with the ideas about how to improve stops per hour or what time your sort starts, etc. Those are the day to day things that frustrate people (among other things). When I asked what makes you think Fred has a hand in the day to day functions, I wasn't being cryptic. I literally meant the day to day operations.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
I did. See post 48. I suggest you read it.

Please see post 13. We were answering you in the context of this thread, which wasn't talking about day to day operations in posts 1-12. Please stay on point. If in doubt please refer to policy 42-15 in the P&P manual.
 

quadro

Well-Known Member
Please see post 13. We were answering you in the context of this thread, which wasn't talking about day to day operations in posts 1-12. Please stay on point. If in doubt please refer to policy 42-15 in the P&P manual.
Context of this or any thread, day to day operations are what they are. The thread that they are in doesn't change them. Anyway, you already told me what Fred does and proved my point so I'm not sure where you are going with this.
 

vantexan

Well-Known Member
Context of this or any thread, day to day operations are what they are. The thread that they are in doesn't change them. Anyway, you already told me what Fred does and proved my point so I'm not sure where you are going with this.

Lighten up amigo, you'll live longer.
 

quadro

Well-Known Member
Confuse the issue. Muddy the waters.

Typical management response.

And by the way congrats on making a mountain out of a mole hill.
I'm sorry that a simple question confused you. Which part of "day to day operations" did you not understand? Did you trip over the "to"? Or was it "day"?
 

Cactus

Just telling it like it is
I'm sorry that a simple question confused you. Which part of "day to day operations" did you not understand? Did you trip over the "to"? Or was it "day"?

Simple question, yeah right.

Chockful of BS through and through.

Like I said you're good a confusing the issue and muddying the waters.

Enjoy your "management training" during your stay at the Holiday Inn Express.
 
Top