How about some rampant speculation?

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

So a14 hour day would get a ups driver how much when compared to a 6-year Home Delivery driver?

First of all, we are capped at 12 hours. Secondly, the vehicle would have been in position and loaded by a part-timer, cutting 2.5 hours off of our day. Third, we would have a 45 minute lunch taken out of our paid day. Fourth, the flowers/chocolates are all shipper release so there would have been no running to the back door/side door to driver release them. Stop, drop and go. Fifth, we don't need turn by turn directions--our stops are loaded in to our DIAD which allows us to run the area in the most efficient manner possible. So your 14 hour day would have been reduced to an 11.25 hour paid day and would have been run in 10 hours, resulting in 2 hours OT and a gross for the day of $330.

 

[vantexan]

First of all, we are capped at 12 hours. Secondly, the vehicle would have been in position and loaded by a part-timer, cutting 2.5 hours off of our day. Third, we would have a 45 minute lunch taken out of our paid day. Fourth, the flowers/chocolates are all shipper release so there would have been no running to the back door/side door to driver release them. Stop, drop and go. Fifth, we don't need turn by turn directions--our stops are loaded in to our DIAD which allows us to run the area in the most efficient manner possible. So your 14 hour day would have been reduced to an 11.25 hour paid day and would have been run in 10 hours, resulting in 2 hours OT and a gross for the day of $330.

Pretty much all of our flowers and chocolates are shipper release now too. If not, if the shipper doesn't request a sig we can still release at a residence. Either way we do have to enter info into power pad. But I think the point is that the Home Delivery guy makes nowhere near what you make on similar hours. With no benefits either. It's a step up from working a minimum wage job with no benefits but doesn't provide much of a life. That's the big problem, had a manufacturing based economy where you could get a lifetime decent paying job with benefits vs now struggling to find anything and being exploited by those who'll make sure they get their's. Hard to hang onto old values when there's no reward for working hard and being cheerful about it.

 

[CJinx]

What FHD driver takes 2.5 hours to load their truck!? Preload is usually wrapping up when they start showing up, so their freight is ready to go. The same people always have a late dispatch because they hang around chatting or complaining about something.

 

[HomeDelivery]

thanks guys for the input

CJinx, I was delayed; the original stepvan got red-flagged for having something broken; so they got me a 12' Budget rental boxvan/truck. I put my supplies into it, slapped on the magnetic FedEx Ground door magnets, went to fuel it up (it was 1/2 tank), then loaded /sorted my vehicle... at 730am they were still unloading packages from the trailers ~ they're normally done the sort by then. preload wasn't finished until 830am that day, which felt like peak season again.

for ups those 4 hours of preload for ups are loaders who load 2-4 package cars per shift... that's a bit excessive if they need to load 4 package vehicles if you asked me (loading 2 simultaneously would be better for them). Ground also gets preloaders, but it'll be a hit-or-miss when you walk into the loaded stepvans/boxtrucks; i hated not knowing what's inside the cargo area & if they were loaded correctly. So I stuck with HD division so I can load it and sort it inside the vehicle myself to avoid any missorts/misloads/crappy loads...

First of all, we are capped at 12 hours.

lucky! if i was going to go over 14 hours, I may have to lie to my scanner & finish the route "off the books" or code the remaining stops DNA (did not attempt) and log off for the night

Secondly, the vehicle would have been in position and loaded by a part-timer, cutting 2.5 hours off of our day.

see the reply i made to Cjinx

Third, we would have a 45 minute lunch taken out of our paid day.

lucky! i work non-stop until i'm done; then i'll take my non-paid break at the end. I'll still hydrate between stops & may use my porta-john method

Fourth, the flowers/chocolates are all shipper release so there would have been no running to the back door/side door to driver release them. Stop, drop and go.

I have some "seedy areas" to deal with; if i drop and go at the front door in plain view from the street, I know they'll be stolen! one had a dog in the front yard & had a chocolate/fruit basket delivery. I honked the horn multiple times to alert the customer; a big Budget Rental truck was in front of their view. No way would i drop n go for the dog will tear into the box and will get chocolate poisoning!

Fifth, we don't need turn by turn directions--our stops are loaded in to our DIAD which allows us to run the area in the most efficient manner possible.

yes i read about your EDD or PAS system. we have a similar system as well (Express calls it ROADS) i call it turn by turn sequencing (i never asked what the system that HD uses). The regular driver i was covering for has this particular route go into a big "figure 8" trace to end up near his home (he takes the stepvan directly to his home instead of returning to the barn).

your 14 hour day would have been reduced to an 11.25 hour paid day and would have been run in 10 hours, resulting in 2 hours OT and a gross for the day of $330.

lucky! if i had a stepvan, i would have broke trace and run it myself to cut down 2 hours. having a boxtruck means i loaded up in sequential order & had to deliver it that way. i'll be lucky to have half of that pay... i'll see next week how the contractor paid me

van, if i went with the temp agency, i would surely have gotten paid to load/prep/sort my own vehicle, got paid to drive to my first stop, got paid to return the vehicle to the barn at the end of the route... if working with a temp agency, the managers would have factored in those extra times doing that & that's why most of the temps i saw only had 60-70 stops each (so they can be done by 8-9.5 hours). I was just returning to that contractor since he asked me a whole week ahead of time. They probably only cover 2-3 zip codes while i was doing about 6 different zip codes

at least i recovered on mothers day & mondays are off for HD division

 

[CJinx]

Ah, so just a bad day.
When I was a package handler I loaded 6 trucks. :O So glad I don't work preload anymore...

 

[HomeDelivery]

6 trucks? yuck... that was ground since in HD, they just leave it in a pile for the drivers to load & sort it in their package cars.

yea, I was just re-iterating that at least UPS has the OT-compensation for the driver if they have late dispatches/overloaded. one can call/type in their DIAD for help.

With a subcontractor, it is a hit-or-miss when you're overloaded or have delays... he knew i wouldn't stop until everything in my vehicle was delivered so he didn't have to call upon his other drivers to meet up and take 20 stops from me.

as i locked up the boxtruck for the night, I saw a few others coming in late as well... just another day at HD

I'm going to try to contact the temp agency representative to see if i can stay as an hourly employee to cover summer vacations this year

 

[59 Dano]

That's the big problem, had a manufacturing based economy where you could get a lifetime decent paying job with benefits vs now struggling to find anything and being exploited by those who'll make sure they get their's. Hard to hang onto old values when there's no reward for working hard and being cheerful about it.

We could always hope for a protracted global conflict that cripples the infrastructure of those nations with whom we compete. That's what created the strong manufacturing based economy that so many people seemed to believe was supposed to last forever. American corporations were at their "greediest" during that period and the workers didn't give a fart as long as they got their cut.

 

[bbsam]

Protracted global conflict? Like the european economies going down in flame?

 

[vantexan]

We could always hope for a protracted global conflict that cripples the infrastructure of those nations with whom we compete. That's what created the strong manufacturing based economy that so many people seemed to believe was supposed to last forever. American corporations were at their "greediest" during that period and the workers didn't give a fart as long as they got their cut.

You are a little off. It was America's manufacturing might that helped win WWII. It was after the war when other countries were rebuilding that our manufacturing base made us the world's dominant economy. And hard earned gains by unions forced companies to offer good benefits to keep unions out as well as compete for workers. Now the pendulum has swung back the other way. Unions have greatly contributed to their own demise, and companies are taking advantage of union weakness to divest themselves of employees benefits. Wealth is being concentrated into fewer and fewer hands which eventually(possibly already started) will lead to the kind of social unrest and radicalism that produced alot of misery in the last century. The idea that some are entitled to live extraordinarily well while the masses struggle has never produced pleasant results.

 

[59 Dano]

Protracted global conflict? Like the european economies going down in flame?

More like WWII.

 

[bbsam]

More like WWII.

How very unimaginative of you.

 

[59 Dano]

You are a little off. It was America's manufacturing might that helped win WWII. It was after the war when other countries were rebuilding that our manufacturing base made us the world's dominant economy. And hard earned gains by unions forced companies to offer good benefits to keep unions out as well as compete for workers. Now the pendulum has swung back the other way. Unions have greatly contributed to their own demise, and companies are taking advantage of union weakness to divest themselves of employees benefits.

The revisionist history is always a nice touch! Unions (cartels of labor) rely on a lack of competition among workers for jobs to maintain their strength. That was really really easy during and after WWII when the economy was zipping along. It got a little more difficult when your neighbor was willing to work for a little bit less than the union rate in order to get a leg up on whatever he was making at his current job. It got a whole lot more difficult when millions of people all over the world were willing to work for a whole lot less.

Wealth is being concentrated into fewer and fewer hands which eventually(possibly already started) will lead to the kind of social unrest and radicalism that produced alot of misery in the last century. The idea that some are entitled to live extraordinarily well while the masses struggle has never produced pleasant results.

There's nothing wrong with some having so much relative to others. You're looking at this from a very skewed viewpoint that bases expectations on a short period of economic activity that is not, nor has ever been, the norm for this country. Post-WWII was great because the workers were getting good pay and benefits anyway just because of the economic circumstances. Unions began making outrageous demands. Unions were *getting* many of them because when the boss is making so much money that he can't count it all, might as well toss a few bucks their way to shut them up. No one cared who got what as long as each guy got his.

Those days are long past us. Neither of us would make a habit of paying someone more than his work is worth and no business that wants to stay in business is going to do that, either.

 

[59 Dano]

How very unimaginative of you.

Oh, you're hurting my feelings now!

The EU can recover from a big nosedive much easier than it can recover from having significant portions of its infrastructure blown to bits. If the EU tanks, the best we can do is loan them a bunch of money and make them pay through the nose for it, but that doesn't do too much for the American economy. If it gets blown to bits, not only can we loan them a bunch of money and make them pay through the nose, but we also produce the stuff that they were producing and sell it back to them and everyone they were selling to. $$$$ galore.

 

[bbsam]

Have you noticed how long the economies of the world have been down? Further downturn could easily take us down as well with nobody loaning anyone money. Nobody was loaning money to Detroit in 2008 until Obama forced it through. And that's just a city. Imagine a europe bailout. Now way republicans in congress let that happen. Voila! Protracted global meltdown.

 

[vantexan]

Have you noticed how long the economies of the world have been down? Further downturn could easily take us down as well with nobody loaning anyone money. Nobody was loaning money to Detroit in 2008 until Obama forced it through. And that's just a city. Imagine a europe bailout. Now way republicans in congress let that happen. Voila! Protracted global meltdown.

Always blame the Republicans. Fact is that northern Europeans are very reticent about loaning more money to their southern brethren. And why should they? They work hard and manage their money well while the southern countries developed nanny states while producing much less. At the end of the day it's tax money being doled out. Hard workers shouldn't have to bear the burdens of those with a more lax attitude.

 

[bbsam]

Always blame the Republicans. Fact is that northern Europeans are very reticent about loaning more money to their southern brethren. And why should they? They work hard and manage their money well while the southern countries developed nanny states while producing much less. At the end of the day it's tax money being doled out. Hard workers shouldn't have to bear the burdens of those with a more lax attitude.

As a matter of fact, I wasn't blaming republicans. Feeling guilty? I was just saying a bailout of Europe would not get through the House. Do you doubt that? I am equally certain that Europe tanking would be disasterous for the U.S.

 

[vantexan]

The revisionist history is always a nice touch! Unions (cartels of labor) rely on a lack of competition among workers for jobs to maintain their strength. That was really really easy during and after WWII when the economy was zipping along. It got a little more difficult when your neighbor was willing to work for a little bit less than the union rate in order to get a leg up on whatever he was making at his current job. It got a whole lot more difficult when millions of people all over the world were willing to work for a whole lot less.



There's nothing wrong with some having so much relative to others. You're looking at this from a very skewed viewpoint that bases expectations on a short period of economic activity that is not, nor has ever been, the norm for this country. Post-WWII was great because the workers were getting good pay and benefits anyway just because of the economic circumstances. Unions began making outrageous demands. Unions were *getting* many of them because when the boss is making so much money that he can't count it all, might as well toss a few bucks their way to shut them up. No one cared who got what as long as each guy got his.

Those days are long past us. Neither of us would make a habit of paying someone more than his work is worth and no business that wants to stay in business is going to do that, either.

As I pointed out, the unions greatly contributed to their own demise. Say what you will, but companies didn't just start doling out benefits because they're benign rulers. Unions forced them through strikes and negotiations to concede basic rights like 40 hr work weeks. And if you have a unionized company with good pay and benefits in an area where other companies didn't, you'd have 1)The best workers trying to get the union jobs and 2)workers at the non-union companies start to talk about forming a union. Apparently you live in Pleasantville where people are happy to work hard for little and think that's ok as long as the boss and his family live well. And as always you tend to push the extreme view. I want to work hard and earn every penny. I don't expect to make as much as a UPS driver or have a gold plated retirement. I do however expect to be treated fairly and with honesty. If I work for you X years because you said that if I did I'd get a decent pension then I expect you to keep your word. If you don't so that you can live extremely well at my expense then why should I believe or trust anything you say or stand for? If at the end of the day it's only about the money for you then you and others like you are the major cause of the mess we're in. These things don't just happen, people make them happen. Greedy people who lack honor made this happen. And are still trying to make a buck with everything falling down around them.

Read up on the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, the wars against the Spanish in the Americas, the Vietnamese uprising against the French in Indochina. It may take decades, but sooner or later people revolt against the idea that the relative few can live lavish lives while the majority struggle to have food to eat. Don't kid yourself that it can't happen here.

 

[vantexan]

As a matter of fact, I wasn't blaming republicans. Feeling guilty? I was just saying a bailout of Europe would not get through the House. Do you doubt that? I am equally certain that Europe tanking would be disasterous for the U.S.

It's just such an ethnocentric viewpoint that we Americans should spend our money to bail them out. THEY formed the European Union, THEY let it get this bad. And bailouts only tend to lengthen the misery, not cure it. Pouring money down a hole doesn't fix anything. And you did say, more or less, that a Republican unwillingness to bail them out will result in a global meltdown.

I pointed this stuff out last year and some on here scoffed at the idea that Europe was doing badly. As Margaret Thatcher famously pointed out the problem with Socialism is that you eventually run out of other people's money to spend. And I heard an economist say recently that the problem is that modern technology has lead to an overcapacity in our ability to produce goods. Money gets tied up in inventory, there's very little liquidity, and it results in one financial crisis after another. And unfortunately as 59 Dano pointed out, it may take a huge blow-out like WWII to right things. I see a war against Islam in our future, or against China/Russia. Bad times ahead.

 

[59 Dano]

As I pointed out, the unions greatly contributed to their own demise. Say what you will, but companies didn't just start doling out benefits because they're benign rulers. Unions forced them through strikes and negotiations to concede basic rights like 40 hr work weeks. And if you have a unionized company with good pay and benefits in an area where other companies didn't, you'd have 1)The best workers trying to get the union jobs and 2)workers at the non-union companies start to talk about forming a union.

That's true, to an extent.

However --we're talking about modern times now-- strong economic growth does as much (and possibly more) for workers than a union, as employers are competing with one another for good employees.

[/QUOTE] Apparently you live in Pleasantville where people are happy to work hard for little and think that's ok as long as the boss and his family live well. And as always you tend to push the extreme view.[/QUOTE]

I have no idea what you are talking about with that. Maybe you think that if we didn't have unions, we'd all be working for 9 cents an hour and whatever other nonsense is printed on the pamphlet.

[/QUOTE] If at the end of the day it's only about the money for you then you and others like you are the major cause of the mess we're in. These things don't just happen, people make them happen. Greedy people who lack honor made this happen. And are still trying to make a buck with everything falling down around them. [/QUOTE]

At the end of the day, yes, it is about the money for me... and for you. I've noticed a trend in your posts -- you want this and that, but the other guy is greedy. I'm not saying you shouldn't get whatever it is that you want, but stop acting like you're holier than thou. You want what's best for you. The other guy wants what's best for him.

Please don't embarrass yourself by trying to pretend that it's not about the money for you.

Read up on the Russian Revolution, the French Revolution, the wars against the Spanish in the Americas, the Vietnamese uprising against the French in Indochina. It may take decades, but sooner or later people revolt against the idea that the relative few can live lavish lives while the majority struggle to have food to eat. Don't kid yourself that it can't happen here.

If you see parallels between our society and those societies, your sense of perception is off kilter.

 

[vantexan]

That's true, to an extent.

However --we're talking about modern times now-- strong economic growth does as much (and possibly more) for workers than a union, as employers are competing with one another for good employees.

Apparently you live in Pleasantville where people are happy to work hard for little and think that's ok as long as the boss and his family live well. And as always you tend to push the extreme view.[/QUOTE]

I have no idea what you are talking about with that. Maybe you think that if we didn't have unions, we'd all be working for 9 cents an hour and whatever other nonsense is printed on the pamphlet.

[/QUOTE] If at the end of the day it's only about the money for you then you and others like you are the major cause of the mess we're in. These things don't just happen, people make them happen. Greedy people who lack honor made this happen. And are still trying to make a buck with everything falling down around them. [/QUOTE]

At the end of the day, yes, it is about the money for me... and for you. I've noticed a trend in your posts -- you want this and that, but the other guy is greedy. I'm not saying you shouldn't get whatever it is that you want, but stop acting like you're holier than thou. You want what's best for you. The other guy wants what's best for him.

Please don't embarrass yourself by trying to pretend that it's not about the money for you.



If you see parallels between our society and those societies, your sense of perception is off kilter.[/QUOTE]

Well of course it's about the money for all of us. For most of us it's about having enough to have a decent home, decent food, a decent retirement, college for the kids, the occasional vacation, a few nice things like a nice car, a big tv. For a % of people it's a scorecard, a yardstick, measuring what you are worth by the size of your home, having a second home, millions in the bank, surrounded by luxury, and willing to push others to accept less and less so you can have more and more. I've pretty much written off any hope of being in the first group as a FedEx mid-range employee, and I'd rather be poor than be in the second group. It's one thing when you are having it done to you, quite another when you are doing it to others. Which camp are you in 59 Dano?