IBT MASTER PROPOSAL

[worldwide]

Are you suggesting UPS will go out of business without driverless vehicles? That's ludicrous.

Response as expected - no suggestions. Nowhere do I say that UPS will go out of business without driverless vehicles. I said that companies that fail to innovate and adapt to changing conditions shrink and then go out of business.

Read slowly what I said and asked: "Keep on doing the same thing and don't change or find a way to adapt to changing business rules and conditions? What are your alternatives if drones and driverless vehicles are not looked at and pursued?" Do you have suggestions or answers?

You are the one that said "No driverless vehicles is probably the most important sentence in the proposal imo." I have been saying that for UPS not to look at new technology like this is crazy given that EVERY logistics company is looking at them to see how they could help. UPS should be the only company in the logistics industry not to invest and look at this technology?

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

Response as expected - no suggestions. Nowhere do I say that UPS will go out of business without driverless vehicles. I said that companies that fail to innovate and adapt to changing conditions shrink and then go out of business.

Read slowly what I said and asked: "Keep on doing the same thing and don't change or find a way to adapt to changing business rules and conditions? What are your alternatives if drones and driverless vehicles are not looked at and pursued?" Do you have suggestions or answers?

You are the one that said "No driverless vehicles is probably the most important sentence in the proposal imo." I have been saying that for UPS not to look at new technology like this is crazy given that EVERY logistics company is looking at them to see how they could help. UPS should be the only company in the logistics industry not to invest and look at this technology?

Bruh, you've basically written a book in this thread. I could sum up your opinion in one sentence. You want to eliminate jobs to make more money for stock holders.

You present a false dilemma to me over and over... that if I don't suggest an alternative to driverless vehicles UPS will quote, fail to innovate and adapt to changing conditions shrink and then go out of business.

It's a non sequitur.

 

[Brownslave688]

Give up $90,000 for an extra year of full time pension credit?

Some of our TCD's go full time in less than 6 months.
TCD has also been a good tool for adding full-time jobs here. If a TCD has 156 reports they must add a full time job.
Our full timers also like that it gives management more flexibility to give them a day off while a TCD runs the route. I know that is not what a TCD is for but it is what happens.

The 156 reports language was big to get added.

While some guys may go ft quickly others may wait years. Why not focus on improving the progression instead of allowing TCD.

 

[Coldworld]

Give up $90,000 for an extra year of full time pension credit?

Some of our TCD's go full time in less than 6 months.
TCD has also been a good tool for adding full-time jobs here. If a TCD has 156 reports they must add a full time job.
Our full timers also like that it gives management more flexibility to give them a day off while a TCD runs the route. I know that is not what a TCD is for but it is what happens.

How do they get that 156 punch number??? Seems high..

 

[East coast navy]

I love article 3, section 7. Very aggressive!

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

How do they get that 156 punch number??? Seems high..

We have probably 1 tcd for every 15 drivers. You wanna work believe me you can find someone to go home.

 

[Coldworld]

Can you predict the future? Driverless vehicles and drones are still in their infancy and they will improve in their capabilities. Virtually every logistics & transportation company is looking at drones and driverless vehicles and investing a lot of money to determine how they can be used to enhance customer service, reduce cost and enhance profitability. Every one of these companies is wrong?

Again, which direction is better for UPS to follow, in your opinion? Keep on doing the same thing and don't change or find a way to adapt to changing business rules and conditions? What are your alternatives if drones and driverless vehicles are not looked at and pursued?

One day all this won’t matter anyway.... so many jobs will be automated and many of these people wont be able to progress into other fields... millions will loose jobs and companies like ups will only be a shell of what it is today. When we are all out of work and milking the tit of the government we won’t need the infrastructure to deliver to the few who can afford to buy things on the internet...so keep automating everything....you’ll be out on your ass just like millions of others...

 

[Coldworld]

I love article 3, section 7. Very aggressive!

What is it??

 

[TearsInRain]

This coming from an IE person.

i mean why not as a % or a ratio

flat numbers are harder to plan

Where I am there is a lot of Pt'ers double shifting because they cannot get new hires to stay. The retention percentage has to be very low. A good reason to add more in the coming years. Our hub is adding a day sort so more positions will have to be filled. I also believe to my core that the union does not audit the numbers like they are supposed to and a good many positions go unfilled or just disappear.

those shifters should be FT for sure

 

[Pizza]

How do they get that 156 punch number??? Seems high..

Ups was abusing the TCD language and using it to supplement the staff and avoid hiring full time. The idea is for TCD to cover vacations and absences of full time and work their regular part time shift when not needed.

The 156 language was added to stop this. Management was in the habit of using the TCD and just continued and jobs have been added.

 

[worldwide]

Bruh, you've basically written a book in this thread. I could sum up your opinion in one sentence. You want to eliminate jobs to make more money for stock holders.

You present a false dilemma to me over and over... that if I don't suggest an alternative to driverless vehicles UPS will quote, fail to innovate and adapt to changing conditions shrink and then go out of business.

It's a non sequitur.

You brought up the subject of driverless vehicles so I'm just trying to understand what you are worried about and what the opposition is to UPS looking at new technologies.

Speaking of non sequiturs, since you stated "Driverless vehicles are not faster and they will not get packages to customers sooner" you have nothing to worry about if UPS uses them, right?

Last time I checked, UPS was isn't a not-for-profit business so it's their obligation to make more money for stockholders--business 101. Stockholders of companies aren't supposed to have their investments grow?

BTW, I did not state anywhere that if UPS does not have driverless vehicles they will go out of business. Driverless vehicles are simply one piece of technology that is developing, drones are another. Maybe they will be viable, maybe they will not be. If they develop to be something viable that can help UPS be more competitive, then I'm all for it. Why would any employee of any company want their employer to remain stagnant and not innovate and grow & prosper? If every logistics company eventually uses them and UPS is the one hold out, it can't be positive thing in the long-term. I stated that companies that don't look at new technologies and innovate and move with the times, will eventually shrink and collapse. Name me one company that is the exception to that basic business rule. You've stated that UPS looking at implementing driverless vehicles is a non-starter and since they are new technology, you are apparently against innovation and new technology.

 

[DriveInDriveOut]

You brought up the subject of driverless vehicles so I'm just trying to understand what you are worried about and what the opposition is to UPS looking at new technologies.

Speaking of non sequiturs, since you stated "Driverless vehicles are not faster and they will not get packages to customers sooner" you have nothing to worry about if UPS uses them, right?

Last time I checked, UPS was isn't a not-for-profit business so it's their obligation to make more money for stockholders--business 101. Stockholders of companies aren't supposed to have their investments grow?

BTW, I did not state anywhere that if UPS does not have driverless vehicles they will go out of business. Driverless vehicles are simply one piece of technology that is developing, drones are another. Maybe they will be viable, maybe they will not be. If they develop to be something viable that can help UPS be more competitive, then I'm all for it. Why would any employee of any company want their employer to remain stagnant and not innovate and grow & prosper? If every logistics company eventually uses them and UPS is the one hold out, it can't be positive thing in the long-term. I stated that companies that don't look at new technologies and innovate and move with the times, will eventually shrink and collapse. Name me one company that is the exception to that basic business rule. You've stated that UPS looking at implementing driverless vehicles is a non-starter and since they are new technology, you are apparently against innovation and new technology.

Tldr.

What is your position with UPS?

 

[Coldworld]

Tldr.

What is your position with UPS?

Part time unload sup???

 

[542thruNthru]

Why do I care if UPS goes under if they eliminate all drivering jobs with driverless vehicles?

 

[worldwide]

One day all this won’t matter anyway.... so many jobs will be automated and many of these people wont be able to progress into other fields... millions will loose jobs and companies like ups will only be a shell of what it is today. When we are all out of work and milking the tit of the government we won’t need the infrastructure to deliver to the few who can afford to buy things on the internet...so keep automating everything....you’ll be out on your ass just like millions of others...

"Technology adoption can, and often does, cause significant short-term labor displacement, but history shows that in the longer run, it creates a multitude of new jobs and unleashes demand for existing ones, more than offsetting the number of jobs it destroys, even as it raises labor productivity."

Only one of the 270 detailed occupations listed in the 1950 US Census has since been eliminated by automation. The one exception: elevator operator. How computer automation affects occupations | VOX, CEPR’s Policy Portal

The good news for delivery drivers is that most studies indicate that "Light Truck or Delivery Services Drivers" and "Heavy and Tractor-Trailer Truck Driver" are jobs that are not immediately at risk of being eliminated due to automation. Longer-term it's a different story. Find Out If Your Job Will Be Automated

 

[worldwide]

Tldr.

What is your position with UPS?

TLDR - too bad, you could learn something new by reading.
International Sales Operations

What is your position with UPS?

 

[542thruNthru]

SALES!!! LOL

 

[clean hairy]

Did anyone notice one of the proposals is to supply UPS socks upon request?

 

[Frankie's Friend]

TLDR - too bad, you could learn something new by reading.
International Sales Operations

What is your position with UPS?

No innovation means no company. No company means no jobs. When UPS competitors change and adapt to current, and future, business conditions but UPS stays stagnant, that's the beginning of the end. Tough to collect dues when no one gets paid.

This is equivalent to the Pony Express in the 19th century demanding that all deliveries be done by horse instead of by rail. How about all the telephone operators that lost their jobs plugging in wires when the phone system went computerized? Should those jobs have stayed in place?

Unions have their place in the ecosystem, but why shoot themselves in the foot? It might be wiser to go with the flow of technology and appropriately unionize where the new jobs are as technology advances. Workers skills may have to change and job responsibilities may also have to change moving forward. Life changes and technologies advance.

It's not so much they need them to innovate but it is the changing landscape of the logistics industry that is forcing UPS and all other transportation/logistics companies to look for ways to provide more efficient services to meet the needs of customers. To go back to the Pony Express example, they did not need to innovate - the horses worked just fine. But along came new technology and it changed the rules of the game. There was now a faster and more efficient way to get things from point A to point B so that is what customers starting asking for and using. The same thing is happening in logistics - drones and driverless vehicles are changing the rules of the game. Customers are not expressly asking for delivery by drone or driverless vehicle but if they can get their stuff delivered faster and more conveniently based on their needs, they will choose that option. UPS can adapt or they can keep on doing the same thing and watch other companies innovate, meet customer demands and pass them by.

Which direction is better for UPS to follow, in your opinion? Keep on doing the same thing and don't change or find a way to adapt to changing business rules and conditions? What are your alternatives if drones and driverless vehicles are not looked at and pursued?

Can you predict the future? Driverless vehicles and drones are still in their infancy and they will improve in their capabilities. Virtually every logistics & transportation company is looking at drones and driverless vehicles and investing a lot of money to determine how they can be used to enhance customer service, reduce cost and enhance profitability. Every one of these companies is wrong?

Again, which direction is better for UPS to follow, in your opinion? Keep on doing the same thing and don't change or find a way to adapt to changing business rules and conditions? What are your alternatives if drones and driverless vehicles are not looked at and pursued?

Not pretending about anything - It's about all of that - that's Business 101. No business is interested introducing new technology just for technology's sake or new services & technology that increase costs - they would not stay in business. They introduce new services and technology that do all of the above - enhance customer service, reduce cost, increase share holder value, again - Business 101. UPS workers and customers are also UPS stockholders should they make the choice to own UPS shares and I'm sure they are interested in seeing their investment grow. Are you against shareowners of companies and holders in 401(k)'s seeing their investments grow and wanting the stock of companies they own innovate and grow?

It's very telling that you've failed to address what I've asked. The only conclusion one can make is that you prefer UPS to stay status quo and not look at these new technologies and how they could help while letting the competition take advantage of what they can offer.

Last try - which direction is better for UPS to follow, in your opinion? Keep on doing the same thing and don't change or find a way to adapt to changing business rules and conditions? What are your alternatives if drones and driverless vehicles are not looked at and pursued?

You brought up the subject of driverless vehicles so I'm just trying to understand what you are worried about and what the opposition is to UPS looking at new technologies.

Speaking of non sequiturs, since you stated "Driverless vehicles are not faster and they will not get packages to customers sooner" you have nothing to worry about if UPS uses them, right?

Last time I checked, UPS was isn't a not-for-profit business so it's their obligation to make more money for stockholders--business 101. Stockholders of companies aren't supposed to have their investments grow?

BTW, I did not state anywhere that if UPS does not have driverless vehicles they will go out of business. Driverless vehicles are simply one piece of technology that is developing, drones are another. Maybe they will be viable, maybe they will not be. If they develop to be something viable that can help UPS be more competitive, then I'm all for it. Why would any employee of any company want their employer to remain stagnant and not innovate and grow & prosper? If every logistics company eventually uses them and UPS is the one hold out, it can't be positive thing in the long-term. I stated that companies that don't look at new technologies and innovate and move with the times, will eventually shrink and collapse. Name me one company that is the exception to that basic business rule. You've stated that UPS looking at implementing driverless vehicles is a non-starter and since they are new technology, you are apparently against innovation and new technology.

TLDR - too bad, you could learn something new by reading.
International Sales Operations

What is your position with UPS?

TLDR is right on the money.

 

[MyTripisCut]

TLDR - too bad, you could learn something new by reading.
International Sales Operations

What is your position with UPS?

Get back to work scumbag. I only delivered one international package all week in my area. You want innovation? Then watch @dookie stain figure out where to take a dump after 9pm on the clock.