The second thing is a break-down of whatever the barriers are in place that prevent employees from transferring to different hubs to seek out more opportunities there. In my local there are a dearth of candidates for utility driving jobs. Even if it is only temporary, you are talking months' of FT pay at a rate higher than what most PTmers make (and those whose rate is higher, wouldn't they still be paid at their rate; even if not, FT at $18.75 is significantly better than PT at $21), as well as valuable driving experience that could speed up the process of becoming a FT driver. However, in my center it was announced they are currently training 3 drivers who will actually be able to attain seniority, two of which were loaders; the third is a street hire who replaces an inside employee who had something personal come up that prevented him from completing qualification.
Reasonable rules could be implemented to prevent employees from over-crowding desirable hubs, such as making the 6-1 ratio be filled by an employee from another district, before it is offered to a supe or an off-the-street applicant. Some may this idea on the idea of it being age-related discrimination, but perhaps an age limit can be put in place to prevent long-time employees close to retirement from being able to transfer to a locale with a better pension plan for a couple years, and then retiring, thus over-burdening that local with a higher-than-normal retiree population they must support; similar rules could be put in place for hubs in popular retirement areas, like Phoenix or many hubs in Florida. I know in the Postal Service one can only transfer to a station that someone else wants to transfer out of; the two employees will basically swap places, ensuring neither station is left in a weakened position as far as personnel is concerned; perhaps something similar could be created to give employees who would like to exploit such an opportunity be afforded the chance to, and thus eliminate any hint of ageism.
Allowing PTmers-or anyone else eligible to apply-to pursue career opportunities at other hubs could help lessen the long waits some must endure to become drivers in places where local management doesn't really see a need to create more driving positions. It still allows for "new blood" to be located in hubs, but without the lack of valuable work experience that comes with such new blood, which could lead to improved loads and environments (I suspect those inclined to go after a driving position will want to show they are hard-working, dedicated, capable, with a good work-ethic). In smaller communities that part-timers leave for other opportunities, now new positions are created for the local population to fill. In light of the disadvantage one has with "high turnover"-which a hub in a less desirable location may experience with their more-motivated workers leaving for better opportunities-maybe some type of initiative could be created, like a special class of hourly whose main focus is to train and help new hires, or employees struggling with becoming acclimated to their responsibilities. This position would only be found in hubs where such a condition might be found to exist; they do not become "hourly supervisors', but more like mentors, assisting the supervisors in having to deal with a constant flow of new-hires.. For the teaching-and mentoring-inclined workers of UPS, this may be an incentive to transfer into a hub in a less-desirable location, and if the position is a FT one, provide another avenue for drivers looking to get off the street. One hiccup is how to balance the needs and rights of seniority with the need to have good people doing this, those really interested in helping make the PT workforce stronger and better.
