New GPS Time Study: What they are not telling you

[pretzel_man]

In the 23 years I have been a driver, I have never seen one of these "variances" you speak of.

They are like vaporware, or fairy dust. They exist in theory, but in the real world they will never happen. In the real world, the driver will simply be overdispatched and pressured into working off of the clock in order to meet the flawed "standard". The standard itself will not be corrected.

Any measurement system with no viable mechanism for the correction of errors is, by definition, unfair and arbitrary.

Are you saying that there is not a single variance in your building? In your district?

I can't say that there is or isn't. I do know that I personally created many in my time.

You asked if a process existed. It does. If a driver has good methods, good pace, and a good job setup (load) that is where a variance fits.

Go ask your local IE manager if any variances exist in your district or building. Ask if he / she disagrees with my statement above.

P-Man

 

[tourists24]

There is a variance process. I've used it many times myself. When the conditions of an area do not match the standard process, a variance can be approved. It doesn't happen often, but it does happen.

I should point out one more thing... The allowance is based on using the methods, but ALSO a proper job setup. That means a good load and a good trace. (Not perfect, but good) This means that if you have to sort your load, you are overallowed. If you have to dig for a package loaded poorly, you are overallowed.

I won't debate with you whether its right to not give planned time for this "rework". I had an IE assignment 30 years ago and that debate existed then. Rework does not get planned time and I understand why.

So to your example, if a driver works by the methods, at a brisk pace, had a good load, trace, and Job Setup, but is still overallowed.... This is exactly a case for a variance.

You will ignore this information I gave you. You have an opinion that will be unchanged by any facts you get. Go talk to you rlocal I.E. and see if they will explain more details on the process. There is no pont in arguing about something you refuse to learn about.

P-Man

All this perfection yet there is still no way to give a good time allowance for mall routes. Yet operations management are still held to that flawed standard

 

[tourists24]

and a short guy automatically gets an allowance for being short, right? A very tall person takes longer steps so they get time taken away right?

 

[grgrcr88]

Unusual that no gain in time even for a single area was seen. The average in the country saw a gain in time. You may be right, its just unusual.

Time studies and work measurement have nothing to do with the performance of the driver. It doesn't matter if you go fast, slow, cut corners, etc. The time study will remain the same. The study studies the route, not the driver. The observer is gathering characteristics of the stops (building type, walk distances, etc)

The new time study program is just a more scientific method for doing so. Its easily audited, reduces time to calculate the studies, and is more precise.

As was said, it becomes irrevelant.... You won't recognize the time study, so you don't want to know about the new system. Therefore, you could never agree to a bonus system since it will always be based on some time study system.

I just don't understand why you complain about a system that you refuse to learn about?

P-Man

I do not care how they measure this that or anything else. The problem is that everything is attached a time "allowance" which is one persons thought for how long a particular task sould take. That is the reason it will never be recognized.

 

[FracusBrown]

I do not care how they measure this that or anything else. The problem is that everything is attached a time "allowance" which is one persons thought for how long a particular task sould take. That is the reason it will never be recognized.

A time allowance is not based upon a thought. UPS didn't invent the theory of time studies. Time measurement of repetitive motion is recognized throughout the industrialized world. The Teamsters don't "recognize" because it pins them down to specific production standards.

Frederick Winslow Taylor is credited with the term Time Study in the early 1900's.

If UPS didn't use time allowances we'd be as unproductive as the government, where however long a person chooses to take to complete a task is acceptable.

 

[pretzel_man]

I do not care how they measure this that or anything else. The problem is that everything is attached a time "allowance" which is one persons thought for how long a particular task sould take. That is the reason it will never be recognized.

That one person's thought fills up an entire room in atlanta. Its filled with backup on how each allowance is calculated. There are video tapes of people doing the job to create some of the original studies.

If I took you to atlanta, showed you the backup, introduced you with the people responsible for the measurement, and reviewed every single calculation, you would still not recognize work measurement.

I honestly don't care if you recognize work measurement or not. I can understand why the union would not want to.

But don't pretent that its because you know its made up. It is not.

P-Man

 

[tourists24]

That one person's thought fills up an entire room in atlanta. Its filled with backup on how each allowance is calculated. There are video tapes of people doing the job to create some of the original studies.

If I took you to atlanta, showed you the backup, introduced you with the people responsible for the measurement, and reviewed every single calculation, you would still not recognize work measurement.

I honestly don't care if you recognize work measurement or not. I can understand why the union would not want to.

But don't pretent that its because you know its made up. It is not.

P-Man

definitely not made up, but skewed unless you fall exactly in the "average" of the allowance.

 

[pretzel_man]

definitely not made up, but skewed unless you fall exactly in the "average" of the allowance.

That is a true statement. It is designed to be 95% accurate, 95% of the time.

BTW, that is a problem for holding a driver accountable (at least for a single day). I have said this before. On a 10 hour day, it could be off as much as 1/2 hour. On one day a month, it could be worse.

For a whole center of course, the accuracy increases as variables balance each other out. Over a week or a month for a center, its pretty good.

P-Man

 

[Jones]

If the union's sole reason for not recognizing the the time studies was they didn't want to be held to a production standard, then they wouldn't recognize a 3 day ride either. The union doesn't recognize them because they're not fair, any cover driver who knows more than 3 routes can tell you that. Maybe the new GPS studies will be better but I can tell you that the ones we have in place now are not anything close to 95% accurate, 95% of the time.

 

[FracusBrown]

definitely not made up, but skewed unless you fall exactly in the "average" of the allowance.

In that case, 50% of people should be held to a higher standard than the average to compensate for the 50% below average?

 

[tourists24]

In that case, 50% of people should be held to a higher standard than the average to compensate for the 50% below average?

that's exactly right Fracus. A 5' tall 45 yr old 100 lb worker cannot possibly be held to the same standard to a 25 year old 6'2 210 worker.

 

[stevetheupsguy]

that's exactly right Fracus. A 5' tall 45 yr old 100 lb worker cannot possibly be held to the same standard to a 25 year old 6'2 210 worker.

That's right, you're way fast and have the endurance of a superhero.

 

[tourists24]

That's right, you're way fast and have the endurance of a superhero.

he he... Im not a superhero, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express... fast,,,, lol pffft

 

[Catatonic]

that's exactly right Fracus. A 5' tall 45 yr old 100 lb worker cannot possibly be held to the same standard to a 25 year old 6'2 210 worker.

That is why they are not held to the same "standards".

The standard that a driver is held to is based upon demonstrated performance.

The 5' tall 45 yr old 100 lb worker may be held to a standard of 25 minutes overallowed while the 25 year old 6'2 210 worker may be held to a standard of 30 minutes underallowed.
The standard is based observations of demonstrated effort sometimes known as a 3-day ride.

 

[tourists24]

That is why they are not held to the same "standards".

The standard that a driver is held to is based upon demonstrated performance.

The 5' tall 45 yr old 100 lb worker may be held to a standard of 25 minutes overallowed while the 25 year old 6'2 210 worker may be held to a standard of 30 minutes underallowed.
The standard is based observations of demonstrated effort sometimes known as a 3-day ride.

That's not what the whole system was developed on though Hoax. For punishment reasons, this is how the company has been trying to approach it, but it's not how the standard over overallowed was established. I can speak from experience. I was accompanied on 3 separate 3 day rides last year while on a mall route. Harrassed as a slouch all year. Constantly ran 2 hours over. I changed routes this year and can run scratch when I feel like it, so now I am a hero. The entire overallowed is a joke because like I said if you dont fall into the "average" category its then flip a coin.

 

[pretzel_man]

If the union's sole reason for not recognizing the the time studies was they didn't want to be held to a production standard, then they wouldn't recognize a 3 day ride either. The union doesn't recognize them because they're not fair, any cover driver who knows more than 3 routes can tell you that. Maybe the new GPS studies will be better but I can tell you that the ones we have in place now are not anything close to 95% accurate, 95% of the time.

You say time studies are not fair.
You say a lock in ride is not fair.
You say SPORH is not fair.
You say NDPPH is not fair.

So, what is a fair measure of performance? You are setting up a scenario that there is none.

P-Man

 

[Jones]

You say time studies are not fair.
You say a lock in ride is not fair.
You say SPORH is not fair.
You say NDPPH is not fair.

So, what is a fair measure of performance? You are setting up a scenario that there is none.

P-Man

Where did I say a lock in ride wasn't fair? I specifically pointed out that the union will recognize a 3 day ride because that measures demonstrated performance, in contrast to the time studies.
I don't know what NDPPH is.

 

[tourists24]

You say time studies are not fair.
You say a lock in ride is not fair.
You say SPORH is not fair.
You say NDPPH is not fair.

So, what is a fair measure of performance? You are setting up a scenario that there is none.

P-Man

good question. none of the above are given out in a fair way. All the ones besides 3 day ride are all based on BS IE numbers. Most 3 day rides are screwed up for several reasons. First off, taking 3 days to set a complete standard for all other days doesnt make it fair. Simply not enough days to look at. It would take a lot of days to get an accurate reading.

Second, you cant get a decent read because alot of drivers' routes change daily with different sections. Impossible to simply take even an average of those 3 days and expect the same performance when there is only one day to compare at a time.

Third, you dont get the same performance when the sup is hovering over you telling you to do things differently than what the methods call for on your ride. I got a good taste of this last year when I had a safety ride on a Thursday and then a 3 day performance ride the next Tuesday. All of a sudden the safety aspects werent as important. When I drove around a building instead of backing and turning around I responded "no unnecessary backing right". Response "well you have to mix safety and performance". Really?

I believe the best best would be some kind of a lock in, but it would need to be done right. Simple observation and ensuring all the methods are followed correctly. Instead, shortcutting for the sake of speed is encouraged. And more than 3 days

 

[soberups]

You say time studies are not fair.
You say a lock in ride is not fair.
You say SPORH is not fair.
You say NDPPH is not fair.

So, what is a fair measure of performance? You are setting up a scenario that there is none.

P-Man

I think that time studies could be fair....if there was some method in place for correcting them in cases when they were demonstrably flawed. Since company policy is to refuse to correct flawed studies, they are by definition unfair.

So if you want the union to agree to some sort of performance measurement, then that measurement must first be fair. It must be transparent and verifiable.

None of the metrics you mention (over/under, SPORH, NDPPH) are transparent or verifiable. They are all arbitrary and subject to manipulation at the sole discretion of the company.

Allowances can be manipulated with a few keystrokes at a computer terminal. SPORH or NDPPH can be manipulated by massaging the load prior to start time and strategically adding or removing selected delivery areas on OJS days in order to artificially inflate demonstrated performance.

The reality is that the company doesnt want a "fair" measure of performance. The company wants nothing more than to maximize profits by coercing as many employees as possible into working off of the clock. The "standards" are carefully designed with this goal in mind.

It is the company, not the union, that has set up the "no-fair-measure of performance" scenario you complain about.

 

[Catatonic]

That's not what the whole system was developed on though Hoax. For punishment reasons, this is how the company has been trying to approach it, but it's not how the standard over overallowed was established. I can speak from experience. I was accompanied on 3 separate 3 day rides last year while on a mall route. Harrassed as a slouch all year. Constantly ran 2 hours over. I changed routes this year and can run scratch when I feel like it, so now I am a hero. The entire overallowed is a joke because like I said if you dont fall into the "average" category its then flip a coin.

What you are pointing out here is that your local management does not know what Work Measurement is and how it should be used - in a perfect world.
I often commented that the use of Work Measurement by Operations Management reminded me of giving a person a screwdriver and their upper management telling them to use it as a hammer.
The frustrating thing is that Ops use of WM does increase productivity.

As an aside, I assume that the person that is now running the mall route is now running 2 hours over. If the answer is yes, then this should be the standard.