Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Partners
New retirement vacation policy
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="brownIEman" data-source="post: 3879851" data-attributes="member: 14596"><p>There was no Kumbaya we're all great loving family. It was always a tough business. There were plenty of management that thought the only way to get effective work out of hourlies was to be a prick, just as there were drivers that sat around enjoying a grand slam at Denny's on the clock sheeting packages.</p><p></p><p>There was, prior to 97, a culture in upper management that we were all in the business together, both hourly and management, we all wanted to see the business succeed long term. The union successful sold the hourly that the company only wanted to screw them, so the hourly screwed the company.</p><p></p><p>The team concept was actually already on the way out prior to the strike, because it had showed no dividends. Oz Nelson was removed as CEO partly because that was his boondoggle, and he had already been replaced by Kelly prior to the strike.</p><p></p><p>The union should have been able to explain financial realities to their members. I've heard the argument many times that UPS somehow forced the union to match their offer just by making it and therefore forced them to more quickly kill the CS plan. That argument is completely without merit.</p><p></p><p>UPS was losing market share, primarily due to cost disadvantages. The leadership at the time was taking the long view. Financially the company was strong, but they saw the writing on the wall. They wanted to make changes to control cost growth while they were strong, not try to do it from a failing company. That's why the CSTC's and DI and COD sites were consolidated, among others. </p><p>The leaders were correct about the loss of market share. What they did not anticipate was the level to which e commerce would expand the market. UPS continues to lose market share, and continues to grow as the market growth makes up for it.</p><p></p><p>There were no merrit based raises for hourlies in UPS proposals, not sure where you're getting that. There was a profit sharing bonus proposed that would have been based on the profit performance of the company, not the performance of any individual if that's what you mean.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="brownIEman, post: 3879851, member: 14596"] There was no Kumbaya we're all great loving family. It was always a tough business. There were plenty of management that thought the only way to get effective work out of hourlies was to be a prick, just as there were drivers that sat around enjoying a grand slam at Denny's on the clock sheeting packages. There was, prior to 97, a culture in upper management that we were all in the business together, both hourly and management, we all wanted to see the business succeed long term. The union successful sold the hourly that the company only wanted to screw them, so the hourly screwed the company. The team concept was actually already on the way out prior to the strike, because it had showed no dividends. Oz Nelson was removed as CEO partly because that was his boondoggle, and he had already been replaced by Kelly prior to the strike. The union should have been able to explain financial realities to their members. I've heard the argument many times that UPS somehow forced the union to match their offer just by making it and therefore forced them to more quickly kill the CS plan. That argument is completely without merit. UPS was losing market share, primarily due to cost disadvantages. The leadership at the time was taking the long view. Financially the company was strong, but they saw the writing on the wall. They wanted to make changes to control cost growth while they were strong, not try to do it from a failing company. That's why the CSTC's and DI and COD sites were consolidated, among others. The leaders were correct about the loss of market share. What they did not anticipate was the level to which e commerce would expand the market. UPS continues to lose market share, and continues to grow as the market growth makes up for it. There were no merrit based raises for hourlies in UPS proposals, not sure where you're getting that. There was a profit sharing bonus proposed that would have been based on the profit performance of the company, not the performance of any individual if that's what you mean. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Partners
New retirement vacation policy
Top