No Travel

Discussion in 'UPS Partners' started by PackageManager, Aug 22, 2012.

  1. PackageManager

    PackageManager New Member

    I understand the need to maintain costs whenever we can but... with the size of regions and districts now, how can operations and technology deployments be supported effectively remotely?

    File under penny wise, pound foolish.
  2. Which deployment are you referring to?
  3. Dragon

    Dragon Package Center Manager

    IE could fix my center with a couple of clicks of the keyboard from 500 miles away...why not they "fixed" my center from 500 miles away last time. Penny richer and lotsa dollers gone! :surprised::surprised: Heck most upgrades are shaken out by the center staff anyway.
  4. PackageManager

    PackageManager New Member

    PAS - yes we still have some, Telematics, SSLAW, NGSS, etc.
  5. Jackburton

    Jackburton Gone Fish'n

    Driver sups here just run misloads around, promptly getting filed on. Driver sups jobs could be replaced with part time sups in the morning and night, extending the hours when managing the business presents the most opportunities. Having a driver sup for each belt, who's looking out for his own group/butt, isn't doing what's best for the center. One or two part times sups for each say 50-60 drivers would be sufficient, eliminating more labor costs.
  6. hiro

    hiro New Member

    My UPS experience has mostly been with hub and other functions, so I obviously don't have much experience with drivers and on car sups, but I would like to discuss your thoughts on how it would relate to the hub. (sort of)

    By the same reasoning, you would agree with eliminating 22.3 jobs in favor of two pt union jobs, correct?

    Now, I doubt you really feel that way, but it seems to be typical UPS mentality to want to eliminate ft jobs. In the case of two pt sups to replace a ft on car sup, the salary would be significantly lower, but you would have more benefit costs. You would also get at most 11 hours of work from two pt sups where I'm sure some on car sups work much more, unfortunately.

    If anything, I believe it would benefit UPS to create more FT jobs from PT jobs in both management and union. The big problem, in the hub anyway, with creating more 22.3 jobs is the significant downtime between sorts. Even with the 1 hour lunch for the 22.3's, there is still about an hour of wasted time. I don't know what the solution would be, other than the union to agree to a longer unpaid lunch in exchange for more jobs? I'm not even sure the union members would want that, but I think there are a lot of good employees at UPS that would like to have a quicker chance at a FT job.

    By creating more FT jobs, you would reduce turnover, and also more than like improve the pool of applicants. Let's face it, the starting salary isn't (relatively) what it once was, and the old UPS line of "benefits for pt's" is becoming increasingly unattractive.

    The same could be done for PT sups in the hub. Allow them to work two sorts. Yeah, they would be getting paid for around 10 hours of work per day, but you would have better supervisors and only be paying benefits for one employee.

    I'm sure there's some great reason's against it that I'm not aware of. And this is also way off topic lol.
  7. TearsInRain

    TearsInRain IE boogeyman

    a PT supe with about 3 years in can do 95% of what a driver supe can do, and the rest could be folded into the safety bunnies and a single pt driver