I understand your disapointment, and I do agree this is a different company than when you, or I, started. I just get tired of always hearing that the company is ruined from what it used to be and all management are solely to blame. Not necessarily saying that is what you were getting at, but I hear it so much I am probably overly sensitive. The company is different, and from a service perspective, in some ways it is worse, but in some ways much, much better. When you started, I am willing to bet if someone wanted to ship a package that weighed in at 72 lbs, UPS would tell them to pound sand. It also was not that long ago, before sleeper teams and other refinements in the transportation system, many corridors had one or two days longer in transit than they do today. Not to mention the ability to track a package throughout it's journey to the consignee.
OK, I'm going to only respond to what I know and have seen.
Yes, brownIEman, this is a different company than when I started. WAY different! Now, I, personally did not say "the company was ruined from what it used to be and all management are solely to blame." I DO agree that it is worse in some areas and better in some others. I merely referred to UPS, whether it be management or corporate or whoever is charged with making some of these good or bad decisions. I understand your sensitivity.
Here's one thing I see:
When I was hired, HR told me that UPS does NOT do any advertising. "You, our clean vehicles, our service is our advertising". Wow! I was impressed! When hired, I was actually proud! Now, appearance standards have gone down, vehicles? In my last year of feeders, I was totally embarassed by the condition of the tractor/trailers. Paint peeling from a Sterling bumper making it look like a checkered flag. The back so oily/greasy/dirty, you couldn't even read the tractor number. On Sat morn or afternoon, walking out from my run, I'd look at the package car lineup for Mon and shake my head. OK, cutbacks? I get it! Standards? I don't get it!
Service? When I started, if a package/pile of packages was missed in the building, the supervisor responsible was called up and forced to run that themselves in their own personal vehicle with no reimbersement, no matter what the distance. Today? Uh, maybe leave it/them for tomorrow. I remember being at our airport when NDA started. When one was missed, a charter plane was sent out with ONE package just to make service. Cost effective? Hell no! Service effective? You call. Yes, I also get the grievance part about supe taking package out and denying hourly.
You talk about service lanes enhancing transit times. In some cases yes, in other cases, no. Here, after the BIG one in '97, some routes were changed that ADDED a day service. How much MORE could we have? I think the possiblities are endless, well, let me back up...they are bounded by UPSs
REACTIVITY! When FDX expanded their E/W coast lanes across I-70 to improve service, UPS snapped back with almost 3 times more sleeper runs across the same lanes. We weren't out of there but knew alot of what went on. We lived along another potential "fast-lane" corridor and asked the mangler whay we don't do that here. As I've stated before on this forum his answer was, "Because FDX doesn't do it yet"! Wow!
We also clearly see where we could overnight service to and from many major cities here but won't do it because FDX doesn't do it yet. Yes, I know about the cost, but what about the gains?
I'm gonna end this tome for now, but do you see what I see? This, of course, is just the tip of the iceberg, as far as I'm concerned and feel that, very really, this company could go down! Laugh if you will but during this latest financial gaffe the last few years and watching several huge companies go bust or close to it, one high ranking goombah said, "Don't ever thing you're too big to fail".
Carry on.