Safety Compliance.

[soberups]

I really think you're wasting your temper tantrum on this site. I think you should fly down to atlanta and throw a big old caniption fit on scott davis floor. Really tell him how pissed you are that the world did not come to a complete stop when you asked for these vehicle modifications. Perhaps crap your pants just to add a little mustard to the conversation.

Who is throwing the tantrum here?

 

[trplnkl]

I really think you're wasting your temper tantrum on this site. I think you should fly down to atlanta and throw a big old caniption fit on scott davis floor. Really tell him how pissed you are that the world did not come to a complete stop when you asked for these vehicle modifications. Perhaps crap your pants just to add a little mustard to the conversation.

oh um ok. Boy that really told me a lot. And you have been the member of how many safety committees for how long? Do you need a fresh crying towel yet or is the current one still good?

And now the discussion becomes a flame war.

 

[tieguy]

And now the discussion becomes a flame war.

my tex you get sensitive all of a sudden. You've thrown a heck of a lot worse out there then that.

 

[tieguy]

Using safe work methods and DOK is important, but knowing them word for word with using them is a waste of time. Many of us, who join the safety committee, want to actually improve the safety conditions at UPS, not just to say that we want to. We would like to prevent an accident or injury before it happens, so we don't have to review after it already happen.

I don't know , we don't ask word for word and the ketter audit does not require word for word. It does require you be able to list them and explain them. If for instance you can tell me intersections is one of the ten points and give a credible explanation on clearing an intersection then you get the points. At that point you have now been trained on clearing an intersection and its up to you to use that training. If you can not explain it then you clearly won't be able to do it. Thus I think it should be a part of the training plan.



Accidents should be reported and not be covered up. I seen many drivers get charge with an accident when they bring their car back to the center with damaged on it, and I've seen a select few drivers that don't get charged for it.

The problem with the reporting is you have to have an accident. Proving who did the damage can be difficult at times. If a driver comes up to me the next morning and reports damage to a pkg car then at that point it could have been the driver or any number of carwashers, a mechanic, a package handler or even the cleaning crew who caused the damage. At that point I'm not reporting an accident because I don't know what or who caused it.


If you work unsafe and don't follow UPS's method you can save two hours a day. He just proved it.

I'm not an office jockey who has never delivered. I'll stand behind my original point on this one. He had short cuts he took but to lose two hours requires a whole lot of slowing down.


The answer to the question is: It is not safe to push one handcart while pulling another. That is an injury waiting to happen. I wouldn't push a baby stroller and a shopping cart at the same time, either.

I think the point here really is not that some guy is pushing two carts its that steve is not happy with his management crew because he no longer feels thier love and he was thus looking for reasons to quit the safety committee. Many of the things he listed as reasons were things he should be looking to fix as a safety committee member. If there were no things to fix then there would be no reason to have a safety committee.


4: Drivers still talk on handheld cell phones while driving.

Turn em in


Who you going to rat them out to? Management? From what has been going on, do you think they will do anything? Maybe if it slows production, they would have a problem with it, but then again not reporting accidents, working unsafe, and working injured is good for the company.

How does he fix the problem. He talks to the driver . thats his role. When I get involved its discipline he has the opportunity to fix things without my giving discipline.

Tie, we see things differently and I truly appreciate your commits. He didn't quit the safety committee, but instead the committee decided to quit safety. You shouldn't be involved in something, if you don't agree with it. It makes you a hypocrite. The title safety Co-chair might give some one authority, but the best way to lead is by example.

I think steve was looking for a reason to quit. many of the reasons he gave were things he should have been addressing. Steve had other issues and no longer felt he wanted to be part of the solution. Its basically a pout move.

 

[soberups]

And now the discussion becomes a flame war.

Its only a flame war when it becomes personal or insulting.

I posted an opinion that we need to take a holistic approach to safety that includes decent equipment, reasonable dispatch levels and fair time allowances for the work to be done.

Rather than respond directly to these suggestions....or coming up with new ones... a solution was proposed that involved me throwing a tantrum and crapping my pants in Scott Davis's office.

I can choose to be offended by the response, or I can choose to simply consider the source. I choose the latter.

It takes participiation by two parties to instigate a flame war. Otherwise, its just one person blowing hot air.

 

[soberups]

I think steve was looking for a reason to quit. many of the reasons he gave were things he should have been addressing. Steve had other issues and no longer felt he wanted to be part of the solution. Its basically a pout move.

I think Steve grew tired of the hypocrasy of a system that would instruct him to use safe work methods only to turn around and threaten him with disciplinary action and excessive supervision for following those instructions.

I think if one reads the entire thread one clearly sees that Steve joined the committee with the best of intentions and a sincere desire to make a difference, and only decided to quit when he realized that the system was designed with the exact opposite effect in mind.

 

[tieguy]

Its only a flame war when it becomes personal or insulting.

I posted an opinion that we need to take a holistic approach to safety that includes decent equipment, reasonable dispatch levels and fair time allowances for the work to be done.

Rather than respond directly to these suggestions....or coming up with new ones... a solution was proposed that involved me throwing a tantrum and crapping my pants in Scott Davis's office.

I can choose to be offended by the response, or I can choose to simply consider the source. I choose the latter.

It takes participiation by two parties to instigate a flame war. Otherwise, its just one person blowing hot air.

The fact remains that you have been flaming the efforts of many fine upsers who have made a difference in changing our safety culture simply because the world did not stop everything when you made a request for a vehicle modification.

As such I suggest you take your personal crying spell directly to the top guy down in atlanta and leave real safety talk to people who can still engage in it without having a personal pity party.

 

[tieguy]

I think Steve grew tired of the hypocrasy of a system that would instruct him to use safe work methods only to turn around and threaten him with disciplinary action and excessive supervision for following those instructions.

I think if one reads the entire thread one clearly sees that Steve joined the committee with the best of intentions and a sincere desire to make a difference, and only decided to quit when he realized that the system was designed with the exact opposite effect in mind.

Steve had personal issues to deal with that had nothing to do with the safety committee. The issues steve listed as reasons for his leaving were the things he was supposed to work on fixing.

 

[upsgrunt]

Tie said:
I don't know , we don't ask word for word and the ketter audit does not require word for word. It does require you be able to list them and explain them. If for instance you can tell me intersections is one of the ten points and give a credible explanation on clearing an intersection then you get the points. At that point you have now been trained on clearing an intersection and its up to you to use that training. If you can not explain it then you clearly won't be able to do it. Thus I think it should be a part of the training plan.



Tie-
I'm sure there are scientists who spit atoms or do quantum physics, but cannot explain it. Does that mean they aren't qualified to do what they know?

 

[local804]

Steve had personal issues to deal with that had nothing to do with the safety committee. The issues steve listed as reasons for his leaving were the things he was supposed to work on fixing.

Tie
You can only bang your head against the wall so many times till you start to bleed. Many people start with a fire thinking they can make a difference. The fire turns into a candle in a windstorm at the blink of a lash. I was never on such committee but would have to wonder why the turn over ration for them is much higher than the pt quit ratio.

 

[soberups]

The fact remains that you have been flaming the efforts of many fine upsers who have made a difference in changing our safety culture simply because the world did not stop everything when you made a request for a vehicle modification..

Incorrect.

I have flamed no one.

I have merely expressed an opinion that safety does not begin and end with the ability to recite a commentary.

I have merely expressed frustration with the fact that in 22 years with this company I have yet to see ONE tangible accomplishment on the part of my Safety Comittee in regards to safe equipment, adequate egress, and unfair time allowances.

Perhaps there is a building somewhere in which the Safety Committee was able to work with the company to get such issues resolved. If so, my hat is off to them. Such is not the case at my facility.

It has been my experience that the only way to truly make any sort of a difference is thru the grievance procedure. This takes the decision making out of the hands of those who only wish to maintain the status quo and avoid rocking the boat, and instead drops it into the laps of those who are empowered to actually change something.

I have successfully filed grievances to force the company to solve egress issues in overcrowded MDU's and to install grab rails by the doors of pup trailers to allow those of us who deliver from them to maintain 3 points of contact while getting in and out.

As per the contract, I first brought these issues to the attention of my Safety Committee. After several months it became apparent to me that they had no intention of ever addressing the problem, so I took it to the next level. UPS fought against these improvements tooth and nail, I might add.

I guess the difference between myself and a certain other poster on this forum is that I see safety as being a combination of many factors whereas the other poster sees rote memorization of acronyms and a 100% score on a Keter audit as the be-all and end-all of safety.

I would imagine that this is due to the fact that one of us has spent 22 years actually doing the work while the other one has spent that same amount of time reading about it from behind a desk.

 

[tieguy]

Incorrect.

I have flamed no one.

I have merely expressed an opinion that safety does not begin and end with the ability to recite a commentary.

I have merely expressed frustration with the fact that in 22 years with this company I have yet to see ONE tangible accomplishment on the part of my Safety Comittee in regards to safe equipment, adequate egress, and unfair time allowances.

Perhaps there is a building somewhere in which the Safety Committee was able to work with the company to get such issues resolved. If so, my hat is off to them. Such is not the case at my facility.

It has been my experience that the only way to truly make any sort of a difference is thru the grievance procedure. This takes the decision making out of the hands of those who only wish to maintain the status quo and avoid rocking the boat, and instead drops it into the laps of those who are empowered to actually change something.

I have successfully filed grievances to force the company to solve egress issues in overcrowded MDU's and to install grab rails by the doors of pup trailers to allow those of us who deliver from them to maintain 3 points of contact while getting in and out.

As per the contract, I first brought these issues to the attention of my Safety Committee. After several months it became apparent to me that they had no intention of ever addressing the problem, so I took it to the next level. UPS fought against these improvements tooth and nail, I might add.

I guess the difference between myself and a certain other poster on this forum is that I see safety as being a combination of many factors whereas the other poster sees rote memorization of acronyms and a 100% score on a Keter audit as the be-all and end-all of safety.

I would imagine that this is due to the fact that one of us has spent 22 years actually doing the work while the other one has spent that same amount of time reading about it from behind a desk.

Taking another look at this issue you have made the point that we should give you the best equipment available and I don't necessarily disagree with that. With that in mind I'm sure you paid to have your daughters car modified to include a safety cage, head and neck supports extra air bags etc to ensure the safest possible vehicle should she crash?

 

[trplnkl]

my tex you get sensitive all of a sudden. You've thrown a heck of a lot worse out there then that.

I've even thrown out worse, but it all starts somewhere. I am trying to become a kinder, gentler Trplnkl....I'm afraid it's not gonna work though.

 

[pickup]

Taking another look at this issue you have made the point that we should give you the best equipment available and I don't necessarily disagree with that. With that in mind I'm sure you paid to have your daughters car modified to include a safety cage, head and neck supports extra air bags etc to ensure the safest possible vehicle should she crash?

Look, all the guy wants is a three point seat belt. Some of the money put towards survellence gadgets in his truck in the name of safety could have easily been diverted toward a safety device that would definitely pay dividends towards safety. On the other hand, maybe it is cheaper for ups to have a dead employee after an accident than a living one who is racking up hospital bills.

 

[soberups]

Taking another look at this issue you have made the point that we should give you the best equipment available and I don't necessarily disagree with that. With that in mind I'm sure you paid to have your daughters car modified to include a safety cage, head and neck supports extra air bags etc to ensure the safest possible vehicle should she crash?

No, we simply spent the money up front to buy her a vehicle with industry standard safety features....a used Volvo with airbags, power steering and a 3 point belt.

Her safety was the #1 factor in terms of the vehicle we chose to buy. The safety of the driver, on the other hand, was never a factor at all when UPS chose to intentionally delete industry standard features from the trucks it ordered.

 

[soberups]

. On the other hand, maybe it is cheaper for ups to have a dead employee after an accident than a living one who is racking up hospital bills.

Cha ching, we have a winner.

Kill the driver off and he can be replaced with a new hire who is in progression for 2 years and has significantly fewer weeks of vacation to pay for. Its an immediate difference in labor cost of at least $10,000 a year.

Plus you save almost $50 per vehicle at time of purchase.

The important thing to UPS is to be sure the deceased driver is current on his safety assements prior to burial.

 

[tieguy]

No, we simply spent the money up front to buy her a vehicle with industry standard safety features....a used Volvo with airbags, power steering and a 3 point belt.

Her safety was the #1 factor in terms of the vehicle we chose to buy. The safety of the driver, on the other hand, was never a factor at all when UPS chose to intentionally delete industry standard features from the trucks it ordered.

You didn't modify the volvo and build a safety cage inside it?

No harness ?
No head support?
no neck support?
no speed control to keep her from exceeding the speed limits.
no extra air bags to maximize her protection.

You did make her wear a safety helmet with a glare resistent lens shield ..right?


Instead you gave her some mumbo jumbo five seeing habits training?

Why sober I'm shocked. It sounds like you've been giving safety a bunch of lip service.

 

[tieguy]

Look, all the guy wants is a three point seat belt. Some of the money put towards survellence gadgets in his truck in the name of safety could have easily been diverted toward a safety device that would definitely pay dividends towards safety. On the other hand, maybe it is cheaper for ups to have a dead employee after an accident than a living one who is racking up hospital bills.

yep thats all he wants. Yet when he had a chance to lead by example and have his own daughters car modified to ensure the maximum safety items were available he came up short. Go figure.

In reality sober is no different then those guys that stand around handing out donuts and trinkets.

 

[soberups]

yep thats all he wants. Yet when he had a chance to lead by example and have his own daughters car modified to ensure the maximum safety items were available he came up short. Go figure.

In reality sober is no different then those guys that stand around handing out donuts and trinkets.

Nice try.

If I had been a cheap bastard like the idiot who designed and ordered the P500 and P800's I would have just spent $400 on a '74 Pinto with a lap belt, handed her a 10-pt. commentary to memorize, and called it good.

Instead, my wife and I did research on which cars and features would maximize her safety, and spent the money that was necessary to provide her with such a vehicle.

This debate has always been about industry standard safety features and the fact that such features were intentionally deleted by UPS in order to cut costs. It has never been about air bags, helmets, roll cages or any other such hyperbole.

 

[tieguy]

Nice try.

If I had been a cheap bastard like the idiot who designed and ordered the P500 and P800's I would have just spent $400 on a '74 Pinto with a lap belt, handed her a 10-pt. commentary to memorize, and called it good.

Instead, my wife and I did research on which cars and features would maximize her safety, and spent the money that was necessary to provide her with such a vehicle.

This debate has always been about industry standard safety features and the fact that such features were intentionally deleted by UPS in order to cut costs. It has never been about air bags, helmets, roll cages or any other such hyperbole.

What was the industry standard when purchased versus what it became later? So then you had the volvo modified to meet todays industry standards as opposed to yesterdays industry standards? I sure hope you did I would hate to think you were a donut eating lip service giving safety advocate. Don't worry sober its not the first time I've seen this. The guy who screams the loudest about ups not caring about safety is often the guy who applies a double standard at home. He's the guy who all of a sudden discovers he can have a safe vehicle without modifying the old car at home.