telematic is lurking in the background

[Re-Raise]

When I was backed into UPS charged the person who hit my truck for the damage. Fault does matter in the real world. Ask your insurance agent.

 

[Re-Raise]

That 15 year pin had a little diamond in it that a pawn shop would give you 20 bucks or more for (or so I was told)

Damn.. that information came a little late.

 

[RockdaleEddie]

We are starting to see some interesting stuff with telematics. Someone analyzed backing records and overlayed the GPS tracks onto maps and found drivers backing 2-300+ feet down city streets. Other examples were backing into condo complexes vs walking. Things like that.

Personally, I think that is a good use of telematics. We are told almost everyday to stay out of resi driveways, do not back up if you drive past a stop and back at a controlled speed. Drivers are still doing it and getting into easily avoidable crashes.

Were not to back down dead end streets we are suppose to walk from the corner as far as safety goes but IE only gives us an allowance from the center of the street to the front door. IE and Safety need to get together and give us a safe and fair allowance and not worry about talking to a customer about your wonderfull weekend. What about Security? front door deliveries only? We get harrassed for cheating and stealing time and all we get is more to do and less time to do it. I actually do love my job FYI.

 

[soberups]

Were not to back down dead end streets we are suppose to walk from the corner as far as safety goes but IE only gives us an allowance from the center of the street to the front door. IE and Safety need to get together and give us a safe and fair allowance and not worry about talking to a customer about your wonderfull weekend. What about Security? front door deliveries only? We get harrassed for cheating and stealing time and all we get is more to do and less time to do it. I actually do love my job FYI.

That will never happen.

The allowance was never intended to be safe or fair or realistic in the first place.

It was intended to increase profitibility by creating a "standard" that can only be met by working off of the clock.

A driver who follows the safety methods, works at a safe pace, and takes his lunch and breaks will almost always be overallowed. There are exceptions, but they are rare.

 

[pretzel_man]

That will never happen.

The allowance was never intended to be safe or fair or realistic in the first place.

It was intended to increase profitibility by creating a "standard" that can only be met by working off of the clock.

A driver who follows the safety methods, works at a safe pace, and takes his lunch and breaks will almost always be overallowed. There are exceptions, but they are rare.

You know, its one thing to complain about how UPS creates and implements work measurement. I see lots of room for improvement in the process myself.

Its quite another to assert that the issues were purposely placed to dishonestly coerce employees to "work off the clock".

I've been chided here for the relatively short amount of time I've spent driving.... As short as it was however, I've spent much more time doing your job than you have spent doing what I've done.

I've done countless time studies and work measurement installations. I've taught the classes. I've done original work measurement. I've seen the work measurement lab in Atlanta (and Greenwich, and Syracuse). I've analyzed and audited work measurement in many places in the country.

I have seen ZERO evidence of any pursposeful inaccuracies in the process. In fact, the basis for all UPS work measurement are either through documented original analysis or from standard industry accepted values.

UPS participates in the IIE and is a valued and respected member there.

Again, complain all you want. Its fair game and deserved. To assert a dishonest conspiracy is silly.

P-Man

 

[Cementups]

It was intended to increase profitibility by creating a "standard" that can only be met by working off of the clock.

A driver who follows the safety methods, works at a safe pace, and takes his lunch and breaks will almost always be overallowed. There are exceptions, but they are rare.

This isn't true. i work safely and by the methods and come in uo to a half hour under daily. What am I doing wrong???

 

[stevetheupsguy]

This isn't true. i work safely and by the methods and come in uo to a half hour under daily. What am I doing wrong???

Well, first off, you cut corners by putting an o where there's supposed to be a p. If you do this in every sentence it'll save you plenty of time.

 

[BrownArmy]

This isn't true. i work safely and by the methods and come in uo to a half hour under daily. What am I doing wrong???

Might be your route...there are several routes in my center that come up two hours over no matter who runs them.

Some routes have time studies that actually match reality, others not so much...so you might just be a really good worker on a route whose numbers have some semblance of clarity.

If a(ny) driver follows the methods on a busted route and comes up (consistently) an hour or two over, is that driver a slacker? Clearly not.

I hear you P-Man, but the reality on the ground is that more often than not, the 'numbers' just don't check out. It's almost like an Alice in Wonderland thing.

If you had the exact same load each and every day, loaded perfectly, there would be days when you came under and days you went over. The vagaries of traffic, construction, the one day a month when the elementary school gets let out early, etc. etc. etc.

Except it's a different load every day and sometimes it seems it's loaded by laughing hyenas (no offense to the preload, I'm a driver and I feel your job is tougher than mine in many ways...).

The numbers SHOULD be a guide, SHOULD be a metric dealing with an ideal day, an ideal load with acceptable variances understood. Instead, unfortunately, it often turns into a weird Dada exercise.

I'm actually looking forward to Telematics coming to my center...for better or for worse, it will put things into perspective. But I know the runners will still be allowed to run...

 

[MC4YOU2]

This isn't true. i work safely and by the methods and come in uo to a half hour under daily. What am I doing wrong???

It reminds me of when we lost the 4.7 seconds for the "paper" allowance. If you had a route with 300 pkgs and 10 miles you got screwed. If your route was 300 miles and 10 pkgs you could yawn. The metrics are supposedly an average, but the the real world is never average. It is uphill and downhill and sometimes its uphill both ways. Cover drivers know the difference in route allowance variances better than any metric. I did it for years and was on the receiving end of IE's handy work. Its not all good or bad, its also not even, as much as I believe guys like PMan try to make it fair, its not. Sorry.

 

[grgrcr88]

It reminds me of when we lost the 4.7 seconds for the "paper" allowance. If you had a route with 300 pkgs and 10 miles you got screwed

True that, I lost $10,000 the year they changed that allowance. Learned alot after that!!!

 

[soberups]

You know, its one thing to complain about how UPS creates and implements work measurement. I see lots of room for improvement in the process myself.

Its quite another to assert that the issues were purposely placed to dishonestly coerce employees to "work off the clock".

I've been chided here for the relatively short amount of time I've spent driving.... As short as it was however, I've spent much more time doing your job than you have spent doing what I've done.

I've done countless time studies and work measurement installations. I've taught the classes. I've done original work measurement. I've seen the work measurement lab in Atlanta (and Greenwich, and Syracuse). I've analyzed and audited work measurement in many places in the country.

I have seen ZERO evidence of any pursposeful inaccuracies in the process. In fact, the basis for all UPS work measurement are either through documented original analysis or from standard industry accepted values.

UPS participates in the IIE and is a valued and respected member there.

Again, complain all you want. Its fair game and deserved. To assert a dishonest conspiracy is silly.

P-Man

You cannot claim that an allowance is intended to be fair...when UPS policy prohibits any study from ever being redone no matter how unfair might be.

There is no mechanism for appeal. You cant argue it, you cant verify it, you cant dispute it and you cant challenge it. Someone comes along on one random day out of an 8 year period, performs a "study"....and the result is chiseled in stone. Even if you and your sup and your center manager and every cover driver in the damn building knows that the numbers are wrong...thats just too damn bad. You will get 10 hours worth of work, the WOR will say 8.5 hours, and you had just better get used to it.

Any measurement system that has been deliberately designed to have no way to correct inaccuracies is, by definition, unfair.

 

[pretzel_man]

You cannot claim that an allowance is intended to be fair...when UPS policy prohibits any study from ever being redone no matter how unfair might be.

There is no mechanism for appeal. You cant argue it, you cant verify it, you cant dispute it and you cant challenge it. Someone comes along on one random day out of an 8 year period, performs a "study"....and the result is chiseled in stone. Even if you and your sup and your center manager and every cover driver in the damn building knows that the numbers are wrong...thats just too damn bad. You will get 10 hours worth of work, the WOR will say 8.5 hours, and you had just better get used to it.

Any measurement system that has been deliberately designed to have no way to correct inaccuracies is, by definition, unfair.

Sober,

As I said, there are lots of things about time studies and allowances to complain about.... I don't know if I agree with the ones you just mentioned or not, but there are other issues (bigger ones I think) that are problematic.

Being "fair" is dependent on one's point of view. Time studies are meant to be "objective". They can (and have) been challenged if they are improperly created, improperly applied, or have a calculation problem.

They can be recreated and the source data is available for audit.

All that being said, they may still be unfair from your point of view. I won't argue that.

My only argument was when you say that they have purposely been slanted to coerce employees to work off the clock. That statement is what I take exception to.

P-Man

 

[NHDRVR]

when they are watching you on the computer mgt has too observe you on route before they can walk you off for stealing time right or wrong??how are you guys are dealing with this new way of mgt???

Actually, you phrased the question wrong. 'Management' isn't doing anything new. They are still the same...Way too much free time on their hands.

It's the technology that's different and really not a big deal...

 

[soberups]

My only argument was when you say that they have purposely been slanted to coerce employees to work off the clock. That statement is what I take exception to.

P-Man

The timestudy is, in effect, a scale that the company uses to measure work.

When I go to a grocery store and order 1 pound of steak, the store measures that steak on a scale before charging me for it.

Lets say I go to 200 different Safeway grocery stores all over the country and pay for a pound of steak at each one. One store might give me .96 of a pound...one might give me .93 of a pound...while two others might give me 1.04 pounds. If I averaged about a pound of steak per store, I would form the opinion that Safeway intended for its scales to be fair, and that the discrepancies in weights were due to minor and unintentional fluctuations in the calibration of the scales.

If, on the other hand, I consistently and repeatedly got less than a pound of steak no matter where I went or which store I shopped at....I would form the opinion that Safeway intended for its scales to be unfair, and that the discrepancies in weights were due to ongoing and intentional manipulation of those scales in order to short change me.

IE isnt stupid. The system works just the way they want it to. The fact that so many routes have blatantly unfair allowances...resulting in drivers working off of the clock to make the impossible standards....is not an "accident". Its not a "coincidence". Its all part of the plan.

 

[Just_another_day_at_work]

..resulting in drivers working off of the clock to make the impossible standards....is not an "accident". Its not a "coincidence". Its all part of the plan.

Sober,
Some driver might does work off the clock to avoid being on the "radar", but the bottom line is that they make their own choices, nobody forcing them. The I.E. might plan on this I don't know, but some of these DRIVERS are working off the clock not the I.E. that's the fact. I certainly don't like it since I covered some of these guys' routes, but after all "it is what it is". Over 200 clicks overallowed, management in my , harrasment. I invited them to ride with me since they know better than me, well nothing happened. So I just 10.5 them every day. Got on the 9.5 list. Requested guaranteed 8 hours on these days. Got paid. End of story.

 

[pretzel_man]

The timestudy is, in effect, a scale that the company uses to measure work.

When I go to a grocery store and order 1 pound of steak, the store measures that steak on a scale before charging me for it.

Lets say I go to 200 different Safeway grocery stores all over the country and pay for a pound of steak at each one. One store might give me .96 of a pound...one might give me .93 of a pound...while two others might give me 1.04 pounds. If I averaged about a pound of steak per store, I would form the opinion that Safeway intended for its scales to be fair, and that the discrepancies in weights were due to minor and unintentional fluctuations in the calibration of the scales.

If, on the other hand, I consistently and repeatedly got less than a pound of steak no matter where I went or which store I shopped at....I would form the opinion that Safeway intended for its scales to be unfair, and that the discrepancies in weights were due to ongoing and intentional manipulation of those scales in order to short change me.

IE isnt stupid. The system works just the way they want it to. The fact that so many routes have blatantly unfair allowances...resulting in drivers working off of the clock to make the impossible standards....is not an "accident". Its not a "coincidence". Its all part of the plan.

As you say, work measurement is intended to measure the amount of work.

Work measurement is stated to be accurate to 95%, 95% of the time. Using your analog of a scale, even at its best, it will be off 5% one way or another 95% of the time.

Taking it a step further .... Work measurement isn't intended to measure how much work a driver has, but how much work a driver SHOULD have. Using the scale analogy, its intended to measure how much meat is on the scale, not just how much weight is on the scale. Work measurement ignores the "fat".

For instance, if you sort your load, you will be overallowed. If you have a poorly loaded car, you will be overallowed. If you have a bad trace, you will "likely" be overallowed. If you have a bad AM or PM plan, you will be overallowed.

My first assignment was in I.E. over 30 years ago. The discussions went on back then whether "normal" "Fat" should be included in the allowance. If they did put it in, then it would more accurately measure a driver. It would also then "condone" these ineffective activities.

The company has chosen for all these years to not put these inefficiencies into the work measurement. The single biggest problem I see is trying to make the driver solely responsible for overallowed.

If a driver is following methods, has a good work pace, has a good load, has a good trace and dispatch and then is still overallowed then work measurement is the problem.

P-Man

 

[Just_another_day_at_work]

If a driver is following methods, has a good work pace, has a good load, has a good trace and dispatch and then is still overallowed then work measurement is the problem.

P-Man[/QUOTE]

So true,
But in the past 2 years I never heard from managers or sups saying that. But maybe it's just in the 3 centers I have been. Instead of that something must be wrong with the driver, loader or whatever you want to come up. The reality that they can't or don't want to question the I.E. measurement, but it's easier to go down on the driver.

 

[Bubblehead]

As you say, work measurement is intended to measure the amount of work.

Work measurement is stated to be accurate to 95%, 95% of the time. Using your analog of a scale, even at its best, it will be off 5% one way or another 95% of the time.

Taking it a step further .... Work measurement isn't intended to measure how much work a driver has, but how much work a driver SHOULD have. Using the scale analogy, its intended to measure how much meat is on the scale, not just how much weight is on the scale. Work measurement ignores the "fat".

For instance, if you sort your load, you will be overallowed. If you have a poorly loaded car, you will be overallowed. If you have a bad trace, you will "likely" be overallowed. If you have a bad AM or PM plan, you will be overallowed.

My first assignment was in I.E. over 30 years ago. The discussions went on back then whether "normal" "Fat" should be included in the allowance. If they did put it in, then it would more accurately measure a driver. It would also then "condone" these ineffective activities.

The company has chosen for all these years to not put these inefficiencies into the work measurement. The single biggest problem I see is trying to make the driver solely responsible for overallowed.

If a driver is following methods, has a good work pace, has a good load, has a good trace and dispatch and then is still overallowed then work measurement is the problem.

P-Man

Conversely, with all of that in mind, how can any driver possibly be underallowed while working by the methods?
With UPS being the safety driven company it claims to be, why would they reward a driver who is obviously short cutting the methods with bonus at time and a half?
It's these type of hypocrisies, on both sides of the issues, that destroy this company's credibility.

 

[UpstateNYUPSer(Ret)]

Conversely, with all of that in mind, how can any driver possibly be underallowed while working by the methods?
With UPS being the safety driven company it claims to be, why would they reward a driver who is obviously short cutting the methods with bonus at time and a half?
It's these type of hypocrisies, on both sides of the issues, that destroy this company's credibility.

Don't assume someone is cutting corners if they follow all of the methods and are still underallowed. There are many factors that could come in to play. It may be something as simple as how fast they walk. It could be area knowledge. It could be the amount of time they spend bsing with customers. It could be knowing that traffic is usually heavier in this area at this time so maybe I should save that area and deliver it when I know the traffic will be lighter. It could be delivering air and ground together and still making the commit time. It could be saving a stop by delivering a consignee's personal package along with their commerical delivery. It could also be the time spent preparing the DOL for the EDD team to ensure that when we went live with EDD that it was a smooth transition.

I am not naive and I do realize that we have runner gunners who do not follow the methods but make their boss look good by making the numbers look good. Runner gunners support your argument.

It could come down to the simple fact that some people are better workers than others.

 

[upsgrunt]

I see your point, and I lean towards agreement, but I would use the word "more efficient" instead of better.