True story....

soberups

Pees in the brown Koolaid
... The real issue is that the WOR system was giving you credit for writing down the full 1Z for every package with a tracking number. This is why the change was made.
...I assume that even you would agree that scanning is quicker than writing down all that tracking info?
P-Man

When we were on paper 50-liners, we never recorded a full 1Z label, we only wrote the 6-digit shipper# plus an ID. That is what the allowance was supposedly based upon.

Obviously, it is quicker to scan a 1Z label than it would be to physically write down all 18 digits...but since we never wrote all 18 digits in the first place, the comparison is meaningless. The only relevant comparison would be DIAD vs. recording 6 digits on a 50-liner.

In the late 80's/early 90's before DIAD we couldnt scan 1Z labels so we filled in the consignee info in the space provided, detached the perforated section, and turned them in at night. There was never any additional time allowed for this.

Fast forward a few years to the early 2000's, we are all on DIAD and PLD/EDD is implemented. All packages have full 1z labels. I.E comes along and screws us out of something like 20 seconds per package by falsely claiming that we had been given "too much" of an allowance in the first place.

That "allowance"...was based upon writing 6 digits on a 50-liner, not on writing the entire 1z label. And there is not a 20 second difference between scanning a package vs. writing 6 digits.

We got screwed, plain and simple.
 

wrecker

Well-Known Member
Sober, maybe I misunderstood, but are you not on Edd, you can just enter the last 4 digits and tracking number will pull up. I hate having to enter entire bar code. I am always in ABC when I want numbers, or vise versa, drives me crazy.


Try keeping it in "ABC".... Hold down the shift key when you want to type numbers.

The opposite works too... much better than toggling between.
 

brownmonster

Man of Great Wisdom
The allowance is like an electric treadmill that the driver is required to run on.

Almost any driver can be made to run "faster" for a little while if IE cranks up the RPM's. The problem starts when the pace becomes unsustainable and the driver cant keep up and gets thrown off of the back.

IE has basically rigged the meter downward to show fewer RPM's than are actually taking place. The driver is running just as fast if not faster than before, yet he is being lied to and told otherwise and the dispatch is cranked up higher and higher based upon those intentionally false readings.

In this analogy, the on-road supervisor is standing directly behind the driver and beating him with the whip of the daily report and screaming at him to keep the RPM's up to where they were before. He does this because if the driver cant keep up and gets tossed off the back, he will be thrown right on top of the sup and they both wind up in a mess on the floor.

Meanwhile, the IE guy is sitting in an office someplace watching the whole thing and laughing his sick ass off while he keeps turning those RPM's up higher and higher and higher. He isnt the one on the treadmill and he isnt the one that gets squashed by the driver when he gets thrown off the back. All he cares about is keeping those RPM's going as fast as possible.

If that IE guy ever had to leave his office to go out in the real world and stand behind the driver, I suspect that he would make sure that the "RPM meter" on that treadmill was accurate...since it would wind up being his problem if it weren't.

Being a successful driver means being willing to maintain the same pace no matter how fast they try to turn that treadmill up. It means being willing to get thrown off the back every single day. And it means remembering that your supervisor is the one who is going to take the brunt of the impact and not you. You just have to be willing to ignore IE's "RPM meter" and keep getting back on that treadmill every morning.


And our customers, in order not to be injured in this whole mess, have stepped out of the way to the competition.
 

UPS Lifer

Well-Known Member
Well, all I can say is, "Thank God I`m in Feeder and don`t have to put up with this stuff!"

I read the quotes about "Thank God" but nobody has said "Thank God I'm RETIRED and don't have to put up with this stuff" ...so

Thank God I am retired and don't have to put up with this stuff!!!

I can remember when I was a driver and the whole center was given an allowance for street traffic when we should have had a freeway allowance to get to our area. I was a driver out of Santa Monica. We all lost 30 minutes from one day to the next. Nobody was happy but most of us realized that what was fair was fair. I guess the company could have tried to take back the 1/2 hour a day difference for the 4 years that the mistake was in place.

I am just glad I was not the manager at the time this happened. YIKES!

I can also remember when we had to pay claims because we couldn't read the writing of some of the drivers. The single biggest advancement UPS ever made was the invention of the DIAD. Nothing is bigger than the DIAD!

Quit your whining and be thankful you have a great paying job with great benefits and wonderful technology that our customers appreciate!
 

pretzel_man

Well-Known Member
When we were on paper 50-liners, we never recorded a full 1Z label, we only wrote the 6-digit shipper# plus an ID. That is what the allowance was supposedly based upon.

Obviously, it is quicker to scan a 1Z label than it would be to physically write down all 18 digits...but since we never wrote all 18 digits in the first place, the comparison is meaningless. The only relevant comparison would be DIAD vs. recording 6 digits on a 50-liner.

In the late 80's/early 90's before DIAD we couldnt scan 1Z labels so we filled in the consignee info in the space provided, detached the perforated section, and turned them in at night. There was never any additional time allowed for this.

Fast forward a few years to the early 2000's, we are all on DIAD and PLD/EDD is implemented. All packages have full 1z labels. I.E comes along and screws us out of something like 20 seconds per package by falsely claiming that we had been given "too much" of an allowance in the first place.

That "allowance"...was based upon writing 6 digits on a 50-liner, not on writing the entire 1z label. And there is not a 20 second difference between scanning a package vs. writing 6 digits.

We got screwed, plain and simple.

I searched around and found the original memo that went out with the change. Here is the text from the corporate IE work measurement change notice. There was a presentation that went with this, but I could not find it.

EXPLANATION:​
While last years roll out of the Package Del Allowance was limited to PAS sites and was in
conjunction with EDD, it is important to note that this allowance change was NOT due to any EDD processes.

This WMCN goes into effect 7/5/04. The allowance must be installed in all package centers by 12/31/04. It is mandatory that the attached presentation is communicated to all On Road
Supervisors and Service Providers before installing the allowance change.​
The reduction in the package delivery allowance of 5.76-seconds per package is based on both documented methods and observation of skilled employees completing the tasks.​
•​
Standard smart labels reduce time to locate address on label

•​
DIAD package scanning is much more efficient than key entering by the driver

•​
With packages containing smart labels ( over 99% of packages can be scanned); the
shipper number, tracking number and product type is now populated with one scan
rather than through key entry by the driver

•​
The greatest impact to the package delivery allowance is due to fewer key strokes

(manual entering of data) into the DIAD. Manual recording is very rare and “by​
exception only”.
 

MechanicForBrown

Prblm found,part on order
Yuh know, the hardest decision I have all day long to make is what wrench do I want to use, and witch truck do I want to work on first! Boy am I glad I am not a driver!!!:happy2:
 
Top