Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Why can't we get an accurate volume projection for our sort?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wilberforce15" data-source="post: 1133417" data-attributes="member: 5053"><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">I don't wear a collar anymore, so it's more of an intellectual curiosity to me than anything. I've been getting 25 hours a week on my sort because of this, and I know good and well that's not going to change. In that sense, it's fine by me.</span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">And no, it's not cheaper to have bad numbers. And no, the 'historical data' are not solid. </span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">The bad forecast costs thousands and thousands of dollars every time it's wrong on the low end. Why? Because we break packages by forcing things through without enough people. And we didn't have enough people because we sent them home based on a bad forecast.</span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">UPS pays for that bad forecast to the low side with sup-working grievances, injuries, busted package claims, and lost customers. Then the next shift (preload, in my case) starts late (then all those bad things happen again on preload) and drivers are out late.</span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">It is NEVER cheaper to do business the wrong way. And breaking bodies and stuff is the wrong way. It doesn't even matter what it would cost to get the right system in place. There is no possible way for that to exceed the long-term problems that this stuff causes. That, and I don't buy for a second that we couldn't get very, very good data for almost no money anyway. Even if I'm wrong on that, it doesn't matter.</span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">UPS, as a privately-held company that valued the long-run, might have figured this out a few decades ago. Now, we certainly won't. </span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p><p><span style="color: #000000">This same old thing could be repeated on plenty of other issues - about half our outbound doors have power extendos. Half don't. Even if a power extendo would cost $1mil over its life, it is a slam-dunk case that it would save oodles more than that in productivity, injuries, and damages over its life, especially in a hub that does our volume on three shifts. The only reason I can imagine for why UPS doesn't immediately install them in all our doors is that huge cash layouts look bad on quarterly reports.</span></p><p><span style="color: #000000"></span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wilberforce15, post: 1133417, member: 5053"] [COLOR=#000000] I don't wear a collar anymore, so it's more of an intellectual curiosity to me than anything. I've been getting 25 hours a week on my sort because of this, and I know good and well that's not going to change. In that sense, it's fine by me. And no, it's not cheaper to have bad numbers. And no, the 'historical data' are not solid. The bad forecast costs thousands and thousands of dollars every time it's wrong on the low end. Why? Because we break packages by forcing things through without enough people. And we didn't have enough people because we sent them home based on a bad forecast. UPS pays for that bad forecast to the low side with sup-working grievances, injuries, busted package claims, and lost customers. Then the next shift (preload, in my case) starts late (then all those bad things happen again on preload) and drivers are out late. It is NEVER cheaper to do business the wrong way. And breaking bodies and stuff is the wrong way. It doesn't even matter what it would cost to get the right system in place. There is no possible way for that to exceed the long-term problems that this stuff causes. That, and I don't buy for a second that we couldn't get very, very good data for almost no money anyway. Even if I'm wrong on that, it doesn't matter. UPS, as a privately-held company that valued the long-run, might have figured this out a few decades ago. Now, we certainly won't. This same old thing could be repeated on plenty of other issues - about half our outbound doors have power extendos. Half don't. Even if a power extendo would cost $1mil over its life, it is a slam-dunk case that it would save oodles more than that in productivity, injuries, and damages over its life, especially in a hub that does our volume on three shifts. The only reason I can imagine for why UPS doesn't immediately install them in all our doors is that huge cash layouts look bad on quarterly reports. [/COLOR] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
Why can't we get an accurate volume projection for our sort?
Top