Re: [FWDLK] shipping by UPS
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [FWDLK] shipping by UPS



Funny, I was a loader of tractor trailers for UPS part time. I made it about 22 days into training when I quit. It was nuts, boxes falling, miss sorts and we did pay no attention to light or fragile, it was all about speed , checking for the correct zipcode for the trailer and getting as many boxes possible into a trailer by the end of the shift and if you moved to slow, the boxes would drop on your head (when you were filling the belly of the truck) or onto the warehouse floor after they backed up the belt. It seemed to me to be the most inefficient way to do something. but what do I know. but when that bell rang, the packages came down the shoot. Kind of like the I love Lucy episode of her working at the chocolate factory.
I have no idea if fedex is any better.
Nick
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, December 15, 2007 6:45 PM
Subject: Re: [FWDLK] shipping by UPS

 
    I used to work for UPS.   I will not ship with them as a result of the things I saw there.  Maybe if I were shipping boulders or dirt ?
   If you think the loss factor is a concern, you should see what they call "the sort", terminals where trailers are unloaded and loaded for other destinations.  You had better pack for war if you send anything that could get damaged in transit if shipping by UPS, that's all I have to say.  Anyone can lose a package.  It takes diligent effort to pile five tons of boxes on top of a fender in a load.  No effort is made to hold the light and fragile stuff to the end and throw it on top.  In fact, sorters were instructed to NOT be concerned with such trivialities and timed loading quotas were strictly hammered on the employees.
 
    Of course, common sense is the best hedge.  Sending a raw fender is idiotic, but I saw it many times each shift.  I once sold a toilet to a museum on the east coast.  The wood crate took half a day to build and the toilet was suspended in injected foam.  Hard to justify the effort / cost sometimes, but this was a $12,000 toilet !  The museum was unconcerned with a little extra cost to ensure its safe delivery.

*************************************************************

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1

*************************************************************

To unsubscribe or set your subscription options, please go to
http://lists.psu.edu/cgi-bin/wa?SUBED1=l-forwardlook&A=1




Home Back to the Home of the Forward Look Network


Copyright © The Forward Look Network. All rights reserved.

Opinions expressed in posts reflect the views of their respective authors.
This site contains affiliate links for which we may be compensated.