New MOU
- Thread starter Brots9999
- Start date
Deer Smearer
Well-known member
So, we thought route coverage factor was based on 52 weeks. Then we were told it was 13 weeks. So in the last 13 weeks carriers have been stopping at boxes longer and more frequently.
Idiots at the Onion agree to add 39 weeks of coverage to the 13 and that will dilute this evaluation’s coverage factor.
One side is playing chess, the other checkers.
Where is that “Give It Away” link?
Idiots at the Onion agree to add 39 weeks of coverage to the 13 and that will dilute this evaluation’s coverage factor.
One side is playing chess, the other checkers.
Where is that “Give It Away” link?
YOUAREthecurrentresident
Well-known member
Lol...thats exactly what I was thinking. 52...no wait, 13...back to 52!So, we thought route coverage factor was based on 52 weeks. Then we were told it was 13 weeks. So in the last 13 weeks carriers have been stopping at boxes longer and more frequently.
Idiots at the Onion agree to add 39 weeks of coverage to the 13 and that will dilute this evaluation’s coverage factor.
One side is playing chess, the other checkers.
Where is that “Give It Away” link?
I was going to send you something, but there’s quite a bit. At the top of your webpage, see the magnifying glass? Touch that and type in Driving Speed Matrix. Ok?
Haygrrl
Well-known member
Wth is Thomas blum?..another new name..director of labor relations changes more than the weather
It makes a huge difference for routes with a mix of both. It should be an increase for those routes over all imo.
Informed delivery has nothing to do with it. It is all based off by what is processed at plant dps wise. The issue being because the system can not differentiate between 552 apt 1 or 552 apt 2 accurately enough To show yes that slot got mail or not.
over all those routes with a mix should see an increase coverage factor. How much is anyone’s guess, but it should increase evals somewhat In those cases.
jsthere723
Well-known member
It was always supposed to be 52 weeks . In our last evaluation they have used 13 weeks as 52 weeks were not available as per the first mou signed on anticipation of quarterly count . Only 49 weeks were collected. This mou makes it clear that there is no more scopes of 13 week average coverage factor as 52 weeks data is available. As per last mou signed , the coverage factor was supposed to be on the basis of 13 weeks , 26 weeks , 39 weeks and land on 52 weeks in 4th count . This mou makes it clear that this is not necessary and no longer the case as it can land on the 52 weeks average with our 2nd evaluation already
Brots9999
Active member
That….. actually makes a lot more sense considering the old evaluation timeline. Thanks!
jsthere723
Well-known member
I am not so sure it will increase. Let’s hope you are right . At least in our office the DPS has been very spotty and less last 4/5 months. I do not know nationwide in general
jsthere723
Well-known member
Now I am not so sure that they actually had the 52 weeks data . If you add up the beginning of data collection and end of mms it becomes I think 49 weeks . Then they have this coverage thing mentioned in the process of adjustments and creation of new routes claiming it can be applied in increments of 13 weeks only . I still cannot figure out the reason behind it . But it is there . Then why they wouldn’t apply 39 weeks average for coverage in last evaluation that is another question. PO is not telling many things voluntarily to union till they are caught and someone in the union becomes sure and adamant about a issue
jsthere723
Well-known member
What I can deduce—- Mapping and that server is the big culprit!!!! Many offices not yet mapped or mapping is not available. Screws up drive matrix , breadcrumbs and coverage factor. This thing is not ready for prime time at all !!! Yet we started getting paid based on this half cooked thing already!
SilverHair
Well-known member
Old way was simple: 2 minutes per mile. So average of 30mph for all miles on all routes. This gave advantage to long country routes with good roads (and good weather) where speed limits could be 45-55mph for example, and not so good for subdivision routes with few miles and lots of mailboxes close together.
New way is to use Drive Speed Matrix (DSM). Basic idea of it is shorter distances between stops means you drive slower average speeds between those stops so more generous time credits are now given. And longer distances between stops means you drive faster average speeds between those stops, so faster average speeds. Distances just under a half mile using DSM average around the old 30mph time credit. Distances above that have faster speeds up to max of 39.45mph for 5190 feet (slightly under 1 mile) and above distances. Whole route is chopped up into segments, time credits given for each segment, and totaled for total drive time.
DSM is a chart (aka, matrix) with 3 columns of data. First column is distance ranges in feet driven, and the 2nd and 3rd columns are the average speed credited for each range, one in mph and the other in minutes per foot.
For example, a half mile is 2640 feet. In the DSM, distances driven between 2495-2665 feet are credited with an average speed of 31.41mph, or 0.00036 min/foot. Multiply the feet times the min/foot number to get the minutes credited for that segment of driving. In this example of driving 1/2 mile, 2640 feet x 0.00036 = 0.9504. So you are credited with 0.9504 minutes (or about 57 seconds) for this segment of driving.
In theory, DSM should give a more accurate time credit for actual speeds driven.
Some of the main problems I have with it are that all roads rural carriers travel are not paved roads where farther distances mean faster driving speeds. And no consideration for weather conditions like snow/rain/ice that can impact some regions of the country for major portions of the year. And even when main road is paved and weather is nice, door delivery often requires off-roading down rutted dirt and gravel roads that are rarely a straight line from mailbox to the park point for door delivery. But according to the DSM, the distance is calculated as if you can plow through the trees in a straight line to the house, and the farther that house is from the mailbox the faster you can go. And remember the matrix gives average speeds, so to average the speed given where you’re starting from a complete stop, you will have to reach speeds higher than those given in the matrix to average those numbers. So when a house is 1/2 mile from the mailbox, and the DSM says the average speed should be 31.41mph, a maximum speed of perhaps 40mph would need to be reached to average 31.41mph. And since many of the roads are windy or dog-legs, even faster driving would be required to make up for the fact that the DSM doesn’t give credit for the actual distance, but only straight line distance. In reality, 5-15mph is all that can be driven down many of these roads. Totally inadequate time credit for these deliveries.
And that’s the DSM in a nutshell according to Silverhair.
SilverHair
Well-known member
Because cbu boxes get less time credit for delivering to them than curbside boxes. And cbus don’t get credited for delivering mail that isn’t dps or other informed delivery/visibility, so their coverage factor is typically less than curbside. Averaging them together causes cbu coverage factor to drag down curbside coverage factor.
Here’s a simple example that may help.
Suppose you have 800 boxes, 400 are curbside and 400 are cbus. Let’s says dps only covers 50% of your route, but you stop at all curbside boxes with other raw mail or flats or flag up, etc. Let’s leave out parcel delivery and WSS/boxholders (these two supposedly give 100% coverage) for sake of a simple example. Since raw mail and bundled flats etc are not being credited for coverage factor at cbus, you only get 50% coverage for your cbu boxes.
So, curbside has 100% coverage, but cbu has only 50% coverage. Since equal number of each type of box, if averaging those numbers, you get a 75% coverage factor for both. Curbside coverage factor was reduced by 25% and cbu coverage factor was increased by 25%. But that’s not an even trade-off because cbu boxes get less time credit than curbside boxes (0.1080 minutes or 6.68 seconds per cbu box per day vs 0.2030 minutes or 12.18 seconds per curbside box per day). So you actually lose time credit.
Averaging curbside and cbu coverage factors gives 75% coverage, or 300 boxes for each:
Curbside time = 300 boxes x 0.2030 min/box = 60.90 minutes
CBU time = 300 boxes x 0.1080 min/box = 32.40 minutes
Total time for boxes = 60.90 + 32.40 = 93.30 min
If each coverage factor were used separately for box credit, 100% is curbside (400 boxes) and 50% for cbu (200 boxes):
Curbside time = 400 x 0.2030 = 81.20 minutes
CBU time = 200 x 0.1080 = 21.60 minutes
Total time = 81.20 + 21.60 = 102.80 min
Daily time lost in this example solely due to averaging coverage factors: 102.80 - 93.30 = 9.50 minutes lost per day. That’s 57 minutes per week.
If you notice on your 4241A from last MMS, there is only one coverage factor listed. If you look on page 1 of your 4241M, there are 5 coverage factors listed, but they are all the same because they must have averaged them together.
This new MOU says it won’t average curbside and cbu. I imagine that includes Centralized too since it has same time credit as cbu. “Sidewalk” and “Other” have different time credits of 0.1900 min/box and 0.1890 min/delivery respectively, but they were not mentioned in this MOU.
Last edited:
This was very helpful. It's obvious that this is the way they should do it, but also obvious that they wouldn't do it this way to screw us in hidden ways. I'm glad the union changed it.Because cbu boxes get less time credit for delivering to them than curbside boxes. And cbus don’t get credited for delivering mail that isn’t dps or other informed delivery/visibility, so their coverage factor is typically less than curbside. Averaging them together causes cbu coverage factor to drag down curbside coverage factor.
Here’s a simple example that may help.
Suppose you have 800 boxes, 400 are curbside and 400 are cbus. Let’s says dps only covers 50% of your route, but you stop at all curbside boxes with other raw mail or flats or flag up, etc. Let’s leave out parcel delivery and WSS/boxholders (these two supposedly give 100% coverage) for sake of a simple example. Since raw mail and bundled flats etc are not being credited for coverage factor at cbus, you only get 50% coverage for your cbu boxes.
So, curbside has 100% coverage, but cbu has only 50% coverage. Since equal number of each type of box, if averaging those numbers, you get a 75% coverage factor for both. Curbside coverage factor was reduced by 25% and cbu coverage factor was increased by 25%. But that’s not an even trade-off because cbu boxes get less time credit than curbside boxes (0.1080 minutes or 6.68 seconds per cbu box per day vs 0.2030 minutes or 12.18 seconds per curbside box per day). So you actually lose time credit.
Averaging curbside and cbu coverage factors gives 75% coverage, or 300 boxes for each:
Curbside time = 300 boxes x 0.2030 min/box = 60.90 minutes
CBU time = 300 boxes x 0.1080 min/box = 32.40 minutes
Total time for boxes = 60.90 + 32.40 = 93.30 min
If each coverage factor were used separately for box credit, 100% is curbside (400 boxes) and 50% for cbu (200 boxes):
Curbside time = 400 x 0.2030 = 81.20 minutes
CBU time = 200 x 0.1080 = 21.60 minutes
Total time = 81.20 + 21.60 = 102.80 min
Daily time lost in this example solely due to averaging coverage factors: 102.80 - 93.30 = 9.50 minutes lost per day. That’s 57 minutes per week.
If you notice on your 4241A from last MMS, there is only one coverage factor listed. If you look on page 1 of your 4241M, there are 5 coverage factors listed, but they are all the same because they must have averaged them together.
This new MOU says it won’t average curbside and cbu. I imagine that includes Centralized too since it has same time credit as cbu. “Sidewalk” and “Other” have different time credits of 0.1900 min/box and 0.1890 min/delivery respectively, but they were not mentioned in this MOU.
I have roughly 280 of each type but I had a 94% coverage factor last time I checked, so Im assuming my time from boxes will go up a small amount.
