#22 C$$ RRECs: Box Time

mwellis32

Well-known member
Like I say until the actual time it takes matches the Time it should take measured by a complicated slide rule formula, we all are lost!
 

DB.Cooper

Well-known member
I rather get paid by a few measurements, at least I would mostly know where I'm getting screwed! 112 no way!
They've made the shell game so complicated, no one can understand or question it.... pure genius....

Plug it all in the computer, and bada bing.... here's your new eval....

But that can't be right.... sure it is.... the computer said so.... :oops:
 

mwellis32

Well-known member
They've made the shell game so complicated, no one can understand or question it.... pure genius....

Plug it all in the computer, and bada bing.... here's your new eval....

But that can't be right.... sure it is.... the computer said so.... :oops:
This should scare the crap out of everyone of us!
 

Old Fart

Well-known member
I wouldn't count on it being thrown out because they knew the numbers along time ago and this monster is still moving ahead with routes being mapped until C 19 hit. The association should have put the brakes to this as soon as the new standards were released. It took me a hour or so to see this was real bad. Not only are the standards horrible, but the crooks in control of all the data is bad also. Once this hits I'm afraid it's here for good. Association might say " We're looking into it, document everything, scan properly, etc". Years will pass, nothing will change.
In part because this, like almost everything in the PO today, is run by DATA. The problem is, the data is flawed. In my humble opinion, as one who used to manage big data in the private sector, this stuff is crap. It's all crap. And you build crap upon crap you get more crap. Real carriers aren't validating any of the stuff engineers put out. And when they do it's so limited even the testing is flawed. If it actually turns out this corrupt when implemented, my guess is there will be some major adjustments as they honestly know all carriers aren't 30% over valued. ( I heard the PO bought several new sorting machines, paid up front, and upon delivery, found they weren't going to work for any part of their business, as consultants had made the final recommendations -- so ONE BILLION dollars is sitting somewhere in some warehouse on machines unused) I am an optimist, but in reality adjustments must be made. After decades of paying carriers roughly the same, if you cut compensation by 30% because they've been overpaid for 25 years you won't have resignations, you'll have anarchy. They'll change. Maybe even Congressional pressure. Many in Congress side with carriers. Just an Old Fart's ramblings again....
 

mwellis32

Well-known member
Waste Billions to save a penny! Management has and will burn through $BILLIONS$ to cut a penny off our wages and benefits and call it the greatest program ever invented!
 

Windindaface

Well-known member
A comment from a 43K/L runner. 15.4 boxes per mile. 59 of my boxes are CBUs (last 4241A) ... I am guessing a 10% hit in current Eval because of it.

RRECS gets rid of the L status. But I see a big gain for distance between boxes because 80% of mine are under 500-1000 feet apart. Also see a gain in dismount drops due to beat feet to the door credit. Once I serve box it's a hop and walk of 100 feet for most.

From my math of bundle tie out options with RRECS as an L and not knowing what qualifies as L,M S parcel times. If I take DPS to the street I might offset the scan credit loss and stay close to current Eval. If I fall under current EVAL I have an AUX to pull from.
 
Top