4 ms·

> By contrast, the recent headlines about UPS drivers making $170k are for drivers with 5+ years of tenure. They do not make 170k, that was a puff piece from U

> By contrast, the recent headlines about UPS drivers making $170k are for drivers with 5+ years of tenure. They do not make 170k, that was a puff piece from UPS. That number was total compensation + monetary value of all benefits. Which not the way most people/postings talk about compensation.

runako 3y ago
> Which not the way most people/postings talk about compensation. This is a tech site. People in tech routinely include the value of e.g. RSUs in compensation numbers. Point taken, but a) it's not too far afield from how tech comp is discussed and b) even if you back out the non-cash components, the drivers still make a lot of money. (Possibly more even than the median US software developer.)
- _aavaa_ 3y ago
  I agree that things like RSUs are generally included, but the 50k of benefits does not include RSUs. The closest this they talk about is the pension plan, which they quote as 23k. Looks like UPS quotes above 95k avg, and 42$/hr avg after 4 years. I have no idea how that compares to average tech salary, but I agree that it is good money. That last thing worth mentioning, also from UPS' site is that almost half of their full-time drivers have been at the company for >15 years. That's a long time. [0]: https://about.ups.com/us/en/our-company/great-employer/real-employee-benefits.html https://about.ups.com/us/en/our-company/great-employer/real-...
  - runako 3y ago
    > 50k of benefits First cut at this would be $23k of pension, plus health insurance. (Average policy for a family of 4 is running around $25k; UPS may have a better plan than average.) It's fair for them to include these because comparable employers do not include either. (Though it make the compare to tech workers less direct.) > almost half of their full-time drivers have been at the company for >15 years There's a documented correlation between good benefits, low turnover, and higher profits.
    - _aavaa_ 3y ago
      > It's fair for them to include these because comparable employers do not include either. It is fair, but not under the phrase "UPS workers make". That phrasing usually only refers to (pre- or post-tax) salary. > There's a documented correlation between good benefits, low turnover, and higher profits. I would believe it. All I meant to say is that the 95k average salary will be skewed by having half their full time employees being there for >15 years. I think you and I agree for the most part, I am pushing to keep a clearer distinction between take home pay and total compensation.
      - runako 3y ago
        > I am pushing to keep a clearer distinction between take home pay and total compensation. I agree, but even this is squishy. For example; pension benefits eventually are taken home by the employee.
- nonethewiser 3y ago
  It includes health insurance premiums and stuff paid by the employer. No one uses that for TC.
  - runako 3y ago
    > health insurance premiums and stuff paid by the employer. As indicated above, most blue-collar jobs don't carry similar benefits. Totally fair to include in the TC number. It's also a higher percentage of notional wages for the specific type of job. Health insurance premiums for a family of 4 are averaging approximately $10/hr; it would be silly not to include that in a comp discussion where employees might be looking at other jobs that pay $15/hr. Again, even backing out the compensation you don't want to call "compensation," these are still very good jobs.

runako 3y ago

> Which not the way most people/postings talk about compensation. This is a tech site. People in tech routinely include the value of e.g. RSUs in compensation numbers. Point taken, but a) it's not too far afield from how tech comp is discussed and b) even if you back out the non-cash components, the drivers still make a lot of money. (Possibly more even than the median US software developer.)

_aavaa_ 3y ago
I agree that things like RSUs are generally included, but the 50k of benefits does not include RSUs. The closest this they talk about is the pension plan, which they quote as 23k. Looks like UPS quotes above 95k avg, and 42$/hr avg after 4 years. I have no idea how that compares to average tech salary, but I agree that it is good money. That last thing worth mentioning, also from UPS' site is that almost half of their full-time drivers have been at the company for >15 years. That's a long time. [0]: https://about.ups.com/us/en/our-company/great-employer/real-employee-benefits.html https://about.ups.com/us/en/our-company/great-employer/real-...
- runako 3y ago
  > 50k of benefits First cut at this would be $23k of pension, plus health insurance. (Average policy for a family of 4 is running around $25k; UPS may have a better plan than average.) It's fair for them to include these because comparable employers do not include either. (Though it make the compare to tech workers less direct.) > almost half of their full-time drivers have been at the company for >15 years There's a documented correlation between good benefits, low turnover, and higher profits.
  - _aavaa_ 3y ago
    > It's fair for them to include these because comparable employers do not include either. It is fair, but not under the phrase "UPS workers make". That phrasing usually only refers to (pre- or post-tax) salary. > There's a documented correlation between good benefits, low turnover, and higher profits. I would believe it. All I meant to say is that the 95k average salary will be skewed by having half their full time employees being there for >15 years. I think you and I agree for the most part, I am pushing to keep a clearer distinction between take home pay and total compensation.
    - runako 3y ago
      > I am pushing to keep a clearer distinction between take home pay and total compensation. I agree, but even this is squishy. For example; pension benefits eventually are taken home by the employee.
nonethewiser 3y ago
It includes health insurance premiums and stuff paid by the employer. No one uses that for TC.
- runako 3y ago
  > health insurance premiums and stuff paid by the employer. As indicated above, most blue-collar jobs don't carry similar benefits. Totally fair to include in the TC number. It's also a higher percentage of notional wages for the specific type of job. Health insurance premiums for a family of 4 are averaging approximately $10/hr; it would be silly not to include that in a comp discussion where employees might be looking at other jobs that pay $15/hr. Again, even backing out the compensation you don't want to call "compensation," these are still very good jobs.