“Effective” Pay Rate
Some of you may recall that I worked at Panera Bread Company before I started working with UPS. Back then I was making $6.50/hour working fewer than 20 hours a week (I really want a job with a consistant schedule that gives me roughly 15-25 hours per week.) Now that I am working at UPS I am making $9.00/hour because I recently received my first raise (+$0.50)
So, I was wondering… which is better? Obviously, UPS seems much better because I am making more money in total; my schedule is much more consistant; and the pay rate is higher. However, I have to drive a lot farther to the UPS HUB, and that takes up a lot of my time each week. So, I did a few calculations.
Here’s a list of the variables that I used to calculate my “effective” pay rate at UPS. I should also calculate my “effective” pay rate at Panera, but I figure that if this is still above $6.50/hour then I won’t need to, because I’ll already know UPS is a better deal for me.
UPS Pay Rate = 9.00
Average Pay Rate after Taxes are deducted = 8.20
Days worked as of last pay stub = 66
Hours worked as of last pay stub = 278.42
Average hours worked per day = 4.2184
Times are in minutes
Time spent driving to and from work = 35*2
Time spent walking to and from work = 5*2
Time spent getting ready for work = 20-30
Time spent getting out of work gear and into non-working conditions = 20
Sum of the average times spent on daily work related activities = 6.60 Hours
(4.22*8.20)/6.60 = 5.24
Right now I am in the process of memorizing all the ZIP codes in Florida and beyond so I can become a package sorter. When I take this test I will get a +$1.00/hour raise, which will put me at $10/hour or $9.00/hour after the deductions. So, at that point this will look more like…
(4.22*9.00)/ = 5.75
Though I need to keep in mind that I will get a few fewer minutes than I have gotten as a loader.
Posted by David under Uncategorized |
You also have to factor in that UPS will reimburse you for school, that should add a lot to your hourly pay rate.
Comment by Nate — June 22, 2005 @ 11:55 am