UPS drivers average 170k?

I worked at fedex for a year and wish I stayed.

“If you're driving for FedEx in the United States, you'll earn a pretty solid living. FedEx drivers in the U.S. earn from $13 to $31 per houron average.Mar”


Indeed said $130 a day.

All the higher paid ones are gone unless they can drive a big rig. Independent Contractors making $15 hr don’t seem like a lot to me. A retired military friend owns a depot and pay’s <$13, not much cash.
 
Fedex Ground is the long time contractor based division that is only recently (last year or two) being absorbed into FEDEX wholly owned structure and their salary base.

Anyway looking at what the average a newbie gets vs multiple year workers is distorting the wage picture to say the least.

$130/day pffft
 
Fedex Ground is the long time contractor based division that is only recently (last year or two) being absorbed into FEDEX wholly owned structure and their salary base.

Anyway looking at what the average a newbie gets vs multiple year workers is distorting the wage picture to say the least.

$130/day pffft
I knew a couple who went to our church and were told a “pay drop from $50,000 to $25,000 or move to a emerging hub like Hawaii.” They use to make more than UPS in 1990, by 2015 drivers-ICs were making stupid low Uber wages because of costs and getting duped in to buying bad routes that averaged poor wages. It’s early, sorry if this is off.
 
From one of many daily email newsletters I get - earlier today:

There's new fodder in the debate about why wage growth soared as the economy rebounded from its pandemic slump — with big implications for how policymakers should approach the fight against inflation.

What's new: An intriguing new paper from Cleveland Fed economists found the ultra-tight labor market that helped define the COVID-19 recovery may not explain soaring wage growth after all.

What they're saying: "While labor market imbalances have been large in the postpandemic period, they induced both downward and upward pressures on wage growth and do not account for the increase in average wage growth," Cleveland Fed economists Martin DeLuca and Willem Van Zandweghe write.

  • Rather, the economists conclude rapid wage growth in recent years is "largely due to the pass-through of higher inflation since the pandemic," one that reflects higher compensation for a higher cost of living.
Flashback: As inflation took off, wage growth followed. Various measures, including average hourly earnings (released monthly) and the quarterly Employment Cost Index, began to accelerate.


  • That happened as the demand for workers clearly exceeded the supply of them. There were more job openings than ever before, but workers who had left the labor force — because of child care issues, lingering fears of COVID-19 and more financial flexibility thanks to the fiscal stimulus package — were slow to reenter.
  • At a news conference in March 2022, when the central bank started what ultimately became an aggressive interest rate-hiking campaign, Powell said the "misalignment of demand and supply, particularly in the labor market" was "leading to wages moving up at ways that are not consistent with 2 percent inflation over time."
The other side: Analysis by the Cleveland Fed economists, however, found that labor market imbalances during the pandemic contributed no more to the average level of wage growth than before the pandemic.

  • "Thus, we conclude that the post-pandemic increase in wage growth largely reflects higher inflation and does not reflect labor market imbalances," DeLuca and Van Zandweghe write.
  • Since "inflation has come down from its peak in mid-2022," they add, that suggests "a decline in wage growth from diminishing inflation pass-through."
The bottom line: So far, cooler inflation has not come alongside a jump in unemployment, as some economists feared would be necessary. But Fed officials are worried the still-tight labor market remains a risk for inflation.

  • At the last policy meeting, policymakers said "the labor market continued to be very tight," though there were signs "that demand and supply were coming into better balance," minutes released this week show.
  • But while wage growth had moderated, pay was still "rising at rates above levels" consistent with its 2% inflation target and "further progress toward a balancing of demand and supply in the labor market was needed."
I may be wrong, but it seems that economists aren't tracking employment figures tied to YT/TkTk/Instagm and such. Apparently revenue for micro accounts is around $400 per post and climb pretty significantly as the number of followers increase. 100k followers brings in an avg $3k/post.
Since the avg weekly gross income is $1300 /week ($68k/year), it would only take a couple videos a week to earn that avg salary, which is fairly substantial and inflation inducing. I imagine it's not so easy to reach 100k followers, but it propels the influencer into the low 6 figures income, something few could every imagine making.

This is what I found on the web:
"When looking at the US specifically, micro influencers are the biggest group, with over 793,000 throughout the country. Next up is the medium influencer group, with over 685,000 influencers throughout the US. Then followed by 51,700 macro influencers, and more than 5000 mega influencers." (blog.heepsy.com)

That's 1.5 million who aren't going back to the expected employment market, which is short over 9 million people. The carry over employment created by these influencers (production, marketing, etc.) is also probably significant and sucked out of the traditional economy.

The point is, the economy is transforming dramatically in front of our eyes by people who find ways to avoid going into 9 to 5 jobs (traders?) and paid significantly less. This creates additional tax revenue for the government but doesn't fill the jobs that remain vacant. Either the US will need to let poor migrants back in to take the jobs no one wants to do or the retail economy will continue to shrink and empower the home delivery businesses.
 
Back
Top