LTM question

[U caught my attention]

The odd thing though is this addresses carriers going to the mapped park point. My question would be can a mapped park point be on private property?

Isnt the fact the customer ordered an item for delivery give us some kind of right to access the property to deliver the item?
Walking or driving in order to perform the job of delivery is still entering private property.

The park point (wherever that is) is the step prior to exiting vehicle to deliver or collect signature. A lot of my park points are at the service box point. I walk up driveways. In my more rural areas where the houses are set back, the park point is in driveways.

Why drive up driveways at all?
Safety of carrier to outside elements
potential for loose animals, inclement weather, earlier nightfall in peak season compounded with multi pkgs at address, heavy pkgs at address, efficiency of pace, prevent fatigue, get off of a heavily traveled fast paced highway
(To name a few reasons)

 

[oi veh.]

it's pretty simple.

if we weren't meant to deliver to the door, then the option on the scanner wouldn't be there.

we wouldn't be able to map the parking point at the house nor the front door location.

why do some carriers want to take a simple issue and make it complicated?

also, why would a carrier deliver a non-express package to a residence without a mailbox? that is just moronic.

 

[Rt2mailman]

You don't need to see it. What if I said no mailbox and no mail service and still drove onto the private property and got into an accident?

If you knew the history of this mail person you would say two things. 1) Damn the union is amazing at keeping people and/or 2) Damn this is why a union is a problem. Sadly this person will someday hit and injure or kill someone before they are removed. There isn't one person in the office who understands why they are still working at USPS other than the union, so that makes this an bad example.

They were disciplined for the accident due to history. The house in question was a retired higher up from USPS who knew the carrier was 1000% wrong, but decided to drop the matter if they never go onto their property again. Even after installing a mailbox. We had stand ups for months explaining why we are not allowed to drive on private property and the union agreed that is what the policy says.

I'm actually curious if you can cite what you've mentioned about distances running out. I can't find that in the documentation. Where would I find that because if that's true it may change things at a stop of mine. If I'm only paid so far then I'm not going to the doors anymore and it's 3849 time and pissing people off until something changes.

In these types of discussions it is always best to agree with your opponent to the fullest extent of their argument. So, I'll do that.
No carrier should ever deliver anything on private property. It's unsafe, due to animals or people, and unkept walkways etc.
That new found "Always existing" rule is wonderful for the USPS. All rural carriers will have their route evaluations lowered by several hours per week, due to not delivering parcels, but just leaving notices. All rural routes that currently deliver on any private properties now have to stop at the edge of said properties and deliver there. All boxes on private properties have to be moved out to the edge of those properties on public lands. This will shorten rural routes by 1000's of miles across the US, saving the USPS some of those billions they have been losing, and or pay out those PMG and other managers' bonuses.
Oh, and by the way "Rurallife0323, you don't have to worry about delivering up to those 3rd stories anymore, or that extra footage, because those apartments are on PRIVATE PROPERTY. Due to this "New found" "Always existing" rule your route has been cut by by 6 hours per week.
Thanks to Rural life" pointing out this "Rule" most rural routes are now the same size as most existing aux routes.
Or is it possible that you're wrong about this "Rule" that doesn't allow rural carriers to deliver parcels to the door by driving?

 

[U caught my attention]

Its annoying to not have simple citable language when trying to defend an improper order. I couldnt find simple citable language that granted access.
My then PM took my round about arguement about park points for delivery to door. He literally watched me plot driveways as park points. He allowed us to go up driveways. Why not have the language that reflects how we perform?

 

[Rural-life-0323]

Isnt the fact the customer ordered an item for delivery give us some kind of right to access the property to deliver the item?
Walking or driving in order to perform the job of delivery is still entering private property.

The park point (wherever that is) is the step prior to exiting vehicle to deliver or collect signature. A lot of my park points are at the service box point. I walk up driveways. In my more rural areas where the houses are set back, the park point is in driveways.

Why drive up driveways at all?
Safety of carrier to outside elements
potential for loose animals, inclement weather, earlier nightfall in peak season compounded with multi pkgs at address, heavy pkgs at address, efficiency of pace, prevent fatigue, get off of a heavily traveled fast paced highway
(To name a few reasons)

I think your right on the first point and what I would argue it someone fought me on it but on the last part I think that could be used as a way to argue that we not go to the doors, too.

Crazy question. Residents are required to install a mailbox and pay for them themselves. For the really, really long driveways why not force them to put in a large container that hide large parcels and can be left at let's say 20-30ft into their property. Before every complains about their routes being shortened, think for one second. You're arguing that driving closer to the front door is best. Why not bring the delivery point closer to where you already are and you're still walking that same distance to deliver them anyways. If their gate was closed you'd put the package over the fence, right? Why can't we just leave parcels closer the mailbox point instead, by policy?

 

[Rural-life-0323]

Its annoying to not have simple citable language when trying to defend an improper order. I couldnt find simple citable language that granted access.
My then PM took my round about arguement about park points for delivery to door. He literally watched me plot driveways as park points. He allowed us to go up driveways. Why not have the language that reflects how we perform?

DING DING DING! Someone gets it.

Practice and policy don't always match up and sadly I've seen this work against TOO many employees and in favor or managers in unemployment and wrongful termination cases. It SHOULD be written into policy or we're all at risk.

The union needs to codify this into policy, ASAP!

 

[Rural-life-0323]

it's pretty simple.

if we weren't meant to deliver to the door, then the option on the scanner wouldn't be there.

we wouldn't be able to map the parking point at the house nor the front door location.

why do some carriers want to take a simple issue and make it complicated?

also, why would a carrier deliver a non-express package to a residence without a mailbox? that is just moronic.

I can map my park point into the middle of a freeway. That simply points out the flaw in the system. It doesn't justify the park point.

As I stated, when I took over my route the previous carrier had everything mapped to red zones and blocking tenant garage doors and driveways. That didn't mean those were correct park points because the system let them do it. It means the previous carrier was a moron and management didn't care because they were losing money and saving USPS money.

The option is there on the scanner for when it's possible to do it by policy and in the cases where the package states "Carrier - Leave if no response" or you have a PS 4232 filled out.

And yes that carrier is a complete and utter moron, that your union fights for all the time. And I mean ALL the time. That one person is a huge reason your dues just went up again (different subject).

 

[Rural-life-0323]

In these types of discussions it is always best to agree with your opponent to the fullest extent of their argument. So, I'll do that.
No carrier should ever deliver anything on private property. It's unsafe, due to animals or people, and unkept walkways etc.
That new found "Always existing" rule is wonderful for the USPS. All rural carriers will have their route evaluations lowered by several hours per week, due to not delivering parcels, but just leaving notices. All rural routes that currently deliver on any private properties now have to stop at the edge of said properties and deliver there. All boxes on private properties have to be moved out to the edge of those properties on public lands. This will shorten rural routes by 1000's of miles across the US, saving the USPS some of those billions they have been losing, and or pay out those PMG and other managers' bonuses.
Oh, and by the way "Rurallife0323, you don't have to worry about delivering up to those 3rd stories anymore, or that extra footage, because those apartments are on PRIVATE PROPERTY. Due to this "New found" "Always existing" rule your route has been cut by by 6 hours per week.
Thanks to Rural life" pointing out this "Rule" most rural routes are now the same size as most existing aux routes.
Or is it possible that you're wrong about this "Rule" that doesn't allow rural carriers to deliver parcels to the door by driving?

Glass half empty person?

The "rules' also makes it possible to make your distances much longer and you make more money. Glass half full. You can easily throw it in their faces that my route is going UP because I'm following your policy. It worked for me and they have no ground to fight me on it since I'm following the USPS polices and the laws.

For the record I increased my eval time by following this not decreasing it. At an apartment I have extremely long walking distances due to assigned parking spaces on the property and not being able to use them. I'm one of the only routes in my office going up every 6 months since I use the existing policies in my favor.

The truth is I'm an over burned 48K route now following their rules and a ton of growth. Losing 6 hours would still keep me well over 48K. I'm actually trying to lose over 14 hours and using the conflicting RRECS policies in my favor right now to try to do that by this next MMS. My hope is to drop to a 46K so I don't get cut more, by using their policies in my favor. Then build again if I drop more, using there conflicting polices in my favor.

Don't hate the player ...

 

[Augsburg]

GPS also does not account for changes in altitude. If your route is at all hilly, the mileage will be short even if the LTM is correct. The ride along might be the only way to show the discrepancy.

The scanner absolutely knows the altitude. It's a choice to turn it off.

 

[Rt2mailman]

Glass half empty person?

The "rules' also makes it possible to make your distances much longer and you make more money. Glass half full. You can easily throw it in their faces that my route is going UP because I'm following your policy. It worked for me and they have no ground to fight me on it since I'm following the USPS polices and the laws.

For the record I increased my eval time by following this not decreasing it. At an apartment I have extremely long walking distances due to assigned parking spaces on the property and not being able to use them. I'm one of the only routes in my office going up every 6 months since I use the existing policies in my favor.

The truth is I'm an over burned 48K route now following their rules and a ton of growth. Losing 6 hours would still keep me well over 48K. I'm actually trying to lose over 14 hours and using the conflicting RRECS policies in my favor right now to try to do that by this next MMS. My hope is to drop to a 46K so I don't get cut more, by using their policies in my favor. Then build again if I drop more, using there conflicting polices in my favor.

Don't hate the player ...

548k routes get cut to 43 not 46. How is it that according to the "rules", why is your route delivering on private property? If we are to not drive on private property to deliver parcels, it only follows that we shouldn't be delivering on private property at all. Following what you believe to be the rule, your route should be 39h h after you loose all private property deliveries.