Printable Version of Topic
Click here to view this topic in its original format
Newbury Today Forum _ Random Rants _ Royal Mail - time for a re think!
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 07:47 AM
Yesterday mid morning (during the restricted hours) I saw a mail van edge its way through the many pedestrians down Northbrook Street and carefully wind its way through the crowd on the bridge. It stopped by the town hall and the driver got out and emptied the mail box. It then drove on to the sorting office.
Yes, I accept it might have been part of a longer round - but the fact remains that this was an unnecessary trip. No commercial organisation is able to do anything like this at this time of day. Equally, given the proximity of the sorting office, it would have been far quicker to walk.
The mail people seemed to have gulled our Councillors into thinking there is something really special about them making them exempt from normal regulations.
Quite apart from the obvious safety considerations, this is hardly sustainable - using a heavy van to empty town centre boxes. Equally, in process terms, its not exactly commercially viable.
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
Posted by: Biker1 Aug 21 2011, 08:16 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:47 AM) 
Yesterday mid morning (during the restricted hours) I saw a mail van edge its way through the many pedestrians down Northbrook Street and carefully wind its way through the crowd on the bridge. It stopped by the town hall and the driver got out and emptied the mail box. It then drove on to the sorting office.
Yes, I accept it might have been part of a longer round - but the fact remains that this was an unnecessary trip. No commercial organisation is able to do anything like this at this time of day. Equally, given the proximity of the sorting office, it would have been far quicker to walk.
The mail people seemed to have gulled our Councillors into thinking there is something really special about them making them exempt from normal regulations.
Quite apart from the obvious safety considerations, this is hardly sustainable - using a heavy van to empty town centre boxes. Equally, in process terms, its not exactly commercially viable.
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
Yes, I accept it might have been part of a longer round - but the fact remains that this was an unnecessary trip. No commercial organisation is able to do anything like this at this time of day. Equally, given the proximity of the sorting office, it would have been far quicker to walk.
The mail people seemed to have gulled our Councillors into thinking there is something really special about them making them exempt from normal regulations.
Quite apart from the obvious safety considerations, this is hardly sustainable - using a heavy van to empty town centre boxes. Equally, in process terms, its not exactly commercially viable.
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
I see all sorts of commercial vans in the "pedestrian area" during restricted hours.
They just seem to ignore the bollards by West Street.
I think entry bollards are needed here also to make it impossible for entry by going round the traffic island.
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 21 2011, 09:00 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:47 AM)
Yesterday mid morning (during the restricted hours) I saw a mail van edge its way through the many pedestrians down Northbrook Street and carefully wind its way through the crowd on the bridge. It stopped by the town hall and the driver got out and emptied the mail box. It then drove on to the sorting office.
Yes, I accept it might have been part of a longer round - but the fact remains that this was an unnecessary trip. No commercial organisation is able to do anything like this at this time of day. Equally, given the proximity of the sorting office, it would have been far quicker to walk.
The mail people seemed to have gulled our Councillors into thinking there is something really special about them making them exempt from normal regulations.
Quite apart from the obvious safety considerations, this is hardly sustainable - using a heavy van to empty town centre boxes. Equally, in process terms, its not exactly commercially viable.
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
Yes, I accept it might have been part of a longer round - but the fact remains that this was an unnecessary trip. No commercial organisation is able to do anything like this at this time of day. Equally, given the proximity of the sorting office, it would have been far quicker to walk.
The mail people seemed to have gulled our Councillors into thinking there is something really special about them making them exempt from normal regulations.
Quite apart from the obvious safety considerations, this is hardly sustainable - using a heavy van to empty town centre boxes. Equally, in process terms, its not exactly commercially viable.
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
I think you are making assumptions and contriving to make a complaint.
Posted by: user23 Aug 21 2011, 09:47 AM
QUOTE (Biker1 @ Aug 21 2011, 09:16 AM)
I see all sorts of commercial vans in the "pedestrian area" during restricted hours.
They just seem to ignore the bollards by West Street.
I think entry bollards are needed here also to make it impossible for entry by going round the traffic island.
I've seen cars do this on more than one occasion, perhaps you're right.They just seem to ignore the bollards by West Street.
I think entry bollards are needed here also to make it impossible for entry by going round the traffic island.
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 21 2011, 10:00 AM)
I think you are making assumptions and contriving to make a complaint.
Me too, and the suggestion that the van should be dropped off at the depot and the round then continued on foot when the van was probably driven past the postbox on it's way to the depot seems a bit strange.Posted by: dannyboy Aug 21 2011, 09:58 AM
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
When RM is flogged off to TNT/DHL and a first class letter costs a couple of quid to send, you'll be harking back to the 'good old days' of the Royal Mail & postie.
Posted by: JeffG Aug 21 2011, 10:26 AM
QUOTE (Biker1 @ Aug 21 2011, 09:16 AM)
They just seem to ignore the bollards by West Street.
There are none at the moment, in case you haven't noticed.
That bit is encased in boarded-up road works and all traffic has to go through the open bit, controlled by lights, so no physical indication that entry is restricted.
Posted by: dannyboy Aug 21 2011, 10:29 AM
QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 21 2011, 11:26 AM)
There are none at the moment, in case you haven't noticed.
That bit is encased in boarded-up road works and all traffic has to go through the open bit, controlled by lights, so no physical indication that entry is restricted.
That bit is encased in boarded-up road works and all traffic has to go through the open bit, controlled by lights, so no physical indication that entry is restricted.
Car drivers seem to get upset why you don't move out of the way for them.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 02:54 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 21 2011, 10:00 AM)
I think you are making assumptions and contriving to make a complaint.
And you've done exactly the same! The facts are I am not permitted to do what the mail service does for my several customers in the town centre. Yes I have made a formal request. Our business actually makes a profit but then we do look very closely at process - time is money. So, then; Fact - mail service are given special treatment, Fact - mail service operates at a substantial loss, Fact - along with many other businesses, we can still manage to service customers during the restricted hours, Fact - we make a profit. Sorry - who ever made the decision to permit mail vans was gulled.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 02:57 PM
QUOTE (user23 @ Aug 21 2011, 10:47 AM)
I've seen cars do this on more than one occasion, perhaps you're right.
Me too, and the suggestion that the van should be dropped off at the depot and the round then continued on foot when the van was probably driven past the postbox on it's way to the depot seems a bit strange.
Me too, and the suggestion that the van should be dropped off at the depot and the round then continued on foot when the van was probably driven past the postbox on it's way to the depot seems a bit strange.
Strange to those who don't have to think about cost and effect yes. This is a classic case of a monopoly service ignoring the rules. Why? WBC rightly stop commercial traffic what are they so scared of when it comes to the mail service?
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 03:01 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 21 2011, 10:58 AM)
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
When RM is flogged off to TNT/DHL and a first class letter costs a couple of quid to send, you'll be harking back to the 'good old days' of the Royal Mail & postie.
When RM is flogged off to TNT/DHL and a first class letter costs a couple of quid to send, you'll be harking back to the 'good old days' of the Royal Mail & postie.
Well I won't for one - BUT only if its done properly. Vis don't copy railways. By the way, I'm one of those dratted modernists who can't see anything wrong with a daily delivery - at any time. Not trying to keep to the Victorian tradition of ensuring you can read your latest electricity bill with your breakfast egg.
Posted by: Biker1 Aug 21 2011, 06:17 PM
QUOTE (JeffG @ Aug 21 2011, 11:26 AM)
There are none at the moment, in case you haven't noticed.
That bit is encased in boarded-up road works and all traffic has to go through the open bit, controlled by lights, so no physical indication that entry is restricted.
That bit is encased in boarded-up road works and all traffic has to go through the open bit, controlled by lights, so no physical indication that entry is restricted.
OK, But they still do it when the bollards are working.
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 21 2011, 06:21 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 03:54 PM)
And you've done exactly the same! The facts are I am not permitted to do what the mail service does for my several customers in the town centre. Yes I have made a formal request. Our business actually makes a profit but then we do look very closely at process - time is money. So, then; Fact - mail service are given special treatment, Fact - mail service operates at a substantial loss, Fact - along with many other businesses, we can still manage to service customers during the restricted hours, Fact - we make a profit. Sorry - who ever made the decision to permit mail vans was gulled.
The RM makes a loss for political reasons. It need not but it is ham strung. Just like the rape of its profits in the past by governments that prevented the RM from investing in its future. Personally I cannot see the problem with a public entity being permitted a delivery in the pedestrian zone.
I have to say: so what?
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 07:03 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 21 2011, 07:21 PM)
The RM makes a loss for political reasons. It need not but it is ham strung. Just like the rape of its profits in the past by governments that prevented the RM from investing in its future. Personally I cannot see the problem with a public entity being permitted a delivery in the pedestrian zone.
I have to say: so what?
I have to say: so what?
So in effect you are saying the present prices are far too low and past lack of investment has caused the problem. You've just made the case for privatisation and justified the price increase some people are worried about. That's something we can agree on then. You can't see a problem with a public entity being permitted to break the rules? Oh dear!
Posted by: Darren Aug 21 2011, 07:08 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:03 PM)
You can't see a problem with a public entity being permitted to break the rules? Oh dear!
Same argument could be used for emergency services.
They're not breaking the rules as the rules include them.
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 21 2011, 07:12 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:03 PM)
So in effect you are saying the present prices are far too low and past lack of investment has caused the problem.
No. In the past the RM made a fortune, but governments fleeced the RM and didn't use it to modernise.
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:03 PM)
You've just made the case for privatisation and justified the price increase some people are worried about.
If the RM have to tramps about a pedestrian zone because of people moaning about them driving, perhaps a price rise might be inevitable?
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:03 PM)
That's something we can agree on then. You can't see a problem with a public entity being permitted to break the rules? Oh dear!
Are they 'breaking the rules'?
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 07:27 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 21 2011, 08:12 PM)
No. In the past the RM made a fortune, but governments fleeced the RM and didn't use it to modernise.
If the RM have to tramps about a pedestrian zone because of people moaning about them driving, perhaps a prise rise might be inevitable?
Are they 'breaking the rules'?
If the RM have to tramps about a pedestrian zone because of people moaning about them driving, perhaps a prise rise might be inevitable?
Are they 'breaking the rules'?
Haven't you noticed they actually deliver mail round the town in a handcart every day?
As I mentioned, our firm and several others manage to service our customers in the town centre without upping prices. We practice an art called commercial management.
Again, no other commercial organisation can do this so even though they have an exemption are still technically breaking the rules. Same as if a Police car decides to jump the lights. Legally known as an indulgence.
Where do you draw the line? So take my first observation; getting an exemption and using vans to empty is sticking two fingers up!
Posted by: user23 Aug 21 2011, 07:44 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 03:57 PM)
Strange to those who don't have to think about cost and effect yes. This is a classic case of a monopoly service ignoring the rules. Why? WBC rightly stop commercial traffic what are they so scared of when it comes to the mail service?
They let other commercial traffic such as Group 4 through too.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 07:51 PM
QUOTE (user23 @ Aug 21 2011, 08:44 PM)
They let other commercial traffic such as Group 4 through too.
Incredible! I'll get my firm to try again then; thanks for letting me know.
Posted by: Berkshirelad Aug 21 2011, 08:41 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:47 AM)
Yesterday mid morning (during the restricted hours) I saw a mail van edge its way through the many pedestrians down Northbrook Street and carefully wind its way through the crowd on the bridge. It stopped by the town hall and the driver got out and emptied the mail box. It then drove on to the sorting office.
Yes, I accept it might have been part of a longer round - but the fact remains that this was an unnecessary trip. No commercial organisation is able to do anything like this at this time of day. Equally, given the proximity of the sorting office, it would have been far quicker to walk.
The mail people seemed to have gulled our Councillors into thinking there is something really special about them making them exempt from normal regulations.
Quite apart from the obvious safety considerations, this is hardly sustainable - using a heavy van to empty town centre boxes. Equally, in process terms, its not exactly commercially viable.
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
Yes, I accept it might have been part of a longer round - but the fact remains that this was an unnecessary trip. No commercial organisation is able to do anything like this at this time of day. Equally, given the proximity of the sorting office, it would have been far quicker to walk.
The mail people seemed to have gulled our Councillors into thinking there is something really special about them making them exempt from normal regulations.
Quite apart from the obvious safety considerations, this is hardly sustainable - using a heavy van to empty town centre boxes. Equally, in process terms, its not exactly commercially viable.
Little wonder the mail service in UK is in such a mess when they consider this acceptable
The Royal Mail are permitted vehicles. It takes more than a traffic order - Her Majesty's mail has priority.
Posted by: Berkshirelad Aug 21 2011, 08:44 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 08:27 PM)
Again, no other commercial organisation can do this so even though they have an exemption are still technically breaking the rules. Same as if a Police car decides to jump the lights. Legally known as an indulgence.
Emergency service vehicles usually have a specific exemption built in to traffic regulation orders ( ie the order does not apply to them). So they are not breaking the rules, technically or otherwise.
Have a look next time one is published in the NWN
Posted by: Berkshirelad Aug 21 2011, 08:48 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 03:57 PM)
Strange to those who don't have to think about cost and effect yes. This is a classic case of a monopoly service ignoring the rules. Why? WBC rightly stop commercial traffic what are they so scared of when it comes to the mail service?
RM has not been a monopoly for many, many years.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 09:05 PM
QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Aug 21 2011, 09:41 PM)
The Royal Mail are permitted vehicles. It takes more than a traffic order - Her Majesty's mail has priority.
Oh yeah? That still doesn't stop someone walking a few yards from the sorting office does it? Particularly when they deliver that way or is Her Majesty's edict one way?
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 09:06 PM
QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Aug 21 2011, 09:44 PM)
Emergency service vehicles usually have a specific exemption built in to traffic regulation orders ( ie the order does not apply to them). So they are not breaking the rules, technically or otherwise.
Have a look next time one is published in the NWN
Have a look next time one is published in the NWN
Rather read the case law thanks.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 21 2011, 09:10 PM
QUOTE (Berkshirelad @ Aug 21 2011, 09:48 PM)
RM has not been a monopoly for many, many years.
Quite so - there are many other and better ways of communicating. So this fetish that the mail must get through is irrelevant and outdated. Coaches and horses disappeared many years ago - even from Newbury. The 'Royal' bit is also open to question now that most of it is operated on an Agency basis.
And anyway, if its not the monopoly communications provider there is no real need to give the emptying of letter boxes any special attention is there?
Posted by: dannyboy Aug 22 2011, 08:23 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 10:10 PM)
Quite so - there are many other and better ways of communicating. So this fetish that the mail must get through is irrelevant and outdated. Coaches and horses disappeared many years ago - even from Newbury. The 'Royal' bit is also open to question now that most of it is operated on an Agency basis.
And anyway, if its not the monopoly communications provider there is no real need to give the emptying of letter boxes any special attention is there?
And anyway, if its not the monopoly communications provider there is no real need to give the emptying of letter boxes any special attention is there?
Work for a courier company do we?
Posted by: Ron Aug 22 2011, 08:30 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 10:10 PM)
Quite so - there are many other and better ways of communicating. So this fetish that the mail must get through is irrelevant and outdated. Coaches and horses disappeared many years ago - even from Newbury. The 'Royal' bit is also open to question now that most of it is operated on an Agency basis.
And anyway, if its not the monopoly communications provider there is no real need to give the emptying of letter boxes any special attention is there?
And anyway, if its not the monopoly communications provider there is no real need to give the emptying of letter boxes any special attention is there?
And they charge a lot more than RM!
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 22 2011, 09:49 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 21 2011, 10:10 PM)
And anyway, if its not the monopoly communications provider there is no real need to give the emptying of letter boxes any special attention is there?
What other organisation empties letter-boxes? I have to say this is way down on my list of things I get excited about, but then I don't operate a carriage service.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 22 2011, 11:20 AM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 22 2011, 09:23 AM)
Work for a courier company do we?
No - but employ them from time to time.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 22 2011, 11:27 AM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 22 2011, 10:49 AM)
What other organisation empties letter-boxes? I have to say this is way down on my list of things I get excited about, but then I don't operate a carriage service.
I'm not actually getting excited about emplying letterboxes - more the muddled and incoherent implementation of traffic regulations. Which is a continued theme on this forum. I do appreciate'that in reality few are interested in the fundamental issue here - effective local government - but just consider where that could lead.
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 22 2011, 11:50 AM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 22 2011, 12:27 PM)
I'm not actually getting excited about emplying letterboxes - more the muddled and incoherent implementation of traffic regulations. ...
You said the RM don't have a monopoly any more. I'm asking who else empties the letterboxes. If it is no-one else, then perhaps they still do have a monopoly?
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 22 2011, 12:27 PM)
Which is a continued theme on this forum. I do appreciate'that in reality few are interested in the fundamental issue here - effective local government - but just consider where that could lead.
I don't see anything wrong in the LA allowing the RM access to the town centre, but I do think the council make it hard for some town businesses to do business with the current pedestrianisation scheme.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 22 2011, 01:10 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 22 2011, 12:50 PM)
You said the RM don't have a monopoly any more. I'm asking who else empties the letterboxes. If it is no-one else, then perhaps they still do have a monopoly?
Using the 'Porter five element model' (the one used by OFCOM) there are certainly alternatives and substitutes. Email, telecomms to name but two. Equally, there are also (albeit commercial only) direct competition in letters.
I don't see anything wrong in the LA allowing the RM access to the town centre, but I do think the council make it hard for some town businesses to do business with the current pedestrianisation scheme.
Spot on! Again, I'd have no issue if the rules for exemption were clear and transparent. Then I don't think even I could argue
Using the 'Porter five element model' (the one used by OFCOM) there are certainly alternatives and substitutes. Email, telecomms to name but two. Equally, there are also (albeit commercial only) direct competition in letters.
I don't see anything wrong in the LA allowing the RM access to the town centre, but I do think the council make it hard for some town businesses to do business with the current pedestrianisation scheme.
Spot on! Again, I'd have no issue if the rules for exemption were clear and transparent. Then I don't think even I could argue
Posted by: Biker1 Aug 22 2011, 02:37 PM
"Then I don't think even I could argue"
Posted by: blackdog Aug 22 2011, 03:43 PM
I don't really see why they need to empty postboxes during the pedestrianised hours - they all say that last collection is 17:30, so why not empty them then?
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 22 2011, 04:03 PM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 22 2011, 04:43 PM)
I don't really see why they need to empty postboxes during the pedestrianised hours - they all say that last collection is 17:30, so why not empty them then?
I suppose the postie can't be at all of them at the same time!
Posted by: blackdog Aug 23 2011, 06:58 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 22 2011, 05:03 PM)
I suppose the postie can't be at all of them at the same time!
True, but they can't empty them before 17:30 and meet the implied promise that all mail put in the box before 17:30 will be collected that day (and delivered the next of course
). So, as the boxes must be emptied after 17:30, why empty them between 10:00 and 17:00?
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 23 2011, 07:02 PM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 23 2011, 07:58 PM)
True, but they can't empty them before 17:30 and meet the implied promise that all mail put in the box before 17:30 will be collected that day (and delivered the next of course ). So, as the boxes must be emptied after 17:30, why empty them between 10:00 and 17:00?
). So, as the boxes must be emptied after 17:30, why empty them between 10:00 and 17:00?I suspect that the 5:30 is an advisory for when to get the post in there by. They may be later, but they might not.
Posted by: dannyboy Aug 23 2011, 10:14 PM
Time on the box is the last collection time from that box. It does not mean it is the only collection time.
Posted by: blackdog Aug 23 2011, 10:44 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 23 2011, 08:02 PM)
I suspect that the 5:30 is an advisory for when to get the post in there by. They may be later, but they might not.
But they have no need to be earlier.
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2011, 11:14 PM)
Time on the box is the last collection time from that box. It does not mean it is the only collection time.
I can't see that the collection of mail from two or three post boxes is sufficient reason to allow a vehicle into the pedestrian zone during its operating hours. If they must empty the boxes during that period they can send someone on foot.
Posted by: dannyboy Aug 23 2011, 10:46 PM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 23 2011, 11:44 PM)
But they have no need to be earlier.
I can't see that the collection of mail from two or three post boxes is sufficient reason to allow a vehicle into the pedestrian zone during its operating hours. If they must empty the boxes during that period they can send someone on foot.
I can't see that the collection of mail from two or three post boxes is sufficient reason to allow a vehicle into the pedestrian zone during its operating hours. If they must empty the boxes during that period they can send someone on foot.
It isn't yet a pedestrian area. It is a road with restrictions in place. Currently some vehicles are not restricted....
Posted by: Darren Aug 24 2011, 06:29 AM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 23 2011, 07:58 PM)
So, as the boxes must be emptied after 17:30, why empty them between 10:00 and 17:00?
Because they get full. It's a post box, not a TARDIS.
Posted by: dannyboy Aug 24 2011, 09:23 AM
QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 24 2011, 07:29 AM)
Because they get full. It's a post box, not a TARDIS.
And staggering collection means you keep posties busy all day.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 24 2011, 12:47 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2011, 11:46 PM)
It isn't yet a pedestrian area. It is a road with restrictions in place. Currently some vehicles are not restricted....
I love these bureaucratically correct expressions so beloved of our office boys; 'a road with restrictions', 'victimless crimes', 'net promotor score' - all quite meaningless and generally used to describe cop outs!
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 24 2011, 01:11 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 24 2011, 01:47 PM)
I love these bureaucratically correct expressions so beloved of our office boys; 'a road with restrictions', 'victimless crimes', 'net promotor score' - all quite meaningless and generally used to describe cop outs!
Why a cop-out? Have you not ever use a figure of speech? We're watching you from now on!
By-the-way: what is a 'bureaucratically correct expression'?
Posted by: dannyboy Aug 24 2011, 01:41 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 24 2011, 01:47 PM)
I love these bureaucratically correct expressions so beloved of our office boys; 'a road with restrictions', 'victimless crimes', 'net promotor score' - all quite meaningless and generally used to describe cop outs!
It isn't a cop out - it is a factual statement.
Posted by: blackdog Aug 24 2011, 01:49 PM
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 23 2011, 11:46 PM)
It isn't yet a pedestrian area. It is a road with restrictions in place. Currently some vehicles are not restricted....
Obviously. My use of 'pedestrian zone' is purely a convenient way of referring to it - perhaps I should use 'restricted zone', but I suspect it would be less obvious what I was referring to. My argument is that PO vehicles should be restricted - as should all other vehicles apart from the emergency services. Hopefully this will be the case when the buses are excluded in a few weeks time.
QUOTE (Darren @ Aug 24 2011, 07:29 AM)
Because they get full. It's a post box, not a TARDIS.
IF they get full (which I doubt) and need emptying between 10:00 and 17:00 they can empty them on foot.
QUOTE (dannyboy @ Aug 24 2011, 10:23 AM)
And staggering collection means you keep posties busy all day.
But they all have to be emptied after 17:30 because they all say this is the last collection time - it's not like it was when several collection times were given on each box.
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 24 2011, 02:59 PM
QUOTE (blackdog @ Aug 24 2011, 02:49 PM)
But they all have to be emptied after 17:30 because they all say this is the last collection time
It's the last collection time to catch today's date as a posting date. If the post office happens to do it late, that is up to them. You do seem to be getting hot under the collar for the sake of barely a handful of journeys in the town centre.
Posted by: On the edge Aug 24 2011, 08:42 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 24 2011, 02:11 PM)
Why a cop-out? Have you not ever use a figure of speech? We're watching you from now on!
By-the-way: what is a 'bureaucratically correct expression'?
By-the-way: what is a 'bureaucratically correct expression'?
Of course I do - that's why I noticed this one. In the commercial world we don't believe our own publicity though! The Council sold the really unnecessary repaving of the town centre to the public on the perception that it would be pedestrian free. Since then (because they are too lily livered to challenge all the exemptions) they've been claiming the public have got it wrong - and its actually a road with restrictions. Come on lads - who ever came up with that one saw us coming. Must admit, I admire whoever it was who sold the idea to the Council - if ever they want a job; give me a call. NB - The Titanic wasn't an unsinkable ship - just a very safe one with exceptions.
Posted by: Andy Capp Aug 24 2011, 09:28 PM
QUOTE (On the edge @ Aug 24 2011, 09:42 PM)
Of course I do - that's why I noticed this one. In the commercial world we don't believe our own publicity though! The Council sold the really unnecessary repaving of the town centre to the public on the perception that it would be pedestrian free.
Give it a few more years and it might be!
Posted by: On the edge Aug 24 2011, 09:31 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 24 2011, 10:28 PM)
Give it a few more years and it might be!
oh - b*****!! well spotted,
Posted by: blackdog Aug 25 2011, 01:58 PM
QUOTE (Andy Capp @ Aug 24 2011, 03:59 PM)
It's the last collection time to catch today's date as a posting date. If the post office happens to do it late, that is up to them. You do seem to be getting hot under the collar for the sake of barely a handful of journeys in the town centre.
I don't give a **** if they collect late - indeed I expect them to. It the handful of unnecessary journeys through the town centre during 'pedestrian' hours that I want to see stopped.
Powered by Invision Power Board (http://www.invisionboard.com)
© Invision Power Services (http://www.invisionpower.com)