Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
The Gaffer's Philosophy:
Part 157: Post Office Again:
June 6, 2005:
I recently receive the email missive below from a visitor to my website. It again illustrates the ongoing degeneration of our USPS. My reply to this woman follows her email.
Good Afternoon:
I came across your essay #100 - "Civil Service" and
wish to take your story a few steps further. Several years ago,
around 1984, I too was victim to mail tampering and ultimately
had to get a post office box from the US Postal Service. Over
the years I went from the original post office box that was close
to my home, to one that was closer to my workplace. This change
took place around 1990. Recently (November,
2005), I decided to get a post office box closer to my new home
to use for my personal and home business mail. At the time that
I filled out the application they asked me for two forms of identification
(one with a picture) which I meekly submitted.
Without going into too much detail, back in 1984, I set up some
trust funds for my children and the paper that comes in from these
funds come addressed to the post office box like this:
Ms X, TTE
U/A DTD 10/29/84
by Kidlet #1 Name
P O Box ####
Midway City, CA #####-####
Because the other name is in the address, the post office personnel
are demanding that I provide two forms of identification for this
individual or they will return the mail to the sender as "unknown
addressee". What seems to have failed to penetrate the thinking
process of these individuals is that this is a legitimate communication
to me as the trustee and has nothing to do with the name or lack
thereof of the beneficiary.
Is there a remedy for this? I am not sure. It seems to me that
I am facing a case of discrimination because I am pretty sure
that large companies who have post office boxes are not required
to provide two pieces of identification (one with photo) for each
and every employee who receives mail at the business's post office
box. The privacy
argument does not seem to fly with them because they fall back
on some obscure new postal regulation that they cannot produce
or even name that says that this is an anti terrorism requirement.
Any thoughts?
Ms. X:
Dear Ms. X:
Thanks for your email about the ongoing dishonest of the USPS. You may find my reply a bit more than you expected. That is because I intend to use it as part of some future essays, without identifying you of course. In a similar situation I also receive mail to my PO box with more than one name in the address. So far, these have been delivered as they should be. However, I have had other cases of these curs returning my mail to the sender on some other completely dishonest pretext. I am convinced what happened to me in those cases was deliberate, malicious, and extra legal. I suspect what is being done to you is of a similar nature. However, even with an attorney, proving such a contention is another matter. I suspect you will find they did not put any of their threats against you in writing. That makes it a he said - she said game. Those are precisely the kinds of game skills bureaucrats in any enterprise have honed to a fine edge. They create the fights and they know how to win them.
As to what I have done about this ongoing dishonest, I wrote about this in another essay on the Wesoomi Forum called "Abandon the Post Office." I have found this is entirely possible for me. I suspect it is for you too. I urge you to read the essay. I think you will find, as I did, that you do not need the Post Office. There is nothing they do for you that cannot be done less costly and more reliably through some other means. You do not have to accept their indolence and dishonesty. It simply takes some initial effort to make the break. Then you can tie up the PO Box to handle the occasional fluke and unimportant communications like junk mail. The USPS is very good at delivering that.
Now, to another point. You said you came across my essay on Civil Service. From that I get that you discovered it somewhat by accident. I also suspect you read that one essay, which is one of several hundred, without looking further into my work or trying to discover what I am about. I regret that. I have a lot more to offer than that one essay. At the very least, I would urge you to revisit my website and read two other essays. These essays are accessible through the Site Links frame. The names are "A Message to Simpletons" and "About Groundswell." These are encapsulated forms of what I am about and what I am trying to do.
I will continue this them next week.
Back to Gaffer's Philosophy
Archives.
|
|
|
|