Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
True story....
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="soberups" data-source="post: 559052" data-attributes="member: 14668"><p>When we were on paper 50-liners, we <em>never</em> recorded a full 1Z label, we <em>only</em> wrote the 6-digit shipper# plus an ID. <em>That</em> is what the allowance was supposedly based upon. </p><p> </p><p>Obviously, it is quicker to scan a 1Z label than it would be to physically write down all 18 digits...<u>but since we never wrote all 18 digits in the first place, the comparison is meaningless</u>. The only <em>relevant</em> comparison would be DIAD vs. recording 6 digits on a 50-liner.</p><p> </p><p>In the late 80's/early 90's before DIAD we couldnt scan 1Z labels so we filled in the consignee info in the space provided, detached the perforated section, and turned them in at night. <u>There was never any additional time allowed for this. </u></p><p> </p><p>Fast forward a few years to the early 2000's, we are all on DIAD and PLD/EDD is implemented. All packages have full 1z labels. I.E comes along and screws us out of something like 20 seconds <em>per package </em>by falsely claiming that we had been given "too much" of an allowance in the first place.</p><p> </p><p>That "allowance"...was based upon writing 6 digits on a 50-liner, <em>not</em> on writing the entire 1z label. And there is <em>not </em>a 20 second difference between scanning a package vs. writing 6 digits.</p><p> </p><p>We got screwed, plain and simple.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="soberups, post: 559052, member: 14668"] When we were on paper 50-liners, we [I]never[/I] recorded a full 1Z label, we [I]only[/I] wrote the 6-digit shipper# plus an ID. [I]That[/I] is what the allowance was supposedly based upon. Obviously, it is quicker to scan a 1Z label than it would be to physically write down all 18 digits...[U]but since we never wrote all 18 digits in the first place, the comparison is meaningless[/U]. The only [I]relevant[/I] comparison would be DIAD vs. recording 6 digits on a 50-liner. In the late 80's/early 90's before DIAD we couldnt scan 1Z labels so we filled in the consignee info in the space provided, detached the perforated section, and turned them in at night. [U]There was never any additional time allowed for this. [/U] Fast forward a few years to the early 2000's, we are all on DIAD and PLD/EDD is implemented. All packages have full 1z labels. I.E comes along and screws us out of something like 20 seconds [I]per package [/I]by falsely claiming that we had been given "too much" of an allowance in the first place. That "allowance"...was based upon writing 6 digits on a 50-liner, [I]not[/I] on writing the entire 1z label. And there is [I]not [/I]a 20 second difference between scanning a package vs. writing 6 digits. We got screwed, plain and simple. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe UPS Forum
UPS Discussions
True story....
Top