Email response from Canada Post, May 27th
I’ve had the following response from Canada Post. My reply is below it.
Subject: RE: Airport Kiosk
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:39:40 -0400
From: <DELETED>
To: “Save the APO”Dear Craig,
I will do my best to provide context to the upcoming changes at the
kiosk. For several years, there have been numerous issues with
delivering mail to the kiosk that range from incorrect addressing to
unauthorized business/personal use of the boxes. My understanding is
that there have been attempts to rectify these problems, but frankly, it
has only been in the last year that we have been able to develop a
relationship with representatives of the YVR authority that is allowing
us to finally address the problems.To begin, the boxes within the kiosk are outdated and are no longer
worth servicing. On June 1, the Corporation is replacing the old
equipment with new Community Mail Boxes (CMB) configured to provide
improved mail delivery service. The new CMBs have been installed.
These are being inspected today, and keys will be provided to the box
holders who are remaining at the site. The old equipment will not be
dismantled until the week of June 8. We have had discussions with YVR
about the potential of relocating the kiosk to a more suitable site;
however, due to the ongoing construction it is not feasible at this time
to identify another location.As part of the Corporation’s business improvements, a new system has
been developed to capture addresses in the country. As a result,
addressing information at the kiosk must be changed. During the week of
either March 16 or 23, the Corporation delivered a letter to each box
holder advising them of the upcoming changes. There were 15 customers
who were using a box at the kiosk, but should have been located at
another CMB site at the YVR. These customers have been reassigned.
There were another 12 customers that were not entitled to a free mode of
delivery at the YVR and have been advised to arrange for a convenience
box located in the postal outlet at the YVR or another postal outlet.
All customers are being given six months of free redirection service.
This is ample time for customers to notify their correspondents of their
new mailing address. I am not certain which category you fall in;
however, I am assuming that you are a convenience box holder. As such,
if you have not arranged for alternate delivery (either return to your
free mode of delivery, or rent a convenience box at a Retail Postal
Outlet) and completed the Change of Address Form, then I will make
arrangements to have your mail held for pick up at the Richmond Delivery
Centre for a period of 10 days.I hope this addresses your concerns. Please do not hesitate to contact
me should you wish to discuss this further. If you would like
additional information regarding convenience box rentals at the YVR or
in the Richmond area, please contact Kelvin Tung at 604.482.4030.Regards,
Here’s my reply:
Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 12:00:33 -0700
To: <DELETED>
From: Save the APO
Subject: RE: Airport KioskHi Xxxxx,
Thanks for your reply. Let me see if I can summarise it and offer you some feedback which I hope you will find useful. However, the fact remains that Canada Post has carried out this change with almost complete disregard for its customers and, to make matters worse, has done so by providing a bare minimum amount of notice such that here we are two business days before the closure of the Airport Postal Outlet frantically trying to come to an understanding of each other’s positions.
1) “For several years, there have been numerous issues with delivering mail to the kiosk that range from incorrect addressing to unauthorized business/personal use of the boxes.”
I assume that Canada Post must deal with large volumes of incorrectly-addressed mail every day. This hardly seems like a valid reason to shut down one particular postal outlet and penalise those who, obviously, receive properly-addressed mail. Please explain what “unauthorized business/personal use of the boxes” is. What other use besides personal or business would there be? And if some use is unauthorised, why has Canada Post been allowing it? I don’t recall being asked, when I rented my box 18 years ago, what kind of use I was planning to make of the box, and I currently receive mail addressed both to me personally and to my company. Not once in 18 years has my use of the box been challenged.
2) “… it has only been in the last year that we have been able to develop a relationship with representatives of the YVR authority that is allowing us to finally address the problems.”
I am shocked to hear that, since the Vancouver Airport Authority came into being in 1992, it has taken these two organisations almost 17 years to form a working relationship. But again, I don’t see why this failure must mean that Canada Post’s customers must suffer.
3) “To begin, the boxes within the kiosk are outdated and are no longer worth servicing.”
My box works perfectly well, and I’m offended that Canada Post considers that it is not worth servicing, despite the fact that I’ve been paying Canada Post my hard-earned money for it to be serviced over the last 18 years.
4) “On June 1, the Corporation is replacing the old equipment with new Community Mail Boxes (CMB) configured to provide improved mail delivery service.”
Perhaps you could define “improved mail delivery service”. While there have been issues with the overall management of the APO over the years, I have not had a complaint about the mail delivery service and fail to see how it can be improved. People send me mail, it arrives in my box in a reasonable amount of time, and I pick it up. How can that process be improved, especially by completely eliminating the process? Please explain that logic.
5) “We have had discussions with YVR about the potential of relocating the kiosk to a more suitable site; however, due to the ongoing construction it is not feasible at this time to identify another location.”
I appreciate that construction might cause a problem with selecting a new site for the kiosk “at this time”. However, if Canada Post was committed to meeting the needs of its customers rather than cavalierly tossing some of them aside, some effort would be made to find a temporary location until a permanent one can be found. As the old saying goes, “Where there’s a will, there’s a way.” I am not qualified to negotiate leases on behalf of Canada Post and I am not aware of vacancy rates at the airport. However, there are several multi-tenant buildings at the airport, and the last time I drove past, the old cargo buildings in the 4000 block of Miller Road were virtual ghost towns, indicating the probable availability of cheap short-term leases for a temporary solution.
6) “As part of the Corporation’s business improvements, a new system has been developed to capture addresses in the country.”
I presume that this is the “modernisation project” that I have been told about that will “not be able to take PO boxes anymore”. (This quote is from the same Canada Post manager who calls this new system “stupid” and says, “It absolutely blows my mind.”) Again, whatever the reasoning behind this, it seems to completely disregard the wishes of Canada Post’s customers.
7) “There were 15 customers who were using a box at the kiosk, but should have been located at another CMB site at the YVR.”
Does this include Air Canada (boxes 23020, 23030, 23038, 23040 and 23200) and the Vancouver Airport Authority (box 23750)? What are your plans for delivery to these customers and will they be required to change their address to stop using their APO box numbers?
8) “There were another 12 customers that were not entitled to a free mode of delivery at the YVR and have been advised to arrange for a convenience box located in the postal outlet at the YVR or another postal outlet.”
I would replace the word “advised” with “told” or “ordered”. I would also emphasise that these customers are paying for their boxes, contrary to your implication that they are receiving free delivery. Additionally, if I wanted a mail box at a different location, I wouldn’t be a customer at the APO. On top of that, I chose the APO in 1991 because I expected it to be stable in contrast to mail boxes sold by private companies or mail boxes provided by retail postal outlets.
9) “All customers are being given six months of free redirection service. This is ample time for customers to notify their correspondents of their new mailing address.”
I agree that six months is ample time to inform correspondents of a new address. My point is that I should *not* have to inform anyone of a new address. That was the whole point behind getting a mail box from a stable company (Canada Post) in a stable location (Vancouver Airport). Additionally, there has been no mention of a refund for the time I will lose having paid for the rental of my box until October 1st.
You have failed to convince me that Canada Post’s action to close the APO and abandon some of its customers is justified. I am asking you to reconsider this decision. I am sure that the apparent low usage of the APO is the result of a concerted effort by Canada Post to make that a reality. If Canada Post engaged in a positive marketing campaign rather than a negative “anti-marketing” campaign — evidenced by the difficulty I had in renewing my mail box last year and being strongly advised by two managers to get a box elsewhere (one even telling me that it’s “the proper way”, whatever that’s supposed to mean) — then I’m sure that the APO could be a benefit to Canada Post’s bottom line.
If you, at your level in Canada Post’s hierarchy, are not able to revisit this decision, then I would ask that you refer me to someone else that can and send me that person’s contact information.
Given the looming deadline, I would appreciate it if you could respond to my points above with haste, preferable early this afternoon. Thank-you.
Craig Hartnett
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.