If you really thought it was the driver, I'd make a formal complaint.
Joe, you're confusing me with someone else. I didn't say it was the driver. I lump everyone involved with transporting a gun into "shipping gorillas". Nowhere did I single out the driver as the problem.
If all of your damaged rifles were UPS, I'd still make a formal complaint.
If filing more than one complaint flags me as a problem rather than the people handling the package, which aren't a problem somehow??, UPS has a serious problem.
The most likely place for a damage is on the belts. If a long package is caught in a turn and it gets wedged in place, it gets a lot of pressure on it.
UPS has a problem with machinery design damaging packages and yet if I file a claim I am a problem customer? A company that adopts a "customer is the problem" attitude usually pays the price at some point for that fallacy. I know my customers aren't my problem, they're my solution.
I understand the handlers are overworked. They handle too many packages in too short a time, and the belt keeps moving even when you need to scratch your ass. I understand that the weight of a package isn't the #1 criteria used for determining where it's placed in the load, so heavy objects necessarily end up on top of more fragile objects. I hear ya Joe.
BUUUUUUTTTTT, that's not our problem. We pay for handlers to move an item from point A to B, and we expect it to arrived unmangled, which is completely reasonable. The USPS put a forklift thru a Sako for me, then denied the claim. I guess that's my fault?
It's also reasonable for you to be frustrated with the lack of padding and support packages are sent with, but ultimately, those are the conditions of the deal, and UPS has to deal with them, as the contractor hired to perform the job. I am a contractor and I deal with real conditions, as they are, to produce the finished product my customers need. I have problems in my processes if I can't somehow produce the desired results. Anything else is just excuses. I'm hired to
solve a problem, not
create one.
Making excuses about why it's ok to damage packages or how it happens, "because the handler in the hub only makes $10 an hour and will be gone in two months anyway", is not a healthy outlook. It reveals that someone somewhere has lost sight of the customer.
In a way, it reminds me of my wife's situation. Way too few people performing way too much work. Stress breakdowns, injuries, meltdowns, turnover. This is the Fed. gov BTW. Are the working conditions the clients fault, so we should yell at them when they need help?
Or are working conditions managements fault? (In this case Congress controls the purse strings, so it's a little different than "management", but you get the idea)
I just believe ultimately, that management must find better solutions to prevent this kind of damage, or they need to put the customers first and pay the claims when they occur.
In my experience, neither is happening at the expense to their customers, and they're ok with it.
I'm not.
