Strictly hypothetical...

[alexpgp]

So let's posit the following hypothetical situation.

In response to my routine question "Is there anything hazardous in the package?" that is asked of a customer who is dropping off a FedEx envelope, let's say I get the response, "Oh, just some anthrax powder."

When my head comes up wearing a face you don't ever want to see, the person says "Just kidding!"

Let's additionally hypothesize that this is said in front of witnesses.

[Poll #331273]It should be noted that right after the post-September-11 anthrax scare, we actually did have a client pull this stunt and ended up doing nothing... mostly.

Cheers...

Comments

[bandicoot.livejournal.com]

Keeping in mind that the question is basically stupid - nobody who was not completely disfunctional would ever admit to sending something hazardous - then:

Depending on how well you know this person and/or employer, I tend to go with the "put a scare into them" approach. In front of those witnesses, I'd advise them of the inapropriateness of their comment, and ask if they'd like to modify it, or if you should contact the Authorities. My feeling is, that approach deters basically honest people from putting their foot in it in the future. When I was growing up, that's what the cops did when you got out of line, and it worked just fine.

If you didn't know the person, then you'd CYA, which would undoubtedly be overreaction. But it would be CYA, if that is important.

So I couldn't check any of the choices ... ;)

[platofish.livejournal.com]

Interesting question.

Irrespective of 9/11 (either before or after) it seems to me that the question is totally legitimate (to prevent unwitting injury to postal workers). However, to the first approximation it does seem like a dumb question - similar to coming in from the rain, and being asked while you drip all over the floor 'so, its wet outside'. The answer is usually 'no, its glorious sunshine'.

Same thing, 'is this dangerous?'.....'no, its just anthrax'.

I doubt I go for the full blown cop thing, nor would I speak with the employer in case it precipitated a termination. But, under the circumstance (and especially after 9/11) it would be worth making the person aware that its a serious question, and more than likely the 'look' would have been enough.

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

Thanks for the response. Actually, the "put a scare into 'em" alternative sounds like about what I'd be inclined to do, as the first and third choices just don't make sense (not to mention not my style), and the second choice carries with it no guarantees, though it does come close to the goal.

Cheers...

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

It does seem dumb, until you realize that people like to send all sorts of things -- innocently -- through the mail (containers of hair spray, lithium batteries, bottles of stuff that turns out to be corrosive if the bottle breaks, etc.).

Recall that an airliner crashed in Florida several years ago because it was carrying some kind of oxygen source in the cargo hold.

Thanks for the comeback.

Cheers...

I'd refuse service, tell employee to sort it out with employer.

[daphnis.livejournal.com]

That sort of stupidity, especially coming so hard on the heels of the Towers and all, is endemic in this country now. We see so much blood and guts in our 'entertainment' choices that the lines between reality and 'dramatic licence' have been blurred, IMHO. We detach from tragedy at home and abroad because there's so little we can do to change things; I suppose that person had never been nailed by a personal tragedy a 'bolt out of the blue', and possibly couldn't see the threat as a serious one.

As agent for the shipping company, and with witnesses who could back up what you heard, I think having to take the package back to the employer and get a wigging from Boss, plus requiring an 'affidavit' from Boss _and_ employee as to the complete harmlessness of the package, would have spread the message far and wide. Especially in Pagosa Springs...

"Can you believe it? The shipping agency made us swear the package was harmless, or they wouldn't take it! No more joking from _my_ people...!" says Boss to Chamber of Commerce friends.

IMHO, of course!

[bookfoole.livejournal.com]

I'd say something like, "In these times we're not allowed to ignore something like this, even if it's a joke. Would you please open to the package in front of us? I'll help you repack it." If the balk, say "I'm required to take action on this unless I can inspect the contents, I have no choice in the matter."

You'll stop them from joking due to the annoyance factor, but you'll probably still keep the customer and you'll satisfy the spirit of the law by inspecting it. I would avoid sounding like I have any discretion in the matter --let them be mad at the Post Office, Govt., etc. --but not you.

thought

[fallensins.livejournal.com]

Now, yes this might seem a bit off the wall, but just for a little bit of a wild thought, think of this. Say someone does tell you its anthrax, nothing is done. And I can see why nothing would be done, cause people joke about it all the time. Yet, this time, it was anthrax. Person is eventually (maybe) arrested, and I can hear it now - but, I told them what I was shipping!! Interesting headline on that arrest.

[kf6gpe.livejournal.com]

bookfoole has a good point, actually.

I was pretty evenly torn between the first and the second alternative. My dad and mother own a UPS Store, and they've gotten things like this as a guy who tried to ship marijuana to New York City in a totally sealed and duct-taped address. The tip was the duct tape and the amount he listed for the insurance. Fortunately for my father and the D.A., he left his real name and return address... *sigh*.)

Sadly, that sort of thing just isn't funny anymore, and as much of a pain as it is, I suppose there have to be consequences. And, of couse, I don't see a "minimum intelligence requirement" and "respect for other people requirement" being set out for those who want to mail things...

[kf6gpe.livejournal.com]

Oh, geeze. I didn't mean to imply that I was surprised that bookfoole had a good point. What I meant was that I was pleased that it was a good point and I wished I'd thought of it, too! I'm sorry.

I'm going to go extract my foot from my mouth and play video games with my four-year old now. Excuse me.

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

The interpretation you clarified never entered my mind., actually.

Cheers...

Re: thought

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

That's probably one of the reasons for the utter lack of humor when it comes to remarks like that. Along the same lines, I've noticed that the flight safety briefing on airlines now include an explanation along the lines of "the cockpit is in the front of the aircraft, and you mustn't try to open the door up there," undoubtedly to deal with the buffoons (and likely Bad People) who would try to open the cockpit door with main force, saying they thought it was the door to the john.

Cheers...

Re: I'd refuse service, tell employee to sort it out with employer.

[alexpgp.livejournal.com]

Interesting suggestion.

Cheers...