[iggy_oi]

Originally Posted by TorqueDog

Your entire argument hinges on the assumption that a lack of discipline is evidence of employer consent; but that’s a logical leap, not a fact. Silence isn’t endorsement.

Unless you’re lying about your calls and the calls of others to Canada Post complaining about it and a lack of any action on their part to address it then it’s completely reasonable to state that the company consents to what they’re doing.

By that logic, any unenforced rule becomes void whether or not management is even aware, and employees bear no responsibility for knowingly ignoring it.

No. As I’ve previously stated if the company isn’t aware of it then it’s a completely different scenario. In this case you’ve made it quite clear that they are aware of it.

That’s not how accountability works.

Agreed. But that’s only because your previous statement was so far removed from what I’ve said and reality in general.

You said yourself that employees should follow direction unless there’s a safety issue. If an employee knows the policy -- follow customer delivery preferences, ie: deliver to the front door, back door, concierge, etc. -- and there's no explicit directive to do otherwise, then ignoring it is still a choice and a poor one.

Yes the employees should follow the direction of management. Your argument is that there is no way the company would direct the employees to not worry about the policy regarding special instructions. My argument is that their actions, or inaction, according to you suggests otherwise. Heck we don’t even know what their policy is but that’s a whole other discussion.

Management may be failing in enforcement, yes, but that doesn't absolve the employee of basic professional standards. Blame rests with both.

Again, despite all evidence indicating otherwise you’re assuming that Canada Post is telling their employees to follow all special instructions when that does not appear to be the case.

This is about basic expectations. If an employee is aware of a procedure and willfully ignores it, they’re not just a passive victim of lax enforcement -- they’re an active participant in delivering bad service.

If the company has given the direction to the employees to not worry about the special instructions under certain circumstances or for any reason really then the employee not doing what you want is them doing the job as directed. As a customer you don’t get to dictate how a business provides their service, only whether or not you want to use their service as they’ve decided to provide it.

I’m not saying the business not being upfront with their customers about how the service will be provided is a good thing. I’m just saying that you’re not really in a position to dictate how they run their business and if the employee is doing as they’re told then they’re not doing a bad job. The job they’re being paid to do is just providing a poor service. If they decide to be a hero by going against management’s direction and it results in delays/overtime they may be subject to discipline. I don’t think it’s fair to expect them to put their livelihood at risk because you think they should do things differently than how they’re directed by their employer. You’re welcome to disagree with that if you like but personally I think that would be a pretty unreasonable position to take.