IS THE POST OFFICE EFFICIENT?
[To the Editor of the SvEcTivron.] Sia,—Under the above title appeared an article in your issue dated December 26th, 1931. The smug complacency of this article is exasperating. To begin with : ask anyone you meet, as I have done to-day, what the Post Office stands for, and you will receive hi answer, as I did : " Letters, of course." Your contributor dismisses the subject of letters with a contemp- tuous wave of the pen.
If I had received from any grocer or baker the bad service I have suffered from at the hands of the Post Office, I should long ago have withdrawn my custom. There is no choice about the sending of letters. But your contributor claims that most complaints are about the telephone service. If he would know why there are not more complaints about letters, the reason is quickly given : it is—anybody who has once had reason to complain about some undelivered letter, who has had to fill in answers to-futile questions in the complaint form, knows by sad experience that it is not worth while.--
I am, Sir, &c., -
Previous page
