T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
199.1 | | HOLST::DEROSA | Well... here we are. | Fri Oct 10 1986 09:06 | 5 |
| That's probably true, and makes sense. On the other hand, I don't
think they check the contents of envelopes as a matter of policy.
Sounds like they checked yours because there was an oddly-shaped
object inside of it. If you had mailed someone a personal letter,
for example, I doubt the same thing would have happened.
|
199.2 | I'd like to see the policy | BETHEL::THOMPSON | Noter of the LoST ARK | Fri Oct 10 1986 10:07 | 9 |
| The mailroom here says if its not paper or media it gets checked.
A DEC product t-shirt was mailed to me and was never seen again.
They tell me policy is to trash anything 'personal'. Sounds unethical
to me.
BTW, next time I'll expence a $20 drive to pick up a $4 shirt. I
guess if they want to save pennies on mail I'l help out.
Alfred
|
199.3 | t-shirt, no problem | TIGEMS::ARNOLD | Are we having fun yet? | Fri Oct 10 1986 10:18 | 4 |
| About a month ago, I received my "Building the Legend" tradeshow
T-shirt thru inter-office mail, no fuss, no muss.
Jon
|
199.4 | More people throwing their weight around | DENTON::AMARTIN | Alan H. Martin | Fri Oct 10 1986 10:55 | 8 |
| The MR mailroom sent a memo around a couple of years ago telling people
to stop receiving professional journals at work, and threatening to
throw them out. This was around the same time that Jack Smith sent
around the memo which stated that every employee was responsible for
taking at least two weeks of courses per year to stay technically current.
I never lost any journals in the mail, which is lucky for the mailroom.
/AHM
|
199.5 | Wolf in sheeps clothing | TMCUK2::BANKS | Rule Britannia | Fri Oct 10 1986 13:27 | 6 |
| No problem, you can send anything anywhere in the world -
disguised as a VMS 4.4 Documentation set:-))
dcb
|
199.6 | Satisfied? | JOET::JOET | | Fri Oct 10 1986 13:57 | 5 |
| An envelope with a couple of floppies in it I got a few weeks ago from
a third party firm had been opened by the mailroom. I have no idea what
they expected to see or whether or not they saw it.
-joet
|
199.7 | My surprise | CARLIN::ROSENTHAL | Out_To_Break_Murphy's_Law | Fri Oct 10 1986 15:41 | 12 |
|
The Stow mailroom apparently doesn't check too carefully (if
at all.)
A few weeks ago, I received something in an interoffice envelope
that I (in_a_way) wish had been intercepted. I had posted a
question in the Christian notesfile (I'm Jewish) and someone
reading that conference saw fit to interoffice-mail me a Holy
Bible... It was a bit unnerving on a Monday morning... especially
when that person didn't have the wherewithal to identify them-
selves...
|
199.8 | What's customary may not be right | HUMAN::CONKLIN | Peter Conklin | Fri Oct 10 1986 17:11 | 3 |
| There are certainly some reasonable limits. For example, you should
expect to be able to send objects through inter-office mail overseas.
This would undoubtedly violate various customs laws.
|
199.10 | Yo! Hands off my Tupperware! | ODIXIE::GRADY | Tim Grady | Sun Oct 12 1986 23:32 | 21 |
| Actually, I had heard some time ago of a policy intended to discourage
personal use of interoffice mail. Friends of ours moved to Valbonne,
and, there being no such product apparently available over there,
asked that we send them certain pieces of plastic kitchen-type stuff
(OK, it was Tupperware), but not through interoffice mail. There
had been a crack down on shipping personal items that way, for obvious
reasons. So...we had another friend smuggle it instead. Sounds
pretty devious, huh?
Remember, as much as we are accustomed to privacy in our mail,
interoffice mail is NOT private. No law protects you from some
Dudley DoRight rifling your interoffice mail in the name of policy.
On the other hand, he could be fired if he opens and reads confidential
company information (such as a salary review, etc), that he had
no right to see. It would be nice if this were a clear cut issue,
but it's not. Dudley had better watch out too! (and not just from
people named Guido, with no neck and no forehead).
tim
|
199.11 | sounds shakey | BPOV09::MIOLA | Phantom | Mon Oct 13 1986 09:28 | 13 |
| Somehow this seems to be a problem.
Depending on what is opened, and what is read.
There is some Employee confidential paperwork that is sent thru
the mail, as well as other confidential material. I have never
been notified that inter-office mail is being monitored, and have
often sent confidential info out this way. (marked as such).
I can't believe that the mail room has been legally given authority
to open and monitor people's mail, it sounds more like some over
ambitious mailroom workers or management.
|
199.12 | Confidential mailings | SKYLAB::FISHER | Burns Fisher 381-1466, ZKO1-1/D42 | Mon Oct 13 1986 11:19 | 7 |
| Confidential mail (both Personnel Confidential and Restricted
Distribution) are supposed to be sent in two envelopes; the outer
one is to bear no information about the confidentiallity of the
item; the inner one is to be sealed. (I think I got this all right;
I read the policy a couple years ago).
Burns
|
199.13 | | TIPPLE::CRAPAROTTA | Uh..Oh I'm in trouble Again | Mon Oct 13 1986 12:06 | 24 |
| Someone thought my note was a little offensive so I did a little
editing. Since I can't find any Regulations on I guess it up to
the person. I really wouldn't use INTEROFFICE anyway as it so slow
and screwed up. I realize we're not in the MAIL business.
<<< HUMAN::ARKD$:[NOTES$LIBRARY]DIGITAL.NOTE;1 >>>
-< The DEC way of working >-
================================================================================
Note 199.9 Interoffice mail not for personal use? 9 of 12
TIPPLE::CRAPAROTTA "Uh..Oh I'm in trouble Again" 10 lines 12-OCT-1986 22:07
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If I caught someone in the Mail Room going thru my mail I'd *&^%(
*^&/(^# fingers!!! That'd be one way to stop him/her... The mail is
for me and should not be checked by them, unless they TRULY feel
it's threating to them. If they want to be there for the GRAND OPENING
so be it...
Joe
PS: I could always get NUNZIO the (*&^%* to talk to them!!
:-)
|
199.14 | O(ld, Old, War Story | INK::KALLIS | | Mon Oct 13 1986 15:37 | 12 |
| Once, before I was informed that interoffice mail shouldn't be used
for such things, I tried to send a friend of mine a book (_In Search
of Ancient Astronomies_, a hardcover, for completists).
He never got it.
I never got it back.
Over the years, I wonder whatever happened to it.
Steve Kallis, Jr.
|
199.15 | | AKOV68::BOYAJIAN | The Mad Armenian | Tue Oct 14 1986 02:20 | 22 |
| I've sent books through i/o mail before and got them back without
problem. I've also sent and received cassette tapes without problem.
On the other hand, a piece of personal mail had been opened by the
mail room. It was from an overseas DEC site being mailed via postal
service to my office. The ostensible reason it was opened was that
my mailstop was not on the envelope and it was opened to see if
my mailstop was written anywhere inside [this explanation was *written*
on the missive sent in the envelope, if you can believe it]. I com-
plained rather vehemently to the person in charge of the mailroom
(this was at PKO), and she agreed that it was totally out of line
and would try and track down who did it.
There was some discussion about this a couple of years ago in
another notesfile. Presumably, the reason that the mailroom checks
packages was because some people in "high security" sites were
sending things through i/o mail to friends at "low security" sites,
who'd smuggle the things out. My impression from that discussion
was that the mailrooms didn't check *every* package, but only
spot-checked packages.
--- jerry
|
199.16 | Right to Privacy is not simple... | ODIXIE::GRADY | tim grady | Tue Oct 14 1986 10:20 | 22 |
| I agree that opening interoffice mail to check for personal usage
is a sham, but I think the policy is a bit too fuzzy to really prevent
such activity. I would not want to be in the mail room where packages
were being opened!
The 'right to privacy', if it really exists, is in question once
again. Physical mail, like electronic mail, is also subject to
the risks of 'casual export' of confidential materials...accidentally
or unknowingly shipping proprietary or sensitive materials out of
a nominally secure environment. How does a company prevent this,
and yet maintain the so-called 'right to privacy'? It's not a simple
question. I agree, though, they shouldn't rifle your mail just
because it rattles when you shake it.
BTW...I used the word 'smuggle' in .10, however in a rhetorical
sense. It was mentioned that I should clarify that, lest people
think any real laws were broken. They weren't. I appreciate the
concern for my legal exposure on that point.
tim
|
199.17 | Toss out the baby but keep the wash water | LSTARK::THOMPSON | Noter of the LoST ARK | Tue Oct 14 1986 14:05 | 6 |
| It's somewhat ironic that the t-shirt that was approved by a
VP as a valid business item was 'trashed' (according to 'policy'
I was told) but interoffice mail yesterday delivered a chain
letter with no problem. It seems as though if it's paper its ok.
Alfred
|
199.18 | Stop this throwing away of things! | COVERT::COVERT | John Covert | Wed Oct 15 1986 01:15 | 23 |
| I'm not sure I have the time to fight this battle, but I think someone should
go to the "Corporate Mail Manager" in Virginia Road and get him to *stop* this
practice of throwing things away -- and stop it company-wide!
Alfred has already shown that there are cases where valid business items have
been discarded by an overzealous mailroom employee.
In no case should things be thrown away. The sender (or his manager), or, if
unknown, the recipient, should be called to explain the item. If it's personal,
the sender (*not* the recipient) should be given a slight slap on the wrist,
or more, if it's a repeat offense.
As usual, different parts of DEC have different rules: A few years ago, a
friend of mine in Germany asked me for my mailstop to send me and my wife
Christmas presents. I insisted that he not use company mail for this, but he
informed me that DEC Germany had authorized the use of their mailroom for
sending (specifically) Christmas presents.
The stuff never arrived, though the Munich mailroom, still insisting that they
had the right to decide that their employees could do this, was able to ascer-
tain that the items had been delivered as far as Northboro.
/john
|
199.19 | CHECK NRO4 | HARPO::CACCIA | | Wed Oct 15 1986 15:07 | 16 |
|
If you know that your mail has to go through the regional mail room
at Northboro and you have not gotten what you think you should have
or if some one has not gotten what you sent them, go to NRO4 and
talk to the mail room supervisor. They can generally take you right
to a bin that jas your stuff in it and will return it to you with
a tounge lashing about using the I/O mail for personal goods.
I tried to send a book to Canada and got a note (probably after
the book had been read) that stuff going out country like that has
to go through the regular mail because of customs regulations. Enen
DEC parts have to have a bill of lading and import papers and all
that. Forms and company corespondence are OK.
|
199.20 | Wanted Field Investigator | LSTARK::THOMPSON | Noter of the LoST ARK | Wed Oct 15 1986 17:39 | 5 |
| Is there anyone out there in or near NRO4 who'd be willing
to check the status of VAXcluster Console t-shirts that no
in Salem has received? Send mail or call.
Alfred
|
199.21 | a name | PUFFIN::OGRADY | George, ISWS 297-4183 | Thu Oct 16 1986 09:13 | 8 |
|
Alfred,
The mailroom is in NR3 and Sara Cormier is the operations manager,
234-4533.
GOG
|
199.22 | See what happens when I get a name :-) | LSTARK::THOMPSON | Noter of the LoST ARK | Thu Oct 16 1986 16:52 | 18 |
| I called NR3. What a difference in policy between there and some other
unnamed mail rooms.
Here is what I was told.
1. DIGITAL promotional items (like my t-shirt) are assumed to be
legitimate. They're looking into what could have happened to
it.
2. Mail judged to be personal use is not trashed. Rather a message
is sent to the addressee telling them where there item is so
they can make arrangements to pick it up. All items are kept for
at least a year.
I did not ask but it looks like other mail rooms may be making
up their own rules on their own.
Alfred
|
199.23 | A side note/comment... | DRAGON::MCVAY | Pete McVay, VRO (Telecomm) | Tue Oct 21 1986 11:22 | 10 |
| Someone in our office lives in Maynard and has a street address
that is only one digit off from the Credit Union's address.
She regularly gets DCU mail which she forwards to them. However,
the Credit Union also regularly gets her mail. They puzzle over
it, since no one works there by that name, and eventually forward
it to her via Interplant mail.
She hasn't been hassled yet by the internal mail system. It
presents an interesting problem: the mail accidently enters DEC's
mail system through misrouting by the post office...
|
199.24 | | RDGENG::LESLIE | Andy `{o}^{o}' Leslie, CSSE, OSI. | Tue Oct 21 1986 12:18 | 12 |
| I recently received a 'flier' from a US company addressed to
Andy Leslie (UVO-7)
Digital Equipment
Maynard
Mass.
So I'm wondering if I can get my Byte delivered there. It'd be a
lot cheaper.
Andy
|
199.25 | how about personal UPS deliveries? | CADSYS::RICHARDSON | | Fri Nov 07 1986 13:51 | 20 |
| How about personal UPS deliveries at work? When I worked in MRO
I used to have things like mail-ordered camera equipment and stuff
delivered there, since I take a dim view of having the UPS people
leave it out on the driveway in the rain (they do not get signatures
anymore for things most of the time; though that wouldn't really
help since they stop delivering long before I get home anyhow);
I really don't know whose, if anyone's, insurance would cover things
that simply disappear or are runied by the weather. The delivery
people there let me know when the first couple of things showed
up upstairs, and I picked them up. Then they stopped notifying
me. After several UPS traces of "lost" stuff showed that it had
been delivered upsatirs, I went up there and made noise, and eventually
located everything. The delivery people told me in no uncertain
terms that personal UPS shipments were NOT to go to DEC; they claimed
that they had to pay a UPS charge for anything delivered there (news
to me; you certainly don't have to pay one to have your $1500 shipment
left laying out on your driveway). I really think that DEC ought
to allow this sort of thing as a convenience for employees, since
there isn't much alternative for most of us (especially if you have
no idea when a back-ordered item will turn up). What do you think?
|
199.26 | | CSSE32::PHILPOTT | CSSE/Lang. & Tools, ZK02-1/N71 | Fri Nov 07 1986 16:07 | 14 |
| The UPS deliveries for Southern NH are from a depot in Manchester.
Recently they imposed a policy that for deliveries to apartments they
would make one daytime attempt to deliver. If you aren't in (I never am)
they ring you in the evening and inform you that you have to drive to
the Manchester depot to collect the goods within a reasonable time or
they will return the goods to the sender.
If DEC will not allow me to have goods delivered to the office I have to
take a couple of hours off work to go and get them from Manchester.
It would seem that allowing what would only be a small number of
deliveries to the office would be a productivity gain...
/. Ian .\
|
199.27 | no to personal mail | REGENT::MERRILL | Glyph it up! | Sat Nov 08 1986 20:29 | 12 |
| Most companies do not let employees use the company as a PO BOX!
Suppose somebody ran a scam with the company as a drop?
I wonder what the cost per letter is via the mailroom anyway?
Sounds like a sensible policy save for the catch-22 that they cannot
tell if it's personal until after they accept delivery, then it's
too late to refust to accept it! [gee, that's probably what happened
to all my fan mail ... ]
Rick
Merrill
|