US postal service struggles with Christmas deliveries in absence of better planning for COVID challenges

 

 

This year, the US postal service has to play Santa’s role for the thousands who would normally have travelled across states and cities to spend Christmas with their families.

 

However, it looks like the postal department had not planned for Christmas with the coronavirus. There have been reports of parcels getting delayed, mixed up, and some landing in different cities too.

 

The two packages that Brighton couple Sandra and William Brewer posted to their grandchildren in Rhode Island have not reached them as expected.

 

They had mailed the first one on December 10, so that it would reach its destination on Dec 14. Till date, there is no news of the parcel reaching Rhode Island.

 

The second package, mailed on December 14 on priority to make it reach Rhode Island on the 17th, has supposedly gone from Rochester to Springfield, then to Massachusetts, and finally has landed in Atlanta and was there until Tuesday.

 

“The big boxes are not getting through,” Sandra feels. “I’m hoping they ship it back north, but who knows? It’s very confusing,” William said.

 

In normal circumstances, the couple would have just driven down to Rode Island and delivered the packages, but it looks like this ‘Covid Christmas’ is dependent on the postal service.

 

The Brewers feel that the postal service was not prepared for the huge spike in the Christmas deliveries. They say that better and more hiring would have helped streamline the process. The USPS holiday newsroom is rampant with complains from irate customers on the delivery delays.

 

Source:


Follow us on Google news for more updates and News










Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


CWEB.com is not registered as an investment adviser with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. Rather, CWEB.com relies upon the “publisher’s exclusion” from the definition of investment adviser as provided under Section 202(a)(11) of the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 and corresponding state securities laws.

Full Disclaimer