先日、東京で世田谷区内のある郵便局へ行ったところ、ジュースを出してくれました。五〇歳前後と思われるその女性に、これはどういう意味なのかお聞きしたところ、客へのサービスとのことです。
ん！？サービス！？……私は一瞬ことばにつまったあと「もっと本質的なサービスがあるはずですがね」と言ったものの、彼女に責任のある問題ではないので、それ以上の意地悪質問はやめました。というのは、①こんな「本質的」事件があったからです。
この「ジュース」のときから3ヵ月ほど前になりますが、同じ郵便局へ行ったとき、たまたまガラス棚の中に「ストックブック」と書かれた札とともに切手入れ帳の見本があるのに気づきました。しかし鍵がかかっているので、手にして実物を調べることはできません。近くにいた職員の一人に、これを買いたいむねを告げると、奥から別の一冊をもってきてくれました。
なぜこれが欲しかったかというと、使う切手を保存するさい、種類別に整理してあると、そのときどきに必要な切手をさがしやすいし、汚れも防ぎやすいからです。以前ある弁護士事務所を訪ねたとき、そのような切手分類保存帳を見て「これは俺も買っておこう」と思っていたのでした。
で、さっそく買って帰り、雑然と袋にはいっている自宅の切手を種類別に分けて入れようとしたところ、どうも勝手が違うんですね。つまり出し入れが非常に面倒なのです。よくよく見ると、これは記念切手を保存するための、切手の趣味人たちが使うアルバムらしい。実用切手のためには全く不便です。「ストックブック」といえば記念切手用だけのことを意味するのか、私はよく知りませんけれど、ともかくこれでは使い道がありません。仕方がないので、郵便局へ返しに行きました。実用のためのものと交換してほしい。もしそれがないのであれば引きとってほしい。
ところが、窓口の人は②妙な態度なのですね。実用のためのものはないし、いったん売ったものはひきとれない、と。もちろん使わなかったので新品のままですし、なんの欠陥もありません。「そんなバカな……」と、私は少々声をあららげました。すると窓口の彼氏は奥から別の人を呼び、その人は私を局内の別室へつれていきました。郵便課長とのことです。そこで改めて、これはひきとれないと主張します。私も言いました。一般の商店ではこんなバカなことは考えられない。たとえば文具店でこの種のものを買った場合、目的が違えば交換してくれるし、なければ引きとってくれる。（中略）
課長は言いました——「いま会計のところへ行って聞いてきましたが、やっぱりダメだそうです。
会計がどう言おうと、そんなものはますます官僚主義の正体を示すだけのこと、何の弁解にもなりません。それによって私の抗議が変わるわけでもありません。
AI translation, cross-checked between two models.
The other day, when I went to a post office in Setagaya Ward, Tokyo, they served me some juice. I asked the woman, who appeared to be around fifty, what this was supposed to mean, and she told me it was a service for customers.
Huh!?？ Service!?...？…… I was momentarily at a loss for words, then said, “Surely there must be a more fundamental kind of service,” but since this was not an issue for which she was responsible, I stopped asking any further unpleasant questions. The reason was that the following rather “fundamental” incident had occurred.
About three months before the “juice” incident, when I visited the same post office, I happened to notice a sample stamp album in a glass display case beside a sign reading “stock book.” However, because the case was locked, I could not pick it up and examine the actual item. When I told a nearby employee that I wanted to buy one, the employee brought another copy from the back.
I wanted it because, when storing stamps for everyday use, arranging them by type would make it easier to find whichever stamp I needed at the time and would also help keep them clean. I had once seen such a stamp-sorting and storage album when visiting a lawyer’s office and had thought, “I should buy one of these too.”
So I bought it and took it home, but when I tried to sort the stamps that were jumbled together in a bag and put them into the album by type, I found that it did not work quite as I had expected. In other words, putting stamps in and taking them out was extremely troublesome. On closer inspection, it appeared to be an album for preserving commemorative stamps, used by stamp collectors. It was completely impractical for stamps intended for everyday use. I do not know whether the term “stock book” refers exclusively to something for commemorative stamps, but in any case this one was of no practical use to me. With no other choice, I took it back to the post office. I wanted them to exchange it for one intended for practical use. If they did not have such a product, I wanted them to take this one back.
However, the person at the counter reacted in a rather strange way. They said that there was no version for practical use and that once an item had been sold, it could not be taken back. Of course, I had never used it, so it was still brand new and had no defects whatsoever. “That’s ridiculous...” I said, raising my voice a little. The man at the counter then called someone else from the back, and that person took me to another room inside the post office. He was the head of the postal section. There, he once again insisted that they could not take the item back. I stated my position as well. Something this absurd would be unthinkable in an ordinary store. For example, if you bought this sort of item at a stationery store and found that it did not suit your intended purpose, they would exchange it, and if they had nothing suitable, they would take it back. (Passage omitted)
The section chief said, “I just went to ask the accounting department, but they say it still cannot be done.”
Whatever the accounting department might say, it merely exposes the true nature of bureaucracy all the more clearly and provides no justification whatsoever. Nor does it change my objection in any way.
Comments