Finding Answers

Sunday, 03 October 2010

You know what I like about the Twin Cities’ Marathon? Well, nothing actually. But you know what I don’t like? The fact that it bisects the city in half.

I commented about this on Facebook last year – when I went to work to get some overtime that Sunday, only to find I couldn’t get home (I waited in a parking lot).

Today, I somehow forgot about this vivisection of the city, and we tried to drive to Target which, unfortunately, means we have to cross Summit Avenue.

But Summit was closed.

My wife smartly thought up taking Ayd Mill Road, certainly one of the strangest roads I’ve ever driven on, but at least it goes under Summit instead of through it. The problem was, everybody else had the same idea. In time, though, we made it to Target.

Man, it’s too bad there’s not any parks – including an enormous regional park that stretches into Fort Snelling State Park and then up into Minneapolis – that the marathon could traverse. It’s so much better that they totally disrupt traffic over a several mile stretch for hours. Makes perfect sense.

Monday, 04 October 2010

Today I paid a visit to that time-sucker known as “The Department of Motor Vehicles.” If you ever have the displeasure of visiting the Maple Grove location, let me key you in on a few things: first, it’s set up like an airport terminal – you check in with someone at the front desk, who then prints out a number and tells you to have a seat. The seats are arranged theater style, so you can watch a muted TV screen that plays snippets of movies. I was privy to a fun flip-flopping between good vs. shitty films (Casablanca, then Goblet of Fire, then The Incredibles). Anyway, I usually like to see what number I have, and then gauge my wait based on what number they’re on (“Hmm…I’m number 83, and they’re on 71 right now…and there are 5 employees, so…”). But Maple Grove’s location rips this pleasure from me: I was number B128, but then they called D260. Then D261. Then A233. Then C119. I couldn’t detect a pattern.

Anyway, when my ‘number’ was finally called, I went up and told the guy I needed to renew my tabs. He started typing away and then pulled out new license plates.

As an aside: I also dislike new license plates. They’re a waste; the ones I have are just fine. Also, I was once detained by a cop for a half hour (on the way to a meeting as other congregation members passed me) because my new plates weren’t up (it’s a long story – ask me in person).

So I asked the DMV employee: “What determines if someone gets new plates, and not just the tabs?”

He said: “The computer tells me.”

I just kind of stared at the plates, not replying in any way. Detecting that I wasn’t happy with his answer, he added: “Well, it’s kind of like a 10/10 thing, you know? If you’re vehicle’s year plus age adds up to ten, then you get new plates.”

I nodded politely, but I’m fully flummoxed by this. Who wouldn’t add up to ten? Think about it: If your car is one year old, then that means it was made in ’09. So 1+9=10. Similarly, if your car is eight years old, then it was made in ’02. And 8+2=10. In my case, it’s 7+3=10. Who doesn’t add up to ten? I’m confused.

Tuesday, 05 October 2010

Today there was a “benefits fair” at my job, which means that representatives from our various benefit providers were on hand to answer questions and pass out swag. Delta Dental was there, Blue Cross was there, LifeWorks was there; the whole gang!

When I came up to the Unum table, I decided to ask the woman: “So how come, a few weeks ago when my daughter was born, I had to go through you guys to get my time off?”

I should probably explain that I had to call Unum last spring and tell them of Isla’s impending birth. They sent me five sheets of paper over the course of the next two months that all said the same thing: I was approved. Then, while I was on leave, I didn’t get my full pay when my paycheck arrived. I called Unum, but they said the problem was my company’s HR department. I called my HR department and (spoiler alert!) they said the problem was Unum. Long story short, all three paychecks I received while on leave were incorrect, and no one took any responsibility for it.

Anyway, the woman answered: “Well we handle all the paperwork for your company.”

“What paperwork?” I asked.

“Well, it’s very confusing, and so your company outsources it to us.”

“Yes,” I said, “but when I take vacation time, I just tell my supervisor I’m taking time off, and he adds in my vacation time. So why couldn’t I just call my supervisor when my daughter was born and tell him I was gonna be taking some time off. As it is, using a third-party just created a bureaucracy that was beyond the abilities of anyone in our HR department.”

“Yeah,” she agreed, “it’s complicated. They get it wrong a lot. But you know, it’s for longer leaves than vacations.”

“I don’t know about that,” I said, “Because I could take a four-week vacation and I don’t need to involve you, but if I take even just one week off for the birth of a child, I have to contact you. What’s the difference?”

“Yeah,” she said, “It’s complicated.” And then I began talking again, but what I said doesn’t matter, because the woman jumped at the opportunity to say hello and dish out paperwork to the lady that walked up to the table.

So much for finding answers.

Complicated indeed.

This entry was posted in Current Events. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Finding Answers

  1. david says:

    The Minnesota statute says you are supposed to be issued new plates every seven years. I haven’t seen anything anywhere about ten years. If your car is around seven or fourteen years old, maybe that is why. If your car is between seven and fourteen years, perhaps something happened that offset its replacement schedule. If it is less than seven years old, then I’ll have to keep looking.

    https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/?id=168.12

    As to why they replace them, all I’ve found so far is that the coating on the plates that makes them extra reflective is only guaranteed for x years. Some sites say five years, some say ten, while one site said that the lifetime dependeds on factors such as salt, cold, sun etc.

  2. david says:

    I’m going to make a guess on the UNUM thing. This is just wild speculation so it’s probably about as good as my license plate answer.

    Perhaps your company takes out insurance against you having a baby. So perhaps the money is coming from a third party. I have something like this where I work. Only in my case, I am taking out the insurance so I get all the benefit — meaning that when the third party paid me, it didn’t eat up my saved up paid time off.

    Just a guess.

  3. Dan says:

    If your car is a 2007 purchased in the fall of 2006 and you are renewing tabs in 2010 your car year is 07 and the age is 4 so it would be 11 not ten. So depending on when you bought the car if it was fall when all the next year models come out or during the actual model year that could mean the difference in their 10 calculation.

  4. James says:

    David, so it appears that either you know more about license plate replacements than the DMV employee or you just are way better at explaining this concept.

    Dan, unless you know something I don’t, then I don’t think your theory is correct. For it would mean that practically all new vehicles purchased between Sept – Dec would not need new plates (even though they may be 11+ years old), while all new vehicles purchased between Jan – Aug would need new plates (even though they may be less than 2 years old). And would the DMV go from the original purchase or from the most recent purchase? My Saturn was originally purchased in December 2002 (giving a total of 11), but I bought it in April 2010 (giving it a total of 10).

  5. david says:

    It seems if the car you were issued new plates for was the Saturn, the seven year replacement rule must be what triggered it. Your plates would have had their seventh birthday since the last time the tabs were replaced.

    I can understand the DMV guy getting it wrong if it were some calculation, arbitrary rule, or if it were based on information not readily available (last digit of the VIN etc.), but if it is as simple as “every seven years,” why wouldn’t that knowledge make its way to him? Strange.

  6. James says:

    Yeah, that’s what I don’t get either. When I worked with the public (at an eyewear store) I tried to become proficient at giving reasons why quickly and clearly. People always asked questions about the creation of their lenses or about their prescription, and I wanted to sound like I knew my job. Apparently, the DMV employee had no such similar desire.

Comments are closed.