| 
Posted Mar 20, 2001 by Researcher 99947
10 items or less, incorrect use of English
should be 10 items or fewer
|
 
|  | |
| |
Posted Mar 20, 2001 by Richy, sub, Patron Saint of Technology
Well, everywhere in the states that this is used, it is "10 items or less"
Not that anyone ever recgonizes this, as they always have 15-20.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 20, 2001 by TheDarthJedi
ah, but there have been a few "10 items or less" that I have seen.. These are usually the ones that also say "10 items or less and no Coupons"
But of course you still get people waddling into your line with 11 items and 10 coupons..
I did the job of a check out person for 2 years. An' lemme tell ya, its not as fun as a barrel full of monkies (if your into that sort of thing, which im not, so I suppose I should of used a different saying....)
Regardless, I have seen a *FEW* 10 items or less on "this side of the pond" while others I have seen range from 20 items or less to 15 items or less, to YES, even 12 items or less!! (I'd like to see a 12 items or MORE lane...)
Whadda about the CASH ONLY lanes where you get the person who "forgot" their money and just realized it after you already finished their 16 items in the "15 items or less lane"... *sigh*
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 20, 2001 by Researcher 99947
Just because something is popularised, doesn't make it correct; 10 items or less, which appears in many stores, is incorrect grammer. 10 items or fewer is the correct way to present it.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 20, 2001 by goldilocks
Wasn't there a huge fuss about this a few years ago in the UK, where all the supermarkets had to change their signs to say "10 items or fewer" rather than "10 items or less"?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 21, 2001 by TheDarthJedi
blah!
why not put "10 items max"
or "No more than 10 items"
whats with all this "less" stuff? wouldent any properly minded store rather the customers buy MORE and not Less??
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 21, 2001 by Bright Blue Shorts
Hmmm was just wondering how are "items" defined? Cos like if I just bought a bag of apples is that one item or say six?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 21, 2001 by Richy, sub, Patron Saint of Technology
The greatest thing about these lanes is that they are almost never faster. They are only there because people think that they are and want them. You end up with 1 person in each of the standard lanes, and 85 in the 10 items or less one.
Also, the cashiers HATE this lane. There are frequently long arguements in the back office when multiple people come on at the same time that the express cashier goes to break. It is much easier to scan a big order than do the lots of little ones, with all that extra cash handling and such. Also, express almost never gets a bagger, so the cashier has that to worry about too.
And, I have been known (well, my last week at working at Winn Dixie, a particulary distasteful store) to simply refuse to check anything over 10. I just tell them sorry and smile (OK, so it is more of a smirk)... or refuse to accept any checks (as you are not supposed to do that anyways)... and I would frequently get cheers!
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 23, 2001 by TheDarthJedi
mwahahha,
I spent two years of my life working at a grocery store. For 1 1/2 years of that time I was the SERVICE MANAGER of the front end! Which ment I WAS incharge of the checkers! I TOLD who's who and what's what. I said "YOU! Go to the express lane!" and they had to! Ah yes, It was nice to be incharge.. And best of all I DIDNT have to EVER work that express lane! No! Instead I'd stick the checkers that I DIDNT like there!! mwahahah
aye, so maybe I wasnt the nicest service manager there for a while... Maybe thats why I dont work there anymore? heh..
well, I HAD to ammuse myself SOMEHOW didnt I? hehehe
|
| | |
| |
Posted Mar 23, 2001 by Richy, sub, Patron Saint of Technology
You sound like one of my managers, the one who we ignored 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Feb 1, 2002 by J. Nigel Aalst
The express lanes are almost never faster. Except when there is a spate of panic buying (such as when a big incoming snow storm is announced) and everyone is making large purchases. In the supermarket, I have noticed that generally the express lanes are closest to the door, and the lines tend to fill up from that end back. So, usually if you grab a line on the far end, away from the exit doors, you get out faster. Forget the express lanes, get in the queue with the least amount of people and the most competent-looking cashier.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Feb 6, 2002 by Myriad
This is incorrect. The English language has been created over the centuries by popular sayings being incorporated into the language and becoming correct in their own right. The word "Quiz" is a prime example. A bet was made that someone could create a word overnight. The gentleman involved then went around town scrawling this word on all the walls he could find. The next morning everyone was going around saying "Quiz? What does that mean?". The word became legitimate because of this. There are hundreds, if not thousands, of examples in the dictionary and beyond.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Feb 11, 2002 by 6.48etc - Quartermaster and Chief Teamaker of the B.H.E.C. Keeper of Unnecessary Name Badges
Generally the closer the checkout is to where the supervisors are, the less capable the cashier. It generally helps if the cashier is over 18 and under 50 , and look out for obvious impediments. (Arm slings are a giveaway.) Watch out for people wearing different uniforms from the other cashiers. Quite often this means they've either been drafted in from another departments to get queues down(and are quite often useless)or worse still, if they're wearing suits, they're trainee managers and are even more useless and sadly don't realise it.
|
| | |
| |
Posted Jul 7, 2002 by swede
ahh, memories.
I spent ten years in the deplorable supermarket industry, starting in high school, working through college, and ending up second in command of a store before finally making my escape. The last post reminded me of how often I ended up on the ole register despite "being the boss" (mostly thanks to the idiots at corporate, being decades detached from their ops experience, giving us no payroll to work with). The sad part was that I was actually the fastest, most efficient cashier in the store, or so the computers said. Were I more intelligent like the management trainees in the previous post I would probably have been a bumbling idiot too 
|
| | |
| |
Posted Oct 13, 2002 by Researcher 206171
Do you get a better class of punter going through your Check Out?
|
| | |
| |
Posted Oct 28, 2002 by swede
"Do you get a better class of punter going through your Check Out?"
No, typical lot of plonkers at mine.
|
| | |
| |
| |
Key |  |  |
A: An older reply to the parent Posting
B: The parent Posting, to which this is a reply
C: A newer reply to the parent posting
D: The first reply to this Posting
| | |
Click on this icon to make a complaint about a specific Posting | |
|
Home
Reply
