----- Original Message ----- From: "Terry Simpson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "U.S. Metric Association" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, 2004-01-11 22:21 Subject: [USMA:28250] RE: Steve Thoburn
> >Bill Potts > >I believe FFU would be illegal. > > You cannot have imperial only but you can have dual. This applies to > prepacked goods such as soft drinks and to goods weighed in the store such > as cheese. I'll bet you can find some stores or shop where the scales are still imperial only and the ads are imperial only. I saw a picture of a shop where the owner actually advertised he was breaking hte law and kept a talley each time he made a sale in FFU on an FFU device. When we speak of dual scales, are we talking of the analog or digital type. If one is speaking of the analog type, then the customer and the trader are in effect selling by pounds and not kilograms. If they post their price in dual units as well, they can make a sale together without ever involving the kilogram. This may be legal. If it is legal then it is a loophole in the law which allows metric to be simply by-passed. When we speak of dual digital, are we speaking of a scale that can be preset to either pounds or kilograms an once set can not be changed? Or are we speaking of a scale that can be selected by a user switch or press of a button at will? If this si the case, there is nothing to stop the trader from selecting pounds and keeping it there, thus flounting the law. At least in the analog case, the kilograms are still visible even if ignored. In this case they are not visible. In either case, dual scales should be illegal as it allows for cheating as far as the law is concerned. > > > >I suspect if someone asks for a quarter of a pound of something, > >most store employees would be able to immediately say, > >"O.K., that'll be about 225 grams," without even looking at the > >conversion table. > > Ahem. 113 grams I think Bill meant to print 125 g as it is 0.25 of 500 g, a more user friendly version of the pound. I doubt most people would notice the difference between 113 g and 125 g. Since the pound is technically not legal for trade its "former" value would be a moot point and a trader or clerk would be free to use any definition one pleases. It is up to the customer to say yes or no to the amount offered to them. If the customer feels the trader is abusing the pound meaning, they have the choice of not buying from that trader in the future, not accepting what the trader is offering or simply asking or the amount in grams. > > In one major store that I visited, staff that use scales receive training > and reference cards. They knew how to convert a quarter without looking, but > not 6 ounces. The cashier thought that a pound and a kilogram were the same. That person must be totally disconnect from reality. If after 4 years of metric sales it is hard to believe that someone in that business would not know the difference. His/her mistake would be a bonus for the customer if he/she gave the customer a kilogram amount and priced it at a pound. > > BTW, to the best of your knowledge, are the Trading Standards still verifying and certifying pound scales used by some traders or are these traders using pound scales with expired certificates? In the case where they are not, shouldn't customers be warned by Trading Standards that the scales are not certified and that a customer may be cheated and is therefore doing business with that trader at their own risk. Is a service company that repairs scales allowed to repair a scale that is in pounds and return it to the trader without first converting it to kilograms? What is really being done to make the remaining traders comply with the law? Euric
