Out of all the replies, only Dani and Guest 08:24 seems to "get it". Dani is the most right: the problem isn't with the rule. The problem, according to Jim's side of the story (when you work in education, one of the very first lessons you learn is never to make up your mind hearing only one person's version of the story--sorry Jim, but we are only hearing your interpretation of this and you seem angry at your co-workers), it is the arbitrary and capricious way the staff is implementing the policy.

The purpose of the policy isn't the security issue related to the restricting movement of people around campus. There are many areas where movement is restricted, and they require different id cards to get into them. No ID, no entry. Rather, the policy Jim is talking about is the security issue related to the packages themselves, who has authority to claim them, and what sort of identification they are required to show to pick up a package. It is no different than the policy requirement that a student show their student ID when they pick up their financial aid checks, or pay their bills at student accounting, for instance. Of course there are always exceptions.

But too often, especially when the staff themselves have "authority" or "anti-bureaucracy" issues, which it sounds like Jim does in this case, staff make the exceptions the rule. Not so good. Then you always have arbitrary, inconsistent application of the rules, and all kinds of students perceive that to be unfair (and they are right, it is unfair). All students should be treated the same. In most cases, I don't think they should be given the package without proper identification. They will learn to adjust. It won't kill them. They will whine. They will hate the staff person "who is so mean" and say that the rule sucks. Repeatedly. And tell you it is ridiculous. But we all have to grow up sometime. It is no more unfair to require proper student identification at a huge university, than it is to say you can't drive without your drivers license. It really is that simple. Staff is not doing students any favors by letting them off the hook, they are merely passing a problem student down the line to the next staff person who DOES go by the policy.

In a university of 50,000 students, having a slip of paper simply doesn't cut it as identification anymore. The issue of whether the ID required should be student ID or a picture ID, I would still side with student ID, because it is the official university identification card, used everywhere on all the campuses. You aren't allowed to do a lot of things without a student ID on campus, so the idea that a student shouldn't have to produce their ID upon request anywhere, is just lame, egocentric, lazy behavior. It shouldn't be rewarded, IMO.

Not having an ID, and not wanting to go get it is, 9 times out of 10, about nothing more than sheer laziness over not wanting to have to go fetch it. I know that seems cruel and unusually bureaucratic. But I tell you what. If you don't consistently stick to the policy, you will end up accepting any old thing, and that does leave you open to liability in the event you give a package to someone who isn't who they claim to be. Remember, this is still US postal laws AND university policy that apply here. Students do have a right to privacy that can't just be thrown out the window because the staff doesn't want to hassle with enforcing the rules because it makes them unpopular with the students. But after you do the job for awhile, you get good at sussing out who is handing you a line because they are lazy, or just want to mess with your head, challenging authority (why can't they go harrass the Board of Regents for the damn double digit tuition increases for the past 5 years, and do something truly useful with their anti-authoritarian energy?), or really just needs a break this one time.

Perhaps that is something you haven't gained the confidence in yet, Jim?

That isn't a small issue, and students can get REALLY belligerent about these things when they are being secretive, or trying to pull something over on you. Sometimes security has to be called in to get them the hell out of the office (or in my current workplace, the classroom, office, cafeteria, library, bathrooms, you name it).
Students do sometimes go off on staff, just blow their tops, and start yelling at the staff when confronted on something they get caught out at. I know, I've been on the receiving end of it. I even got yelled at via TTD by a deaf university student once, but that is another story.

Now, apparently not too many posters here have been around the Merry Prankster college students of late. But they fuck around all the time with university mail, and some of the stuff they do is dangerous. The university in question for Jim is a huge place, with lots of toxic, controlled stuff. There are research hospitals, management facilities chemicals, agricultural pesticides, fertilizers, etc where students work--places with restricted access, and restricted use materials. There is a very good reason why the students are never trusted. The reason is, they just love to pull their merry college pranks by mailing shit like that to one another, to people they are trying to harrass, that sort of thing. There are some very scary, unstable people in a university the size of this one.

There have also been some very serious cases of racial harrassment through the university mail system. Very bad, in the geography department while I was there.

Then there is the security issue that all colleges and universities face with the unibomber type mail threats. Remember the university prof killed by the mail bomb? It might sound like "don't do that you'll poke your eye out" sort of bureaucratic fear mongering. But if the bad thing happened on your watch Jim Dixon, I think you might be grateful if you could explain that you did follow policy, the student did have a valid student ID, the slip for picking up the package, and that the box was in fact registered to that student, wouldn't you? Especially if you had to explain what you did to someone besides the keystone cops U police--like the FBI?