Esker-pades
Established Member
The title says it all really.
They appear to be large administrative headaches. They are all too frequently issued with errors in them, meaning staff either have to manually input data or they have to be re-issued. I avoid them when applying for compensation, although I have been issued with a couple in my time.
Background information (such as the number of times they're actually issued, used etc.) may also be pertinent. I suspect that they're not issued comparatively often. If that's correct, is the low quantity the reason that they haven't been abolished (IE: the inconvenience is outweighed by the cost it would take to withdraw them), or is it a sign that they should be? I would argue the latter.
What I'm really interested in is the reasons to keep them. I'm assuming that there must be some.
They appear to be large administrative headaches. They are all too frequently issued with errors in them, meaning staff either have to manually input data or they have to be re-issued. I avoid them when applying for compensation, although I have been issued with a couple in my time.
Background information (such as the number of times they're actually issued, used etc.) may also be pertinent. I suspect that they're not issued comparatively often. If that's correct, is the low quantity the reason that they haven't been abolished (IE: the inconvenience is outweighed by the cost it would take to withdraw them), or is it a sign that they should be? I would argue the latter.
What I'm really interested in is the reasons to keep them. I'm assuming that there must be some.