Connect with us

Business

Your package wasn't delivered? Try living at one of L.A.'s '½' addresses

Published

on

Your package wasn't delivered? Try living at one of L.A.'s '½' addresses

Casey Hogan had no idea her new address would be so frustrating.

But soon after moving into a granny flat in Van Nuys three years ago, she realized that the fraction in her house number — think: 101 ½ Main St. — was going to be particularly inconvenient in an era of constant deliveries.

Her packages get marked as “address not deliverable” or dropped off at the wrong door. Retail websites that are programmed to reject special characters, including the fraction’s slash, sometimes refuse her shipping address or auto-correct it to another location.

She has tried workarounds to this quirk of Los Angeles geography — most common in dense neighborhoods with duplexes or, as in Hogan’s case, at accessory dwilling units built on preexisting properties. Spelling out the fraction as “one half” has helped, but about a quarter of her packages or food deliveries arrive late or get dropped at someone else’s house.

In the case of a particularly urgent order before a flight, she had Amazon deliver a dog carrier to her mother’s home in Oceanside and drove there to pick it up instead of risking a snafu at her place.

Advertisement

“It’s still a nightmare,” said Hogan, 32, who works as a medical scribe. “Anything that could go wrong has gone wrong.”

In the increasingly deliverable world shaped by consumers’ skyrocketing, post-pandemic expectations that almost anything they want or need should arrive quickly and seamlessly at their doorstep, residents at more than 60,000 Los Angeles addresses like Hogan’s have been left on the sidelines. (Or really, left standing on their stoops, searching endlessly for packages.)

The shared inconvenience grew into a community on Reddit, where people swap tips, such as entering the address as a decimal — 101.5 Main Street — or spelling it out as Hogan does. One person made a more drastic suggestion: “Break down and get a P.O. box.”

Dealing with fractional addresses and other tricky deliveries, such as those behind gates, is equally frustrating — and costly — for retailers, logistics experts said, as well as for shipping companies that move more than 58 million packages a day in the United States.

The average American received about 70% more packages in 2022 than in 2017, according to a Capital One shopping research report. And a recent survey of 300 retail executives by the location data company Loqate found that almost 8% of first-time deliveries in the U.S. failed, costing about $17 per failed order — or roughly $200,000 a year.

Advertisement

Fractional addresses are sometimes written with slashes and other times with decimals — or, as at this home in East Hollywood, both.

(Marisa Gerber / Los Angeles Times)

“They have to deal with such a large amount of packages,” said Blake Droesch, a senior analyst at eMarketer who studies last-mile delivery. “This is not the post office of yore, where you could get an address half right, and the mailman will spend half the day trying to figure out who this letter belongs to.”

Since demand for deliveries spiked early in the pandemic, Droesch noted, there has been a significant shift in what people buy online, from items like new shoes or a laptop — things people didn’t mind waiting a few days to receive — to hygiene products and home essentials needed quickly.

Advertisement

“If you run out of deodorant,” he said, “you kind of need that the next day.”

Ram Bala, an associate professor of business analytics at Santa Clara University, studies the supply chain and is involved in a startup that will use generative artificial intelligence to improve shipping logistics.

Bala said it’s often odd little problems that sound simple to solve — in this case, figuring out how to accommodate fractional addresses — that end up being the trickiest.

“Anytime you try to fix that problem, there are unintended consequences somewhere else,” he said. “It’s a trade-off.”

Retailers don’t appear to be prioritizing a fix for people with fractional addresses, since doing so would require removing rigid formatting parameters built into software to ensure that normal addresses get entered correctly, Bala said.

Advertisement

In Los Angeles, which has about 1 million residential addresses, the roughly 60,700 fractionals are relative rarities. They’re concentrated in densely populated neighborhoods such as Boyle Heights, East Hollywood and Pico-Union, according to the city’s Bureau of Engineering, which oversees the handling of address numbers.

“The use of fractional numbers is discouraged and should only be used as a last resort,” a primer on the bureau’s website says.

A spokesperson for the city said the reticence to assign fractional addresses — which are often, but not always, ½ and never go beyond ¾ — stems from conversations with residents worried about not only confusing delivery drivers and visitors but the effect on property values. Still, it’s sometimes the best alternative when squeezing new units between existing ones.

The phenomenon isn’t unique to L.A.

Only about 60,700 of Los Angeles' 1 million residential addresses have fractions.

Only about 60,700 of Los Angeles’ 1 million residential addresses have fractions.

(Marisa Gerber / Los Angeles Times)

Advertisement

Pockets of other big cities where large, historic buildings were divided into smaller dwellings, such as New York and Philadelphia, also have fractional addresses. And in an even more complicated twist detailed in a piece by Colorado Public Radio, the city of Grand Junction, Colo., has fractions in its street names, creating perplexing intersections such as C ½ and 28 ¾ roads.

Despite the delivery headaches, fractional addresses can carry a whimsical charm, often drawing comparisons to Platform 9 ¾, the fictional London train stop where students in the Harry Potter series caught the Hogwarts Express.

But for Juan Crespo, who started the Reddit thread asking for tips about living at a fractional address, it was more annoying than alluring.

Before moving into a unit in a Highland Park quadplex in 2021, the 32-year-old research scientist tried to change his shipping address with online retailers he used frequently, including Southwest Airlines and Target, where he and his spouse had created their wedding registry.

Advertisement

But the sites kept rejecting the slash.

He eventually called and, after a wait, got a Target employee to manually add the “½” to his address; by then, he said, several gifts, including a $300 stand mixer, had already been sent.

When ordering from DoorDash and Uber Eats, he said, his address would often be automatically switched to a different location a few blocks up, requiring him to enter a neighbor’s address instead.

“It was just a pain,” said Crespo, who has since relocated to Michigan and settled into a home with a full address number. “I’m glad we don’t have to deal with that anymore.”

For Hogan, who lives in the ADU in Van Nuys, the annoyance remains.

Advertisement

A few months ago, she posted to an online help forum, asking Google to have her fractional address added to Google Maps, since many retailers use the company’s mapping software to handle shipping logistics, and a problem there can create a ripple effect of issues on other sites.

“I have to resort to entering my neighbor’s address and hoping I can intercept the delivery person,” Hogan wrote. “HELP!”

A member of Google’s Product Experts Program, a group of volunteers who answer questions in exchange for perks from the company, quickly responded to Hogan saying that only an employee can add an address with a slash to the map. A volunteer asked her to upload a photo of her driver’s license or utility bill showing her address, but Hogan felt uncomfortable doing so and abandoned the effort.

She can easily rattle off a list of packages that never arrived or were initially dropped off somewhere else: workout clothes, two pairs of shoes from Nike, a showerhead from Jolie Skin Co. And she has gotten used to filing claims with shipping companies after getting notifications with pictures showing packages left in unfamiliar doorways. She bought a Ring doorbell camera and enabled the package notification feature, so she has proof that a delivery never arrived.

So many of her food deliveries got messed up, she said, that she set up a rack outside her gate with a sign that reads, “Leave food here.”

Advertisement

These days, she prefers to shop in person whenever possible and thinks twice before buying anything online — a hesitance, she admits with a laugh, that comes with a silver lining.

“I guess it does save me money.”

Business

Column: Ex-'pharma bro' Martin Shkreli claims he launched a crypto coin with Barron Trump. Where's the evidence?

Published

on

Column: Ex-'pharma bro' Martin Shkreli claims he launched a crypto coin with Barron Trump. Where's the evidence?

Some people just have a knack, even a skill, for placing themselves at the center of obnoxious public business deals.

But few have proved as adroit at the practice as Martin Shkreli.

Remember him? Shkreli’s first foray into public notice came in 2015, when he jacked up the price of a 60-year-old drug to a point where it was virtually out of reach of patients for whom it was a lifesaving treatment.

Barron gave me the order to launch the coin.

— Martin Shkreli, claiming a business relationship with Barron Trump

Advertisement

At this moment, he is back in the spotlight for claiming that he launched a crypto token dubbed DJT on behalf of Donald Trump’s son Barron. More on that in a moment.

To begin at or near the beginning, in 2015, Shkreli’s company, Turing Pharmaceuticals, acquired the rights to a drug named Daraprim.

The drug was a crucial treatment for the parasite-borne disease toxoplasmosis, which in its worst manifestations can cause blindness, neurological problems or death. The disease remedy is a six-week, two-pill-a-day course of Daraprim; at the standard price of $13.50 per pill, that brought the cost of a full course of treatment to about $1,130.

Shkreli raised the price of Daraprim to $750 per pill, or $63,000. For those needing more protracted treatment such as HIV patients, the cost could exceed $630,000.

Advertisement

That made Shkreli the poster boy for the dysfunction in America’s pharmaceutical market, especially since Turing hadn’t developed Daraprim itself; the drug had been on the market since 1953. He seemed to bask in his renown, turning in a smirking performance before a congressional committee in 2016 that got him labeled the “pharma bro” in the popular press.

Shkreli kept making news. In 2015 he had been charged by the Securities and Exchange Commission and federal prosecutors with fraud, based on allegations that he had cheated investors in two hedge funds he founded. A federal court jury convicted him on three felony counts in 2017. A federal judge sentenced him to seven years in prison; he was released in 2022.

Also in 2022, the Federal Trade Commission banned Shkreli for life from participating in the pharmaceutical industry, due to his actions involving Daraprim.

That brings us up to date, more or less. At this moment, Shkreli is embroiled in two controversies.

We’ll start with the Barron Trump affair. About a week ago, a crypto blogger stated on X (formerly Twitter) that Donald Trump “is launching an official token” dubbed DJT, Trump’s initials, on the Solana trading platform. “Barron spearheading,” he wrote.

Advertisement

Unlikely as that might sound, it fit into what appears to be a trend of third parties trying to associate Barron, 18, with Trumpian enterprises. In May, the Florida Republican Party selected him as a delegate to the Republican National Convention.

Barron’s mother, Melania, put the kibosh on that, stating that Barron couldn’t attend due to “prior commitments” — even though the selection had been endorsed by Donald Trump.

The tweet referring to DJT sent the new token soaring in the crypto market from a price of less than a penny to nearly three cents on June 17 and 18. On Tuesday it was trading between about 1.6 cents and 1.8 cents.

The initial tweet launched a frenzied effort among crypto followers to find out who really was behind DJT. On June 18 the crypto data firm Arkham Intelligence offered a $150,000 “bounty” to anyone who could identify the real creator of DJT. A day later it awarded the prize to ZachXBT, a self-identified “detective” on X, who established to Arkham’s satisfaction that it was Shkreli.

Since then, Shkreli has offered to produce evidence that he and Barron collaborated on the launch, including logs of Zoom meetings in which he and someone identified as “bt” participated.

Advertisement

Shkreli wouldn’t comment to me on the record. Neither the Trump Organization nor the Trump presidential campaign replied to my queries about whether Barron worked with or even knew Shkreli or was involved with the coin.

During a lengthy webcast June 19 on the Spaces live-audio feature of X, however, Shkreli maintained that he had been brought together with Barron by one of Barron’s high school friends and that the coin was developed and launched at Barron’s initiative, and that Barron was determined to launch a Trump coin before Donald Trump Jr., whom he supposedly detests.

“I was approached, not the other way around,” Shkreli said. “Barron gave me the order to launch the coin…. He was adamant that Don Jr. was going to launch a coin.”

Shkreli said that Barron was also worried that Trump’s presidential campaign would launch its own token. “We kept this from the campaign. We don’t trust the campaign. We don’t like the campaign people — I viewed them and Barron viewed them as bloodsuckers, as political consultants who know nothing and are just trying to drain as much money as they can out of the situation.”

He said Barron pulled out of the deal after the publicity wave arrived.

Advertisement

There isn’t much anyone can do to verify a word of that, until and unless Barron Trump surfaces with his own version, if he even has a version and Shkreli hasn’t concocted the whole yarn.

Shkreli’s record doesn’t inspire confidence. Consider the convoluted history of the album “Once Upon a Time in Shaolin” by the hip-hop group Wu-Tang Clan. The musicians recorded the album with the intention of creating just a single copy that could be played only at listening parties but not commercially exploited until 2103.

At a 2015 auction Shkreli bought it for $2 million. After his conviction for fraud, it was among the $7.36 million in assets the federal government seized to satisfy judgments against Shkreli. The arts collective PleasrDAO bought it from the government for $4.75 million, only to discover, according to a lawsuit filed earlier this month, that Shkreli had copied the album and was streaming songs from it online.

PleasrDAO has obtained a temporary restraining order prohibiting Shkreli from streaming or issuing copies of the unique album, pending a hearing scheduled for next month.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Business

Meat processing plant fined nearly $400,000 over child labor violations

Published

on

Meat processing plant fined nearly $400,000 over child labor violations

A federal court has ordered a meat processor in the City of Industry and a staffing agency in Downey to turn over $327,484 in illegal profits associated with child labor, and fined the companies an additional $62,516 in penalties.

The U.S. Department of Labor obtained the court order last week after it investigated A&J Meats and The Right Hire, which helps companies find employees. Investigators concluded that children as young as 15 were working in the processing plant, where they were required to use sharp knives as well as work inside freezers and coolers, in violation of federal child labor regulations.

The two companies also scheduled the children to work at times not permitted by law. Children worked at the facility more than three hours a day on school days, past 7 p.m. and more than 18 hours a week while school was in session, according to a news release from the Department of Labor.

Marc Pilotin, western regional solicitor at the Department of Labor, said the meat processor and staffing agency “knowingly endangered these children’s safety and put their companies’ profits before the well-being of these minors,” according to the news release.

“These employers egregiously violated federal law and now, both have learned about the serious consequences for those who so callously expose children to harm,” he said.

Advertisement

Federal law prevents companies from employing minors in dangerous occupations, including most jobs in meat and poultry slaughtering, processing, rendering and packing factories.

The judgment obtained in the U.S. District Court for the Central District of California is part of a settlement the Labor Department reached with the companies. It also forbids A&J Meats, its owner Priscilla Helen Castillo and The Right Hire staffing agency from trying to trade goods connected to “oppressive child labor.”

As part of the settlement agreement, Castillo and the two companies will be required to provide annual training to employees on federal labor law for at least four years and submit to monitoring by an independent third party for three years.

Yesenia Dominguez, owner of The Right Hire, denied the claims made by the Department of Labor, saying her company did not hire any minors. She said her employees are trained to ask for documentation from workers’ home countries that lists their ages, since often they are migrants and might be undocumented.

“Those allegations aren’t true,” she said. “We do business by the book.”

Advertisement

Dominguez said she felt the government “gave us no choice but to settle.”

A&J Meats did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The Labor Department has investigated other meat processing plants in California in the last year connected to Castillo’s father, Tony Elvis Bran.

In December, federal investigators found grueling working conditions at two poultry plants in City of Industry and La Puente operated by Exclusive Poultry Inc., as well as other “front companies” owned by Bran.

Children as young as 14 stood for long hours cutting and deboning poultry and operating heavy machinery, the labor department said. The workers came primarily from Indigenous communities in Guatemala.

Advertisement

The poultry processor, which supplies grocery stores including Ralphs and Aldi, was ordered to pay nearly $3.8 million in fines and back wages.

Continue Reading

Business

Smart & Final workers strike amid accusations of retaliation

Published

on

Smart & Final workers strike amid accusations of retaliation

Hundreds of employees at two Smart & Final warehouses went on strike last week amid accusations the retail chain’s parent company retaliated against them for unionizing and is planning mass layoffs.

About 600 workers at the facilities in the City of Commerce and Riverside walked off the job Thursday.

The work stoppage comes after a year of increasing tensions between the workers and Grupo Chedraui, the Mexican company that owns Smart & Final.

At a meeting with employees in May last year, a Smart & Final executive announced that the company planned to close five Southern California distribution centers. The executive told employees at the warehouses they would be terminated and have to reapply for their jobs for lower pay when a new 1.4-million-square-foot facility in Rancho Cucamonga opened, according to several workers who attended the meeting.

The announcement came shortly after workers at the City of Commerce facility had voted to unionize and days before a union election was scheduled to be held at the Riverside distribution center, leading to claims by employees and union officials that the move was in retaliation for the unionization push.

Advertisement

Teamsters Local 630, which represents the workers, has filed more than 30 unfair labor practice charges with the National Labor Relations Board, alleging the company is interfering with workers’ right to organize, among other claims.

Chedraui denies that its actions were retaliatory, saying the planned warehouse closures are part of a plan to integrate “five outdated and capacity-strained facilities that are spread across 2,000 square miles.”

“The Teamsters’ claims are simply not true,” the company said in an emailed statement. “Our new facility will employ nearly 1000 people, creating hundreds more American jobs than exist today. This will substantially reduce our carbon footprint and enable us to continue providing affordable food to communities in California that need it the most.”

Chedraui said the strike, which began Thursday, hasn’t caused any major disruptions in its operation of distribution centers.

Grupo Chedraui acquired Smart & Final in 2021 for $620 million through its American subsidiary, Chedraui USA. Along with Smart & Final it operates two other chains in the U.S., El Super and Fiesta Mart, making it the fourth-largest grocery retailer in California, according to company news releases. It also operates stores in Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and Nevada.

Advertisement

Many of the Smart & Final warehouse workers have been with the company for more than 20 or 30 years and make about $32 per hour, union organizers and workers said in interviews. At job fairs for prospective hires at the new distribution center, Chedraui is advertising pay at $20 an hour, the organizers and employees claim.

“Things are very uncertain for us,” said Daniel Delgado, who has worked for more than 19 years at Smart & Final’s distribution center in Riverside. With the strike, “we are trying to send the company a message — a message that we are tired of being looked at as a faceless number.”

“We know this company has made billions of dollars off our backs,” he said.

Chedraui USA had $7.5 billion in domestic sales in 2022, a 137% increase over its 2021 revenue, according to an analysis of the nation’s top 100 retailers by the National Retail Federation.

In April, state Assemblymember Chris Holden (D-Pasadena) wrote to Chedraui , warning that the company’s plan to force warehouse workers to reapply for jobs appeared to violate a law he authored last year. The measure, Assembly Bill 647, aims to protect jobs of grocery employees, including warehouse workers, in the event of mergers or reorganizations of companies.

Advertisement

And Daniel Yu, assistant chief of the California Labor Commissioner’s Office, sent a letter in May to Chedraui, urging the company to suspend its plans to relocate its facility and delay hiring in order for his office to collect evidence to determine whether the company’s actions violate labor law.

The decision to strike this month came after a three-week work stoppage last year and other protests by employees. Maurice Thomas was among hundreds of workers who rallied outside a Smart & Final in Burbank in August. He joined the company about three years ago, leaving his job at a Frito-Lay plant in Texas to take care of his parents in California.

“It’s been real, real tough,” Thomas said. “The company has no interest in bargaining with us, they are delaying until either we give up or they move to this new facility without us. But we are not going down without a fight,” he said.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending