Route 12 and the 11:30 Medical Window

Work out the total workload in minutes.

• 52 single-family stops × 3.5 min = 182 min
• 3 apartment buildings × 8 min = 24 min
• Travel between stops = 45 min
• Total = 182 + 24 + 45 = 251 min, or 4 h 11 min

Apply the start time. Loading ends at 09:00, so the baseline finish is 09:00 + 4 h 11 min = 13:11.

Now test stop 41 against the window. The plan says 10:55. Add the known losses in the order they occur:

• Late loading: +20 min → 11:15
• Elevator outage at the second building: +12 min → 11:27
• Two extra signature stops: +6 min → 11:33

The window closes at 11:30, so the parcel arrives about 3 minutes late - a negative margin. Note the word likely on the signature stops: that is an estimate, not a fact, so the honest conclusion is that the sequence is at risk and probably fails, not that failure is certain.

Check the finish time too. The 12-minute elevator loss and 6 minutes of signatures also push the end of the route to roughly 13:29, before the break and the return leg. The break is mandatory, so add 30 minutes: 13:59, plus return travel to reach the depot before 15:00. That is feasible but leaves little slack.

Option chosen: deliver the medical parcel first, then start the sequence at stop 1.

Reasoning by the numbers:

• Depot to medical address: 26 min. Departing 09:00 puts you there at 09:26 - over 30 minutes inside the 10:00–11:30 window, and 2 hours of buffer against the elevator and signature delays, which then cannot affect this parcel.
• Return from the medical address to stop 1: 18 min → 09:44.
• Remaining work is the original 251 min minus the medical stop itself (about 4 min including signature) plus the 18-minute backtrack: roughly 247 + 18 = 265 min, or 4 h 25 min.
• 09:44 + 4 h 25 min = 14:09. Add the 30-minute break: 14:39. Add return travel to the depot: approximately 14:54.

So the revision protects the window but consumes the slack: you arrive back about 6 minutes before the 15:00 deadline.

Because that margin is thin, the plan has two parts, not one. Re-sequencing alone is not enough; you should also telephone dispatch before departing to report the 20-minute loading delay and the elevator outage, and ask whether the medical parcel can be confirmed as the priority. If the supervisor prefers the original sequence, the decision and its likely window failure should be recorded with a timestamp.

What you should not do is skip the break or the return deadline to absorb the loss - those are hard constraints, and violating them creates a second problem.

Records to make, and the reason for each:

1. Late loading time (09:00 instead of 08:40). This is the root cause of most of the loss and is not your error. Without it in the record, the delay looks like slow delivery.
2. Elevator outage, building and time observed. A building fault is a recurring route risk; it justifies a route time adjustment for future coverage.
3. Time of arrival at the medical address and signature captured. This proves the window was met.
4. The re-sequencing decision, the time it was made, and who approved it. If a customer later complains about a late parcel elsewhere on the route, the record shows why the order changed. Approval matters because re-sequencing is a supervisory call.
5. The 30-minute break time and the depot return time. These show compliance with the two hard constraints.
6. Anything you could not verify. If the elevator sign gave no restoration date, say so; do not write "elevator out all week."

Why this matters beyond paperwork: the incident file may be read by a supervisor, a customer, or an insurer. A record that states observed times and facts supports the carrier. A record that guesses at causes ("the building manager never fixes anything") invites dispute and cannot be defended.

Keep the note short and chronological. Times, places, and actions - not opinions about the people involved.