Letter to the Editor
More about marking and tagging
To the Editor:
Although I loathe getting into a
“kissing” contest, I am compelled to write again.
Don Desrosiers usually writes a good
factual article. However after reading his June article
and now his article, “A tagging and assembly face-off” in your July issue, I believe Don has
slipped off the cutting edge. I am disappointed in Don and
disturbed that his second article, like the first, is filled
with incorrect remarks and conclusions that misrepresent the
true facts about Polymark.
The article is very repetitive, adding to
the confusion. However, to avoid any further confusion, I will
attempt to be as brief as possible, rebutting each of those
points necessary.
The contest: Polymark vs. writing names in
collars. Let’s state the facts simply, ink marking is
permanent, Polymark is temporary. When Don says, “the tag
is intended to be removed, but usually isn’t,” he
is incorrect. The tag, except in very rare instances, remains
on the shirt when it goes back to the customer. The marker
removes the tag easily by the fingergrip the next time the
shirt comes into the plant as part of the fast mark-in process.
Possibly Don is confused when he sees a Polymarked shirt come
into a plant using paper tags and staples.
Next: “Ease of attaching the tags
…writing in collars is probably a little bit faster
because it will often be unnecessary.” This is an
incorrect conclusion. Years ago, the large “steam
laundries” commonly used ink machines. It was not
uncommon to see two, three or more of the same legible marks in
a shirt.
Why? They found it was quicker to mark
without having to look for a mark and make a decision, is it
the right mark? Is it dark enough? Should I mark it or not?
I have unsolicited testimonial letters
from many of these laundries who updated from black ink marking
to Polymark, stating their quick return on investment with the
increased productivity in the marking and sorting areas, and
the reduction of claims and mix-ups. We also know fast,
automatic equipment sets the pace for the operator and
increases productivity over a manual method.
Next. “Method of attachment:
…Polymark’s cloth labels are fused to the fabric
using something that you’ll call glue.”
Come on, Don, with your engineering
background you should know it is important to use correct
terminology! Polymark does not use glue. It does use Adhesion
Control Fluid, commonly called AC Fluid. The AC fluid lowers
the melting point of the specially woven fibers of the Polymark
tape to ensure that the tag is applied with controlled adhesion
(18 ounces of pull) and will remain intact throughout any
process in a laundry, including drycleaning, until it is
physically removed.
Next: “Readability of the tag:
…The Polymark tags are often hard to read.” Many
years ago, the American Institute of Laundry in Joliet, IL,
found, after hundreds of washings, that the Polymark tag
remained intact and was still legible. Another fact they stated:
the legible Polymark tag lasted the life of the garment, when
the garment was tested for tensile strength.
Next: “Speed of mark-in
…Polymark can be fast, but scribbling can be
faster.”
We covered this before, but I would like
to add that one of the elements of “marking-in” is
the checking of pockets and unbuttoning buttons. Whether the
shirt has to be marked or not, every shirt has to be handled
and checked. The Polymark machine holds the shirt for 3.5
seconds. This gives the operator two hands to turn the pocket
and check buttons.
Applying the Polymark tag is a by-product
of checking the shirt and there is no down time while the tag
is being attached.
Next: “Tags coming off.” As
stated above, the Polymark tag will remain intact throughout
any process in a laundry, including drycleaning. However, like
driving a car and getting stuck because you ran out of gas,
using the Polymark machine without adding fluid could cause a
problem. This would be as evident as running a shirt unit
without steam.
Next: “Ease of removal.”
Redundant.
Next:. “Lot
distinguishability.” I am confused when Don says,
“Polymark lots aren’t very distinguishable”
Polymark is equipped with the following coding: 12A15. The
first two numbers clearly represent the lot, the middle letter
usually represents the week, and the last two numbers represent
the customer number. Because 1 and 0 have been deleted to avoid
confusion between numbers 1 and 0, a laundry can run 24 weeks
before a mark is ever repeated. Special code wheels can be made
available.
In addition to the clearly printed lot
number, some plants that were previously using paper tags
prefer to change color tape for each lot. Thirteen color
combinations are available.
Next: “Transposition of
numbers.” As Don said, the built-in feature with Polymark
where a number cannot be transposed is “a very nice
touch.”
Next: “Assembly speed.” Don
says, “having the presser do the assembly will slow down
productivity of the press station.” That is an incorrect
statement. Time studies have proven, with the Polymark 15 Order
Lot System, sorting at the shirt unit does not slow down the
shirt unit operator. Space permitting, the Poly Trolly’s
15 sections are easily reached without having to take a step.
After the initial two or three lots go
through, the press operator gets digital recognition, and speed
sorting without mistakes, becomes as easy as dealing a hand of
cards. Sorting quickly becomes an automatic movement, like
stepping on the brake in your car. The exact same elements are
involved whether the operator places the hangered shirt onto a
screw conveyor, a slick rail or into the correct numbered slot
on a Poly Trolly.
Next: “Cost of use.” It is
true, an investment in a Polymark machine is necessary to enjoy
the many owner benefits of the system. If an employee is paid
$7 an hour and the laundry processes 200 shirts a day, the
owner gets an immediate payback and close to $200 extra in the
bank every month. Higher wages or greater volume brings added
dollars to the cash flow and bottom line profit. The cost of
supplies is comparable to the less expensive paper tags,
staplers and staples.
Rather than compare Polymark to each of
the various manual paper tag buttonhole attachments, there is
no doubt, every tagger will have the opportunity to double or
triple their productivity with less effort, when they upgrade
to Polymark. If they don’t show this dramatic increase,
just like a slow producing shirt press operator, they should be
retrained or replaced.
Having said all that, let’s take a
look at why do we identify our customers’ articles. I
think the answer is obvious — so that we can process all
the incoming work in bulk, and then get the orders back
together again quickly and correctly with as few handlings as
possible. Identification is a vital function in every laundry
and its importance is often overlooked.
If you break it down, laundry and
drycleaning is a basically a manufacturing operation. We
manufacture clean clothes out of dirty clothes. It is
reasonable then, to follow basic manufacturing procedures,
batch or lot control, proper work flow, scheduling, work in
process control, just to name a few.
Does it make sense to have open orders
sitting and waiting for a dark shirt, a bleeder, a rewash, a
repair or a stray item that is somewhere in the plant and will
eventually show up?
These proactive management basics should
be given serious consideration when selecting an identification
system for your laundry. It’s no secret, we are in a
labor intensive industry. Labor is a constant and cost
increasing burden, with absenteeism and other problems, but
good, dependable equipment is self- liquidating. Invest in
proven equipment and get your money back in productivity.
In closing, just a few words about counter
staff. Many articles have been written about working your
counter staff smart, rather than working them hard. Teach them
to be “YOU” behind the counter, to sell your
services and pay them for that added business they bring in.
Don’t burden them with slow menial
tasks like tagging shirts, when the job can be done faster with
automated equipment in the main plant where it belongs. Who
cares if they might be standing around doing nothing some of
the time if they greet the customer by name with a smile and
bring in drapes, sweaters, raincoats or other business you
would not have had if she was too busy stapling tags and says
“I’ll be right with you.”
I am enclosing a reprint of an article
about a large, high volume steam laundry, where I set up eight
Polymark machines when they went from black ink to the Polymark
System and saved 16 operators.
Also, please find some sample tag swatches
that I marked with an old Polymark machine. I believe you will
agree, the lot and customer numbers are clear and legible. If
you remove the tags you will see there is no residue left
behind.
Milton B. Heilweil, president
MBH Enterprises
Chester, NY
Milton B. Heilweil, a graduate of NYU, has
been involved with Polymark since 1957. He has visited
laundries and attended laundry trade shows throughout the U.S.
and Great Britain. With his knowledge regarding laundry
identification systems, work flow, scheduling and management,
in conjunction with the Polymark System, he has helped many
plant owners improve their bottom-line profit to earn the
increased profit they deserve. He developed the MBH Rope-Tie, a
product to eliminate shake-out of shirts. He can be reached at
his toll free number, (888) 765-6275, or by e-mail at
m.heilweil@att.net. The Polymark website is www.polymark.net. The Rope-Tie website is www.rope-ties.com.
 |
Technology has advanced since the '50s
To the Editor:
I have read with interest the article by
Don Desrosiers in the June, 2003 issue about marking systems
and the follow-up Letter to the Editor by Milton Heilweil of
MBH Enterprises in the July, 2003 issue.
My interest comes from my involvement with
Textile Marking Machine Co. Inc., the manufacturer of the
Tag-O-Lectric Marking Machine and its successor company,
Thermopatch Corp. Since the Polymark system is mentioned, I
think that it is important that your readers are aware of other
equipment that is available for this task.
The Tag-O-Lectric Marking Machine was
developed in the 1950s to identify articles for processing by
laundries and drycleaners. It printed wet strength tags and
automatically stapled them onto textile articles for
processing. It was limited in the number of characters that
could be used for identification purposes. It was discontinued
in the early 1970s due to the decline in the family laundry
business and the fact that Textile Marking’s Thermo-Seal
Temporary Identification Machine was more popular for marking
shirts.
The age of the Tag-O-Lectric machine that
Don was familiar with probably had something to do with the
printing quality and readability of his tags.
Remember, we stopped building this machine
in the 1970s. Both the Polymark and the Tag-O-Lectic were
capable of small and large lot sizes and therefore both units
should score the same regarding Transposition of Numbers.
I am completely baffled by the fact that
he shows “No lots - 0” under “Lot
distinguishability” as the unit was designed to be used
specifically for lot systems. Remember that the large family
laundries of the 1960s and 70s had larger washers and used
larger lot sizes. Shirt laundries normally use 25 to 50 lb.
washers and therefore the lot sizes used are smaller.
Textile Marking Machine Co. Inc. also
developed the Thermo-Seal Temporary Identification Machine in
the 1950s. This unit was designed specifically for
identification of articles through the laundry process.
The first units were capable of printing,
cutting and sealing a small temporary tag onto the article
submitted for processing. Although the machine saved labor in
the marking-in process, the biggest benefit of this system came
from the speed of sorting and the reduction of errors in the
sorting process. For example, shirts could be sorted right off
the folder eliminating a final sorting operation. Shirts would
then be double checked when packaged to eliminate any sorting
errors.
The Thermo-Seal Temporary Identification
Machine went through many improvements between 1960 and 1990.
In the 1990s, computerized technology was used by Thermopatch
in the design of an entirely new machine nicknamed the
“Rabbit,” which is used around the world today.
In the late 1990s a second, smaller, less
expensive machine, the “Bunny,” was developed for
use in remote locations and pick-up stores where the volume is
lower. Both units utilize computer printing and are extremely
flexible when adapting the machines to coding systems now in
use.
The systems used vary in almost every
plant. Lot sizes can be tailored to the size of the washing
unit used. With the introduction of bar code systems, the
ability to print a bar code on the tag, whether permanent or
temporary, is important. Thermopatch manufactures both
Temporary and Permanent Identification systems that can be
customized for efficiency and also be designed so that they
present little change to those employees who might resist the
change to a different system.
The important thing to remember is that
the system used is the key to efficiency and savings and
today’s computerized marking machines are capable of
being adapted to any system now in use.
Ray Paleczny
Vice president, European Operations,
Thermopatch Corp.
Ray Paleczny started with Textile Marking
Machine Co. Inc. in 1966 and became a partner in Thermopatch
Corp. in the 1980s. Thermopatch Corp. manufactures textile and
garment identification equipment and systems for the laundry,
drycleaning, industrial laundry, textile rental, prison,
hospital, nursing home, garment and textile manufacturing
industries worldwide. For more information call (800) 252-6555
or visit the web site at www.Thermopatch.com.
|
|
