The rise of robot scheduling is a nightmare for low-wage workers

[n2doc]

“Automated scheduling software” has been touted as the wave of the future (paywall) for hip, forward-looking, data-driven workplaces. The company Kronos, for example, promises to help restaurants “provide outstanding customer service as you control labor costs.” Using the system, employees have variable hours, determined by data on customer flow, allowing managers to schedule more workers during busier times and fewer on slow days.

“Along with virtually every major retail and restaurant chain,” Jodi Kantor writes (paywall) in the New York Times, “Starbucks relies on software that choreographs workers in precise, intricate ballets, using sales patterns and other data to determine which of its 130,000 baristas are needed in its thousands of locations and exactly when.”

But, Kantor points out, for low-wage workers, especially parents, the system’s shifting work schedules can make life extremely difficult. For white collar workers, “flexible work” often means the ability to take a few hours or days a week spent working at home, and is the sign of a progressive and supportive employer. For low-wage service employees, however, there’s nothing particularly flexible about the variability of robot scheduling.

The Times story points at a larger truth: Advances in management and workplace technology all have essentially one goal, to get more out of employees at lower cost. And in the quest for efficiency, companies often forget they’re dealing with people.

more
http://qz.com/249582/the-rise-of-robot-scheduling-is-a-nightmare-for-low-wage-workers/

[el_bryanto]

1. It does sound like a nightmare

I like consistency - having your work schedule every week on a constant basis with no recourse would drive me up a wall.

And of course another potential goal of the software is to make sure restaurants/coffee shops have coverage and nothing more; if they can keep your hours down, well that would be good for the bottom line.

Bryant

[TreasonousBastard]

2. Twenty years ago I was designing restaurant payroll systems and...

this was one of our pitches.

We gave up when too many of our customers (we already sold them point-of-sale systems) told us it was tough enough to keep employees. Screwing them out of a few more hours a week would just guarantee they would quit.

[SnowCritter]

4. Ah, those were the days

Unfortunately they're long gone.

Seems that more than a few companies are just fine with screwing with employee's schedules just to save on the bottom line. I mean, what are the employees going to do? Quit? In the economy the way it is? Not likely.

[whatthehey]

5. depends

Tipped employees at least in the 2.13 states like this one tend to hate working low traffic hours and like to be cut as soon as they see dead time.

[shraby]

3. They should give the person being displaced by the robot a living wage

out of the money the robot is earning for the company. The robot should be a stand-in for an employee, not a replacement.

[safeinOhio]

6. What this kind of scheduling is really about.

It makes it so the low wages employ is unable to hold a second job. That would lead to less control over over the employ as the other job makes him or her less dependent on that 24 to 32 hr job.

[tammywammy]

7. when i worked at Starbucks in the early 2000s

Scheduling was automated then, but a manager could override it. I remember at one particular store a manager kept scheduling me to close on Sundays (get off work at 11pm) and open Monday (4:300 am). I made a big sink about it, since he new that I along with most everyone else lived 30-45 min away. A good manager would make the system into a more set schedule. At another store, it was really based on the college semester, but I remember I would open Mon/Wed/Fri, Tue mid shift and something Saturdays.

Later when I managed an independent coffee shop I did as much as set schedule I could, taking into account days people would request off, but most importantly had the schedule up a week in advance so people could switch.

[Brickbat]

8. "In the quest for efficiency, companies often forget they’re dealing with people."

It's just like the goose that laid golden eggs. Bosses keep cutting tighter and tighter margin in the bizarre push for efficiency, and the system collapses.

[drmeow]

9. "In the quest for efficiency, companies often forget they’re dealing with people."

Try - in the quest for highest short term profits, companies don't care that they're dealing with people. It started with changing from "personnel" to "human resources" (excuse me, we're not resources to be used up) to "talent" (we're not even human anymore).

[rickyhall]

10. Have they ever heard "the cost of doing business"?

As for scheduling efficiency, the one I love is when managers look at "on this day last year we did blank" and miss. Either it sucked or it overwhelmed. Or, the manager decides the rush is over and he/she sends half the crew home, then it hits hard 10 minutes later. But none is as bad "clock out but don't go home." Or you need another job to get by but scheduling makes that impossible. I've worked "retail service" too long because I could go on and one.

[meegbear]

11. I worked for a company that had software for supermarkets that did that ...

When the cashier scans your items, the info would be stored in a database. The software would go through and determine, for instance, that when there was a sale on roast beef in the deli, sales would peak Fridays from 4 to 8. They could use that info to automatically schedule an extra person on deli at that time.

I can see this working for a supermarket, but a restaurant? Not so much.