Text 21797, 157 rader
Skriven 2009-03-11 20:42:00 av MICHAEL LOO (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av DAVE SACERDOTE
Ärende: Computerized check 344
==============================
I don't think that the trends are clear yet in the
self-checkout vs. full-service department, but I
imagine that even if automation has not produced
layoffs so far, the likelihood is there.

 -=> Dave Sacerdote said to Hap Newsom <=-

 HN> I also refuse to use them...because there's 
 HN> no benefit to me. 
 DS> The most tangible benefit to me is that I get to speedily
 DS> check myself out without waiting in a line.  

Haven't been behind me at the self-checkout, I gather
(I know, actually).

 HN> The store gets to eliminate
 HN> a checker or two,
 DS> At the two supermarkets in my home town where self-service
 DS> checkouts are in use, they were installed in ADDITION to
 DS> the full-service checkouts; no jobs were lost.  In fact, 
 DS> additional people were retained, because there is one
 DS> cashier specifically assigned to oversee the self-service
 DS> checkouts, rendering assistance as needed (whether with
 DS> recalcitrant items or to bag for the customers if they
 DS> wish.)
 
Wait 1 sec. Every place I recall has seen a diminution in
regular lanes to make room for the self-checkouts. In
Washington-area stores, it can be almost 50%.

 HN> and they get me to do their
 HN> work for them. 
 DS> As I noted, your labor isn't used as a replacement for
 DS> anyone.  It simply offers you another checkout option
 DS> (one which you choose not to exercise.)

Thinking on this. Let's say that, at capacity, there are
x checkout staff doing x units of work. I imagine that, as
the grocery stores aren't welfare organizations, the
staffing is arranged so that each checker does an average
of one checker's worth of work, no less. With your scenario,
no loss of lanes, no loss of checkers, no loss of baggers,
a certain percentage y of customers use the self-checkout,
so that you get x checkout staff each doing 1-(y/x) amount
of work (baggers likewise). How can that not lead to a
lowering of the staffing levels by something like y percent?

 HN> If they were to offer a cash discount
 HN> if you used the computerized checkout I might 
 HN> consider it.
 DS> Non sequitur.  All checkouts are computerized.  The only
 DS> difference is that you, rather than a cashier, are passing
 DS> items over the scanner.

You know what he means. It's just a terminology error on
his part, not really a non sequitur.

 DS> Supermarkets already operate on razor-thin margins.  I
 DS> can't imagine that there is much cash savings in offering
 DS> self-service checkouts, especially because - as I noted
 DS> earlier - they augment, rather than replace, employee-operated
 DS> checkout lanes.

The razor-thin margin, though, compounded by whatever the
turnover rate is, is pretty significant. So if a store gets, say,
a 1% return on investment, but the average turnover is a month
(got to be much shorter on perishables!), that's still 12.68%
or so annualized. There's a reason why there are all those
grocery stores.

 -=> Dave Sacerdote said to Dale Shipp <=-

 DS> [shrug] The regional differences in our markets means that
 DS> I can't really make a meaningful comparison.  Self-service
 DS> checkouts have been added in stores here _without_ reducing 
 DS> the number of full-service lanes, and there's rarely anyone
 DS> queueing up to use them here.

The day may come. The ideal, from the store point of view,
is when the time spent waiting for self-checkout and regular
lines is the same: barring the trivial cases of 0% and 100%
self-checkouts, this depends on the scanner literacy of the
userbase, which I imagine is quite high at the moment; it's
the vast inept and intimidated class that the stores have to
woo; and when this effort is made, some equilibrium will
be reached, and the staffing differences will become obvious.

 DS> As for the "free labor" part, well, YMMV.  I often bag my own
 DS> stuff even in full service lanes.  It gives me something to 
 DS> do and gets me through line quicker.  I don't consider it
 DS> to be giving the store "free labor." 

If the store's staffing algorithm takes into account the
self-bagging, it's reducing the labor cost, essentially
the same thing.

 -=> Dave Sacerdote said to Dale Shipp <=-

 DS> At all full-service supermarkets here (Stop & Shop, Shaw's, Big Y,
 DS> Geisslers, Armata's - even butcher shops like Arnold's) the
 DS> cashiers don't normally bag.  Each checkout has two people - 
 DS> a cashier and a bagger.
 
In the Washington area, cashiers more often do the bagging.
In the Boston area, it's a mixed "bag," depending I think on
the time of day, with double staffing at peak hours, single
with maybe a few floaters at shoulder, and single without
extras off peak (when I tend to shop).

MMMMM----- Recipe via Meal-Master (tm) v8.04

      Title: Veloute Sauce - Larousse Gastronomique
 Categories: Sauce, White, France, Larousse, Basic
      Yield: 2 -1/2 qts

  2 3/4 qt White stock made with veal
           -or chicken
      1 c  Pale blonde roux made with
           -butter and flour

  Veloute, Sauce Blanche Grasse. (with variants)

     For 2-1/2 quarts (litres):  stir 2-3/4 quarts (litres) of white
  stock made with veal or chicken into one cup (325 grams) of pale
  blonde roux made with butter and flour.

     Blend well together. Bring to the boil, stirring with a wooden
  spoon until the first bubbles appear. Cook the Veloute very slowly
  for an hour and a half, skimming frequently.

     Strain through a cloth. Stir until it is completely cold.

     Note. Veloute is a great basic sauce, and it may be prepared in
  advance. Obviously it may also be made just before it is used.

     As the white stock which is used for making it is seasoned and
  flavoured, it is not necessary to add other flavourings to this
  sauce. An exception may be made for skins and trimmings of mushrooms
  which may be added when available, this addition making the sauce yet
  more delicate.

  Veloute Sauce II (based on chicken stock). Veloute de Volaille - Made
  like ordinary Veloute sauce, using chicken stock to stir into the
  blonde roux.

  Veloute Sauce III (based on fish stock). Veloute de Poisson, dit
  Veloute Maigre - Made like ordinary Veloute sauce, replacing the veal
  or chicken stock with fish stock.

  Larousse Gastronomique, Prosper Montaigne, 1938.  Crown edition, 1961.
  Typos by Jeff Pruett.

MMMMM

___ Blue Wave/386 v2.30
--- Platinum Xpress/Win/WINServer v3.0pr5
 * Origin: Doc's Place BBS Fido Since 1991 docsplace.tzo.com (1:123/140)