Panera is losing nearly 100% of workers yearly amidst fast-food turnover crisis | Hacker News Reader

Panera is losing nearly 100% of workers yearly amidst fast-food turnover crisis

cnbc.com

19 pointsbenryon20 comments

I'm reminded of something in academia. When one or two people fail a test, they probably messed up. When 50% or more fail a test, the teacher messed up.

I say to to say I hate when it is phrased as a "turnover crisis". No, working there is so bad that people either quit or find something better!

Ha! We went into a Panera Bread last week. There were two counters but no service. We stood there for several minutes expecting someone to take our order at the counter and then realized there were iPads to place your order.

We ordered soup and bread and a couple drinks. For $20 you obviously get what you pay for, but is it a place I would really ever go out of my way to eat at? No.

It was clearly microwaved soup with way too much salt. The place was rather filthy inside. The people working there didn’t want to be there and neither did we.

Maybe it’s nostalgia but years and years ago I recall Panera having better service and food. I didn’t really change my standard that much (we eat out a few times a year and not at upscale places).

years and years ago I recall Panera having better service and food

Panera used to be a public company. They got bought out by a giant conglomerate. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/JAB_Holding_Company

My recent experience mirrors yours. Much worse than in previous years. I don't have any urgency to ever go there again. But ... on the day I was there the place was pretty busy, so quite a few people still like it.

>>Some experts believe it is inevitable that fast food will be the first job sector ruled by robots.

Does anyone know of any companies that have mostly automated?

My local supermarket has doubled the number of self serve cashiers and reduced the regular cash registers by the same number. I hate using them but sometimes it's just so crowded that I feel I have to unless I want to spend a big chunk of my day there. If it's anything like that then it seems to me that the future kind of sucks.

I love the self-serve checkout!

Also the electronic ordering screen at the local Wendys. Less chance of screwing-up the order.

I think fast food should be more automated -- do you really need an actual human to lower french fries into oil and wait for the beep?

Of course you (and I!) do - we are HN readers. While I think there’s a change afoot in the direction of not minding ordering or receiving goods without the help of a human, there’s still a large swath of the population who wants a consultation and help when they are shelling out money. I also don’t think it’s entirely generational.

Self-checkout is significantly slower and more error-prone than using a cashier. It would be one thing if you could just walk your cart under a scanner and get a bill. But self-checkout is exactly the same as regular checkout, but with nobody there to help you. It's hideous for any orders with 10+ items.

The self checkouts I have used are explicitly worse than if they let you operate the regular checkout. I'd happily use the cashier's workspace and check myself out. Self checkout kiosks are a nightmare of user unfriendly design that assumes you are going to steal every chance you get. The workflow of cart --> scanner --> bag is hideous, the weight sensors to prevent theft fail to detect items all the time, entering produce codes takes forever since unlike the cashier you don't get dedicated controls, the bagging area is too small even if you have minimal items and since 6 other people are getting the exact same voice feedback nearby you can't distinguish which instructions are for you.

> the weight sensors to prevent theft fail to detect items all the time

I've noted the local stores I go to with self checkout have disabled the weight sensors. I think they've decided the slowdown and annoyance isn't worth the reduction in shrinkage. Also possible the reduction is nil.

I try to go through a line with a cashier if I can just to get my support for a human workforce into their metrics, but sometimes I have to use the self-checkout (often because it is the only option after certain hours.) I've noticed that when there is a problem with the anti-theft scale (usually because something has failed to scan because I am moving faster than the weight-check) the sole attendant will just cancel the "bagging alert" from their command station.

I imagine it's impossible to investigate every time the machine stops when one person is "monitoring" a dozen or more of these things.

I've stopped trying to rectify these errors and now just consider it as a discount for me having to take on the work they used to pay someone for. Perhaps the stores see it the same way and the loss is still way less than the cost of employees?

What sort of issues do you actually see with increased number of items? I can't imagine how that could be difficult

increased probability of false positive on weight in the bags: needs to be manually reset before continuing checkout

fruit whose code is not in the system

fruit without a code

Usually one person suffices for that, no? Like the single cashier handling self-checkouts or the old times elevator operators. I doubt we'll get rid of humans entirely, especially if a building requires upkeep, etc.

Oh please no. Getting one pump of liquid sugar in my McDonalds coffee instead of 3 takes me 6 seconds to tell a cashier and 1-2 minutes at the Dante’s Inferno near my office with the automated kiosk.

When you think about it, YOU work at the supermarket now.

I also work at the furniture store and quite like it.

I’m fairly certain this is intentional. Workers can’t unionize or agitate for better pay if they just leave after 6 months. The real question to ask the execs at these companies is: what did you do to achieve such high turnover rates?

Turnover is expensive. There may be failures at different levels of management. I doubt there is conscious intent to oppress. More to the fact, how many fast food places are unionized these days and is that really even a major risk at this point in American history?

The article describes how the companies have made the jobs turnover proof. Turnover isn't expensive at these companies. Otherwise they would have stepped in and attempted to reduce the turnover rate. In reality they think they can make more money with high turnover.

Those companies have optimized for turnover. There is no "crisis" because the high turnover rate exists by design.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com