Self-Checkout Is a Failed Experiment
theatlantic.com
theatlantic.com
Very convenient. There are random checks by the staff, one out of 20 times maybe.
Theft (things like putting unscanned $200 beef tenderloin roasts unscanned at the bottom of a bag) was so bad they canceled it within months. I miss it, it was super convenient.
They're now trialing camera-based machine vision cart attachments that are slow and annoying.
But yes, I miss it too.
And the flat platform types, are you referencing the kind that are normally seen in Home Depot? The ones typically that go 6 inches from the floor and look like a pallet jack? With those again you can find them in Sam’s club and Costco but you won’t see them in a “typical” grocery setting
Several Walmarts I’ve been in have asked to see my receipt, the answer is always the same: “No Thank You”, and if they persist I just ignore them.
This is actually different than how stores like Sam's Club or Costco work - these stores can force you to show the receipt because a condition of membership is that you must show the receipt. But in a store "generally accessible to the public" e.g. a non membership style store such as Sam's Club or Costco in the USA store employees cannot detain you or otherwise force you to show a receipt for something that you paid for - as grandparent says it's your property at that point.
I typically show the receipt at Walmart if its not going to be an inconvenience for me. But the other day I had bought a heavy car battery and a jump starter kit and my hands were full and I wasn't about to put all of that down to show off a receipt. So I politely declined and kept walking and that was it. It's kind of like cops and searching your vehicle - they can always ask and you can always decline. They have the technology to figure out if you're actually stealing or not, so if they know you are, and they know, then they'll simply just ban you from the store. If not, then they aren't going to arbitrarily ban you.
But surely there is a legal basis to prevent you from leaving the store with groceries before you have paid for them. When you walk through the normal checkout and they ask you to put everything on the conveyor so that they can scan it, are you allowed to say "no thank you" and just walk out? If that is not OK, I fail to see the difference.
Receipt checking, by definition, always happens after the transaction has completed and the payer has taken possession of the groceries, hence the receipt. So receipt checking is always a practice to verify that your already lawfully purchased groceries match up with what you are removing from the store. This is a practice, while rooted in a perspective that benefits the store, that you have no obligation whatsoever to comply with.
The store, as mentioned above, has no obligation to let you back into the store (they can ban you), but they also have no right to detain you and force you to prove that you own your belongings as you are leaving either. And a store is not going to ban someone unless they are completely sure they have stolen something. So in practice there is really no issue with telling receipt checkers to pound sand for trying to verify my lawfully purchased groceries. I usually don't, because it feels standoffish for no reason sometimes, and you risk encountering someone that doesn't fully understand the law correctly. But if I have a good reason, as mentioned above, I will definitely tell them to pound sand.
I realize now rereading the thread how these two scenarios became conflated, because OP responded to the "before purchase" scenario that you provided with an "after purchase" scenario. So we are really talking about two different scenarios here.
That isn't true. Just being rude to staff can get you banned from many stores. If you don't like their policy of checking receipts, they can ban you, although they can't really enforce anything without a trespassing order, at best they can just refuse service.
Also AFAIK in the States it’s quite easy to get a “trespass order”. My understanding is that in most jurisdictions you simply tell the person they are in trespass and they are required to leave the premises or be subject to detention by authorities if they don’t. Now your typical employee may not be able to just hand that kind of order out due to some internal policy but in theory any agent of the business would be able to do it. There’s no real additional paperwork or legal process that needs to happen outside of a verbal exchange
There isn't really. The store can call the police, and when they show up, they can stop you from leaving. But...ya, that doesn't work out very well.
I imagine in Europe you would just become a social pariah and might get a knock at your door by police (at least in Switzerland...), while in the states...they can't do much, there is no social pressure.
I was also once in the position of acting as witness in the loss prevention office when one of my classmates was caught (no chase) stealing fishing gear. Awkward.
1. If someone is willing to steal from a store, who knows what else they are willing to do? Retail workers do not make enough money to potentially put themselves in harm's way over a $200 beef tenderloin roast. 2. It's doubtful whether a retail worker even has the legal authority to physically detain a shopper. I surely wouldn't put up with it as a shopper, and would make a stink. And at that point you're back to #1: Will the next shopper you detain make a stink, or will they get violent? 3. For liability reasons, companies don't want their employees getting harmed, so most stores' guidance is to not interfere.
The US is rapidly backsliding from a high to low trust society so things like this are simply not possible in many areas. A few trials like this ran near me and shut down months later.
The US isn't rapidly sliding anywhere.
America is in super state of being both, high and low trust.
And by judging the current world trends it will collapse to one state pretty soon - the dead cat scenario i am afraid.
https://thecounter.org/supermarket-robot-automation-ai-organ...
> Not that there is a lot of data to suggest that this oft-discussed recent spike in retail crime is even real. In an earnings call earlier this year, for example, the CFO of Walgreens admitted that his company had perhaps “cried too much” about theft, and that its product losses had actually declined in the previous quarter.
It's still financially viable to assume a little extra theft risk here because you take a tenth of the time at checkout and use less than half the person time as regular self checkouts (which use a tenth of the time a manned checkout does). They massively increase throughout in large, busy stores.
The recent problems have been:
District Attorneys deciding property crime is selectively enforceable for social justice engineering, and a knock-on effect of the police not bothering to do their job while having the gall to collect a paycheck they didn't earn.
Political divisions where a growing demographic of self-destructives wish to throw a Molotov cocktail into functional civilization. This explains why COTUS can't elect a Speaker of the House.
We've seen plenty of issues with police that wildly escalate a situation, in ways that result in things like "burn-half-the-city-down riots".
In that atmosphere, it might be an intentional goal to minimize the number of "low value" police encounters. Stopping a shoplifter might recover $100 of merchandise, but you have to get it right an awful lot of times to recover for every time a trigger-happy cop loses his cool and the city has to pay a seven-figure settlement.
That is one way of putting it. Another and in my opinion more correct way is to conclude that some groups of people are looking for reasons to burn half the city down and find it in "police brutality" or "racism". When the police is just as brutal towards different groups of people the cities do not burn down.
You can have a look at the areas which gave heed to the calls to "defund the police" to find out whether that has led to a decrease or increase of crime. If the police were the cause of these problems you'd expect fewer problems when there are fewer police encounters. In actuality the result is the opposite and what most people who do not hold with the narrative expected: less police leads to more crimes committed.
No, reducing police presence in these dystopian areas is not the solution. A better trained police force with better tactics might be. Giuliani managed to turn New York around so it can be done if there is the will and the opportunity to act upon that will.
Giving up and giving in will lead to streets empty of stores instead of streets with empty stores which will promptly be followed by claims of "discrimination" and "structural racism" because there are no shops in those areas without a single person asking why those shops left. Giving up and giving in is not an option.
Many police departments in big cities are severely understaffed. Seattle is at 60% where it needs to be, and has the lowest number of officers since 1992 (while population is much larger than then).
Couple that with just being a bad job: you get blamed for not doing enough, doing too much, and...really, there are just way better jobs out there these days that offer as much money for a lot less stress.
Best thing since sliced bread IMHO, very quick and easy. Most stores have reduced cashier stands from eg. 10 to ~2.
In Partner Card [1] stores such as Viru Keskus supermarket (Kaubamaja Toidumaailm), one can download Partnerkaart app [2] to use their phones to scan for products.
I personally am a big fan of this one, since for some reason my phone's barcode scanner is greatly faster and more accurate than the market's own scanners.
[1]: https://www.partnerkaart.ee/et/ [2]: https://apps.apple.com/us/app/partnerkaart/id1615988287
Apart from produce, I'd prefer home delivery that eliminates the scanning and transportation effort entirely.
I suspect a better approach than gig economy grocery delivery would be dedicated refrigerated vans and trucks with drivers who work directly for the seller. Gig economy drivers don't keep things at a proper temperature and can't seem to deliver consistently.
In general, where I am in the US, gig economy workers are rude, short tempered, don't read direction notes, and sloppy.
I find them mostly convenient. the only times I've every had a staff come over is when I've done the wrong thing and the machine needed staff assistance to progress or when the machine did the wrong thing and I needed the staff to progress.
It amuses me to read (and I see it a lot) people outraged that staff may come over and check what they're doing and not cheating the system somehow, outraged at the lack of trust being perceived.
Do they not remember the old checkout system was a complete lack of trust scenario. Every single item you want to buy was checked by staff.
The self checkout is a HUGE level of trust being given to the customer.
I’m all for self-checkout if it is limited to 12 items or less because it is significantly slower to scan and bag groceries yourself than to have two people who are trained at this.
The process is so slow that we drive an additional 15 minutes away just to avoid that grocery store.
Honestly, I think the issue may be more due to labor shortage than penny-pinching.
I'm not sure why that is, but it isn't the fault of the self-checkout machines. They are smaller than normal checkouts, and they could have 20 of them and still need only one cashier on duty.
Where I live, when they replace normal checkouts with their conveyor belts, lolly stands and backing areas, they typically get 2 self service ones per normal one replaced.
The stations at my local Harris teeter are unable to handle the user quickly scanning+placing products in the bagging area. I imagine this has to do with how the software translates changes in the bagging-area weight to a count of items. When this happens you have to wait around for the system to decide you aren't, in-fact, stealing.
These same stations also prevent further item scanning once an age restricted item (e.g. alcohol) is scanned, forcing you the wait around for the attendant before you can continue with your items.
Contrasted to the self-checkout stations at my local food-lion, which have none of these issues, the lack of UX is frustrating.
To top off with some non-content: You'd really think more people would have learned how to reliably scan barcodes after observing others do it hundreds, if not thousands, of times.
All the self checkout systems I've used are near identical. You move unscanned items past a scanner and onto a scale in the bagging area. Nothing confusing about that
Low cost of living areas you have many more reliability issues, I suspect because of high use and poor maintenance.
Examples of poor reliability I’ve experienced are:
- Scale not working for produce, requiring the attendant to re-tare it
- Machine stuttering when scanning, resulting in not scanning, then double scanning an item
- Machine refusing to scan after a small number of items. Staff response to that was “try not to use the small machines, they have issues”
You also have some vicious anti-patterns that when combined with suspicious staff support make the checkout experience
- At Kroger, similar items share the same picture. I was once scrutinized by a staff member who reached into my bag to see the item I had just place in there when scanning celery because celery sticks and celery bundles share the same picture in the checkout screen.
- Kroger also issued coupons by mail to compensate for raising prices. When scanning coupons, you need to have staff support to take the coupons, which prevents completing checkout before their intervention.
You combine that with the fact that many people in low cost of living areas also have health issues, which degrade their ability to follow instructions and respond to complex stimuli, you have a situation where self checkout lines backup, people get over charged, and it’s for the benefit of the company and not their customers.
Personally, I love self-checkout, and would be happy to use it every time, even at the place where it's a bit oversensitive. (Just have to remember to place the item in the bag, wait a second, then move the full bag back to the cart...) I think the notion that it's a "failed experiment" relies on a number of assumptions that the author's experiences are universal. It needs more fine-tuning in places, and possibly some more regulation to ensure that it's not being used in predatory ways (either toward the customers, or in terms of cutting down on employees and forcing everyone to use the self-checkout).
And it's generally _fine_. I remember a lot of problems when they started showing up 20 years ago, but it's distant-memory stuff at this point. Bigger supermarkets also tend to have self-scan things that you bring around the aisles with you for big shops.
(One fun exception: a few years back all the grapefruits on offer were unusually small, I think due to adverse weather conditions in Spain. If you tried to buy grapefruits, the machine would become concerned that the grapefruits you'd put in your bag weren't as heavy as it expected, and required an employee to reassure it. There are presumably acceptable weight ranges for fruit, and the problem grapefruits just fell outside it...)
However in stores like Fry's/Kroger/Albertsons, it effectively treats me like a thief.
I'd consider it a plus honestly at this point, self checkout has no line, and short of a cart full of groceries, it's likely faster.
The ones at the Target, don't lock out the scanner unless you scan something that is marked as having a security tag, and the degausser hasn't fired.
Our local CVS has some, and they're fine, but anyone that can't use them (low vision, paying with cash (sometimess), or buying things that require ID) have to chase down the one or two roving employees in the store, which would be super annoying if you had to do it often.
Personally, I tend to use SC when I have <5 items. Even on the "nice" systems, there's no way I can outpace someone who does this all day, has helpful tech (conveyor belts, a bagger (even if it's me), ability to enter quantity, can enter PLUs, doesn't have to deal with the system locking out the scanner whenever it feels like it).
Another annoyance is you have to remember to scan your alcohol last or else it will block the checkout until your ID has been checked, Walmart has figured this out and only checks your ID when you hit "checkout".
You're a little out of date.
Target is also slowly circling the drain and will be death spiraling into worse service + experience.
I shop at both regularly. How am I 'out of date' by sharing my experiences (of last week, literally) of my local stores lol?
Thought you were talking about Fry's electronics, I've never heard of Fry's Food and Drug before I just looked it up.
He said "I guess we do."
I wonder how they're going to get me to stock shelves and clean the restroom.
I've recently started using their service where you scan items with a portable scanner as you go around the shop, and bag them immediately. Checkout is even quicker because everything is already in my bags, and I can see a running total of how much I'm spending. Again, it just works.
What doesn't work is product location discovery. I get that they want me to wander around looking for the coffee or whatever that theyve relocated yet again, because they think I'll make more impulse purchases, but it still frustrates me.
Or out of general low-level supermarket-chain evil. My local Tesco (a small urban one) recently rearranged everything, and put the flour next to the gluten-free products. The only way I can explain this is that this is a sort of Tesco Value Squid Game; in the office upstairs evil billionaires watch coeliacs running the Gauntlet of Gluten.
- Small format
- Small quantities & worse value
- Limited selection
- Giant self-checkout conveyor belt confusing shoppers
Sounds like most of those issues are self-inflicted by cheaping out on all the hardware. Reliable scales, scanners, etc. aren't hard to figure out, if you bother paying enough for it.
In the half-decade or we've had self-checkouts in Austria, they've been mostly reliable – I've only ever had real trouble in the first six months of their deployment (teething issues), and in the first half of 2023, when producers were shrinkflating their packagings so often that the inventory databases couldn't keep up and scales were regularly expecting the wrong values. That seems to have quieted down again too, thankfully.
I can be in and out of the shop within a minute or 2-3, never needing to talk to a human.
The only disadvantage is that I can’t get my bottle deposits paid out using the app; I have to go to the till for that.
At Netto and Føtex (Danish brands), they have traditional self-checkout with a machine where you scan your items yourself. You get a printed receipt/code that opens the gate.
Scan & Go uses the same exit as the self-checkout, so they give you a code on your phone to open the gate.
Here’s a very short video from Netto: https://youtu.be/5zVATAnUNyg
Here’s another video from Coop, skip the first 1m20s: https://youtu.be/V69FQH47-sE
We would have been happy to wait in line for a traditional cashier but there were only self checkout lanes. And long lines for those too! We finally get to the front of the line, dutifully scan each item. Of course it’s impossible to track what’s scanned already since the area to place items is no larger than the one at the supermarket. Fat chance putting a shelf on that tiny area.
Anyway, the system decides that due to our purchase volume, we were selected for a “random rescan”. So we wait for someone to come over and it picks three items for the person to scan. Of course they screw it up, and the system now declares the entire order needs to be started from scratch.
How exactly did anyone save time or effort in this case? What a nightmare.
However I spent 3 years in London and self checkout dominates. The Sainsburys by my house had ~40 self checkout kiosks and only about 6 regular checkout lanes. I only used the checkout lane one time in multiple years (same at Waitrose and Tesco).
There are a few things that made it better:
1) Produce in these stores is rarely sold by weight. It’s more common to get produce in packaged quantities with a bar code. Much easier to scan. And generally the tech seems to just work, it rarely complained that I had missed an item when I hadn’t.
2) Fewer item purchase restrictions. Even alcohol was allowed at self checkout but you did have to flag someone down for that.
3) People do smaller shopping trips. Each person at an urban market in London is likely buying a basket of goods, not a whole cart. That makes the entire process much more streamlined and space efficient.
Not in my experience. I love self-checkout.
> Produce in these stores is rarely sold by weight. It’s more common to get produce in packaged quantities with a bar code
Same with my local store in the US. Still a few things sold by weight, but the majority of stuff is barcoded. Even produce.
> Even alcohol was allowed at self checkout
Is that not true pretty much everywhere in the US as well? They have to check ID, yes, but that's a legal thing.
Even where a lot of stuff is sold by weight, you can just have self-service scales that print a barcode around the shop; this seems to work fairly well (unless they're out of order; then it's a whole thing and you can only use the self-checkouts that have built in scales, grumble mutter).
Another annoyance: after moving to California i’m fairly frustrated by the “No Alcohol in Self Checkout” rule. Buying a sandwich and a single bottle of wine? Good luck standing in line behind someone with a cart full of produce! Don’t really see what this law does except cause frustration. In states where it’s allowed you need an attendant to verify ID anyway, same as a regular line. Another stupid CA rule.
Cashiers have never been the ones tasked with bagging our groceries over here, so I guess it's not that big of a step to just scan and throw it in the bag after that.
Modern UX for the win!
* full service gas stations
* live in maids
* a mailman, milkman, iceman, and paperboy they knew the names (and birthdays!) of
Call it false nostalgia or what you will, but we lost the plot somehow on paying for dignity-as-a-service.
Sincerely, the "everything-is-worse" department
Don't blame other for machines that suck and/or your inability to follow instructions I guess
It's not just throwing machines out there without proper UX studies and adapted to each case
Even if self-checkout as it is implemented today doesn't work [1], that's not a reason to declare it a failed experiment. It's a reason to improve the technology. The only thing stopping us from having universal self-checkout is lack of quality in the hardware and software.
There is a separate conversation about what impact self-checkout has on jobs and food prices. It's an empirical question what the ratio of automated to human checkout should be in order to maximize throughput. Maximizing throughput means lower food prices for everyone. However, if it happens that maximizing throughput means letting go of tens of thousands of human workers, then that also has an impact on the economy. This is why we should have a robust social safety net in wealthy societies.
[1] I don't actually think this is the case. I use self-checkout multiple times per week at the grocery store, and I almost never have an issue. Maybe 1 in 10 visits I'll need assistance from staff, which takes less than a minute.
People frequently say that, but how does that serve the interests of capitalism? If a safety net is too robust, they'll have to pay to support unproductive non-workers indefinitely. Seems like it would make a lot more sense (and be the moral thing to do w.r.t. objective, capitalist morality) to make the safety net inadequate and hard to access, to eventually cull the unproductive people that turn out to be useless and cannot find other work.
If cutting all social safety nets really maximizes overall well-being, then that's what we should do. But I don't think anyone seriously believes that. I think those who advocate for cutting off all aid to people with bad luck simply don't care about their suffering.