McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a [W:391]

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

And how much does that person bring in? The average McDonald's franchise grosses around $2.5 mil per year. $70k is almost 3% of that. That is not insignificant for a single employee. People often mistake an individual franchise with the megacorp; individual franchises are, for all intents and purposes, small businesses.

Click to expand...

3% is, as described, a small fraction

The assertion was made that minimum wage employees are completely expendable fodder whose wage isn't felt by any given business. This is false. The labor cost of running a 24 hour operation (two positions) runs well in excess of $140k per year. This is just a fact. If a business wanted to halve that cost, they could eliminate a position.

Click to expand...

No one made that assertion. You are exaggerating again.

People do call in sick, which adds a cost to the business (overstaffing to cover shortfalls, potential overtime, etc). Individual franchises run differently, but the one I worked at in high school offered a weeks paid vacation after one year, and I wasn't a manager or anything.

Click to expand...

when people call in sick, they don't get paid and they call in someone else so there's no overstaffing or additional expense.

It all addresses the point. People who advocate for nearly doubling the minimum wage usually display untold ignorance of how businesses actually run. I recommend remedial math classes with an emphasis on fractions and percentages.

Click to expand...

No, it didn't address the point at all because the point was that the labor expense associated with taking orders at McD's is a very small part of their expenses. Nothing you said contradicts that. All you did was show that there's some level of expense. You did not show that the level is high.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

3% is, as described, a small fraction




No one made that assertion. You are exaggerating again.



when people call in sick, they don't get paid and they call in someone else so there's no overstaffing or additional expense.



No, it didn't address the point at all because the point was that the labor expense associated with taking orders at McD's is a very small part of their expenses. Nothing you said contradicts that. All you did was show that there's some level of expense. You did not show that the level is high.

Click to expand...

First, let me make a correction. 3% is a 24 hour staffed position, not an employee. So, gen that, we'call the night shift a total 24 hour period (2 12-hour shifts). For the other twelve hours of the day, you have a breakfast rush, a lunch rush, and a dinner rush. These periods require the heaviest staffing. I'll be generous and call it six employees to cover from breakfast through lunch for 8 hours, and six employees from lunch through dinner for 8 hours (lunch is their busiest time by far). 6 employees times 8 hours times two shifts equal 96 hours, or 4 24-hour shifts. Added to the two shifts required over night (one 24 hour period), we have 5 24-hour shifts to cover in any given day. That's more like 15% of gross. Minimum. Before SS, Medicare, payroll taxes, and benefits. This also doesn't count the manager or assistants, just the minimum wage positions.

If you think calling in doesn't cost the business money, you have obviously never worked an hourly position let alone managed one. You probably also think training is free.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

First, let me make a correction. 3% is a 24 hour staffed position, not an employee. So, gen that, we'call the night shift a total 24 hour period (2 12-hour shifts). For the other twelve hours of the day, you have a breakfast rush, a lunch rush, and a dinner rush. These periods require the heaviest staffing. I'll be generous and call it six employees to cover from breakfast through lunch for 8 hours, and six employees from lunch through dinner for 8 hours (lunch is their busiest time by far). 6 employees times 8 hours times two shifts equal 96 hours, or 4 24-hour shifts. Added to the two shifts required over night (one 24 hour period), we have 5 24-hour shifts to cover in any given day. That's more like 15% of gross. Minimum. Before SS, Medicare, payroll taxes, and benefits. This also doesn't count the manager or assistants, just the minimum wage positions.

If you think calling in doesn't cost the business money, you have obviously never worked an hourly position let alone managed one. You probably also think training is free.

Click to expand...

You are, once again, exagerrating the costs. You're including the entire staff even though what is being discussed is the order takers.

and if you're going to increase the demand in your hypothetical situation, then you have to increase the sales. If they need more people to service the counter, it's because they're selling more product.

And add in the fact that you *still* have shown nothing about how much of their total expenses is spent on the people who take the orders. All you've shown is that it costs them some amount of money for which you earn a well deserved "Well, duh!"

And I've been in the food service industry for several decades so I know that restaurants hire an excess # of part-time employees so they always can call someone to come in when someone else calls in sick.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

You are, once again, exagerrating the costs. You're including the entire staff even though what is being discussed is the order takers.

and if you're going to increase the demand in your hypothetical situation, then you have to increase the sales. If they need more people to service the counter, it's because they're selling more product.

And add in the fact that you *still* have shown nothing about how much of their total expenses is spent on the people who take the orders. All you've shown is that it costs them some amount of money for which you earn a well deserved "Well, duh!"

And I've been in the food service industry for several decades so I know that restaurants hire an excess # of part-time employees so they always can call someone to come in when someone else calls in sick.

Click to expand...

Having too many extra employees without enough hours to share between them leads to shortfalls through attrition; people will quit if they aren't making enough money, which leads to training new employees (costs money) or understaffing and inferior service (costs money).

I am not overestimating employee costs. You are underestimating them by refusing to acknowledge the total picture. A franchise like McDonald's probably runs in the neighborhood of 35-40% for labor cost. Every 3% you can chisel out of that helps enormously. Again, being generous, three staffed cashiers per rush and another for the night shift make 3.5 24-hr shifts, which is 10.5% of gross sales.

10% is not insignificant.

Further, if we're talking about a $15/hr Minimum, that number is more like 5-6%., which is around 20% of gross sales just for cashiers.

How much does a tablet cost?

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

Having too many extra employees without enough hours to share between them leads to shortfalls through attrition; people will quit if they aren't making enough money, which leads to training new employees (costs money) or understaffing and inferior service (costs money).

Click to expand...

And yet, restaurants have been doing this for a long time, and it works just fine for them. Maybe they should hire you to tell them what idiots thay are

I am not overestimating employee costs. You are underestimating them by refusing to acknowledge the total picture. A franchise like McDonald's probably runs in the neighborhood of 35-40% for labor cost. Every 3% you can chisel out of that helps enormously. Again, being generous, three staffed cashiers per rush and another for the night shift make 3.5 24-hr shifts, which is 10.5% of gross sales.

Click to expand...

Of course you're overestimating employee costs because this thread is about the automation of the order takers, and you're including the kitchen staff and management.

And
10% is not insignificant.

Click to expand...

It's a small fraction.

Further, if we're talking about a $15/hr Minimum, that number is more like 5-6%., which is around 20% of gross sales just for cashiers.

How much does a tablet cost?

Click to expand...

Read the thread title. McD's isn't doing this to cut costs. They're doing it to boost sales.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

DA60 said:

'If you’ve ever felt guilty ordering at McDonald’s, the fast-food mega-chain has just the fix: You can now order your own quarter-pound bacon cheeseburger from a welcoming, non-judging machine.

Battling the worst sales slump in a decade and competition from build-your-own upstarts like Chipotle and Smashburger, McDonald’s is expanding a test concept built around ordering via tablet. Just tap on a screen and watch as your burger’s toppings (and calories) pile on, then wait for an employee to bring it over. No human interaction necessary.

McDonald’s move towards dehumanization, launched as a pilot last winter and expanded across San Diego last week, is part of a larger trend of chain eateries turning tablets into your full-time restaurant buddy: equal parts menu, server and paycheck. Applebee’s, Panera Bread and even airport bars have installed tablets to allow diners to order food or booze without a wait.'

McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a machine - The Washington Post


This is what happens when - among other reasons - you start demanding higher pay then your position is worth (like fast food workers demanding $15/hr.).

If these fast food workers force Congress to adopt a $15/hr. minimum wage? I guarantee you that the above will be the result...automation and mass layoffs.

It ain't rocket science people - you are VERY replaceable.

Click to expand...

Every time these union thugs try to agitate management calls their bluff. The worst part is these union thugs ONLY supported this mcdonalds striking because it raised their own wages. But now the consequences are left to the mcdonalds guys alone-it was never about them.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

For one thing, 70K for 24/7/365 coverage is nothing compared to what the person brings in.

Click to expand...

Yes, that is how profits work.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

And yet, restaurants have been doing this for a long time, and it works just fine for them. Maybe they should hire you to tell them what idiots thay are

Click to expand...

Restaurants as an industry have the highest rate of turnover. Tipped jobs are frequently overstaffed because regular hourly employees cost the business three to four times as much. Too many servers means better service and worse tips... which is why waiting tables has such high turnover. There is also very little cost associated with hiring and training new servers. But please, regale us of stories about there being too many cooks and dishwashers on during the dinner rush. (Clue bird for those with no service industry experience: this has never happened.)

Of course you're overestimating employee costs because this thread is about the automation of the order takers, and you're including the kitchen staff and management.

Click to expand...

Did you not see the specific breakdown for just cashiers, the position we are talking about eliminating? Or are you intentionally ignoring it because it damages your argument too badly? Giving you the total labor cost helps you view individual labor cost in context. 10% of gross when total labor is 30-40% represents 25-33% of total labor. When looked at from the view of total labor cost, or $875,000-$1,000,000, 25% is a significant amount of money, just as 10% of gross is significant (and they are the same number).

It's a small fraction.

Click to expand...

Tell that to anyone who manages or owns in the service industry.

Hell, tell that to anyone, ever (with the exception of the church crowd who think 10% tithe is just fine).

10% of $2.5mil is $250,000. Yeah. A tiny amount. This is why I recommend remedial math study with a focus on fractions and percentages.

Read the thread title. McD's isn't doing this to cut costs. They're doing it to boost sales.

Click to expand...

If that were true and wasn't just marketing spiel, they would have done it already. The cost savings is there. They have to market the change in such a way that McDonald's restaurants don't appear to be giant vending machines, and that is the only reason why this hasn't happened literally everywhere so far. Marketing is expensive and it takes time.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

Restaurants as an industry have the highest rate of turnover. Tipped jobs are frequently overstaffed because regular hourly employees cost the business three to four times as much. Too many servers means better service and worse tips... which is why waiting tables has such high turnover. But please, regale us of stories about there being too many cooks and dishwashers on during the dinner rush. (Clue bird for those with no service industry experience: this has never happened.)

Click to expand...

WHich just confirms what I said about restaurants having an excess of part time employees.

And when restaurants come up short on dishwashers, they put one of their wait staff or kitchen staff to work.

Did you not see the specific breakdown for just cashiers, the position we are talking about eliminating? Or are you intentionally ignoring it because it damages your argument too badly?

Click to expand...

My argument is that it isn't a large share of their expenses, and you have shown that I'm correct

Tell that to anyone who manages or owns in the service industry.

Hell, tell that to anyone, ever (with the exception of the church crowd who think 10% tithe is just fine).

10% of $2.5mil is $250,000. Yeah. A tiny amount.

Click to expand...

Like I said, I've been in the industry for decades. I don't have to tell it to them; They say it to me.

If that were true and wasn't just marketing spiel, they would have done it already. The cost savings is there. They have to market the change in such a way that McDonald's restaurants don't appear to be giant vending machines, and that is the only reason why this hasn't happened literally everywhere so far. Marketing is expensive and it takes time.

Click to expand...

So McD's is lying?

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

WHich just confirms what I said about restaurants having an excess of part time employees.

And when restaurants come up short on dishwashers, they put one of their wait staff or kitchen staff to work.

Click to expand...

And what happens when you're down a cook? Chaos. Someone has to come in to cover (and potentially break overtime, and people are great at making excuses), or there has to be a certain level of overstaffing built in in the first place. For cooks (and dishwashers, but that job has almost no training/skill involved), who usually make in excess of four times the server amount, there is a fine line to strike between too many and not enough. This is where extra cost comes in, because in order to have "extra" cooks on staff, you have to give them enough hours to keep them all happy, which means "extra" scheduled hours, which cost the restaurant money. Which was my point.

My argument is that it isn't a large share of their expenses, and you have shown that I'm correct

Click to expand...

You have an odd definition of the word "large". Must be a learned behavior for dealing with the ladies. I say this because you must have giant balls to attempt to claim 10% of a business's gross is "small."

10% of $2.5mil is a lot of money. You would be an idiot to think "ah, it's nothing really." An idiot.

So McD's is lying?

Click to expand...

It's marketing. So, yes, in essence. Marketing is based on "shaping" the truth into whatever form is most pleasing. This usually has nothing to do with the actual truth by the time it's done.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

And what happens when you're down a cook? Chaos. Someone has to come in to cover (and potentially break overtime, and people are great at making excuses), or there has to be a certain level of overstaffing built in in the first place.

Click to expand...

Just like waitstaff, they have an excess # of part time cooks to call on. If not, they call up another restaurant and ask them if they can arrange for a cook to come in

For cooks (and dishwashers, but that job has almost no training/skill involved), who usually make in excess of four times the server amount, there is a fine line to strike between too many and not enough. This is where extra cost comes in, because in order to have "extra" cooks on staff, you have to give them enough hours to keep them all happy, which means "extra" scheduled hours, which cost the restaurant money. Which was my point.

Click to expand...

Depends on the restaurant. In many restaurants, the servers make more money on average.

Besides, we're talking about order takers, not cooks. Those iPads aren't going to cook the burgers

You have an odd definition of the word "large". Must be a learned behavior for dealing with the ladies. I say this because you must have giant balls to attempt to claim 10% of a business's gross is "small."

10% of $2.5mil is a lot of money. You would be an idiot to think "ah, it's nothing really." An idiot.

Click to expand...

Good thing onbody said that "it's nothing really". Only an idiot would think someone has.

It's marketing. So, yes, in essence. Marketing is based on "shaping" the truth into whatever form is most pleasing. This usually has nothing to do with the actual truth by the time it's done.

Click to expand...

I'm sure you have proof that McD's is lying about this and it's really motivated by cost-cutting

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

DA60 said:

'If you’ve ever felt guilty ordering at McDonald’s, the fast-food mega-chain has just the fix: You can now order your own quarter-pound bacon cheeseburger from a welcoming, non-judging machine.

Battling the worst sales slump in a decade and competition from build-your-own upstarts like Chipotle and Smashburger, McDonald’s is expanding a test concept built around ordering via tablet. Just tap on a screen and watch as your burger’s toppings (and calories) pile on, then wait for an employee to bring it over. No human interaction necessary.

McDonald’s move towards dehumanization, launched as a pilot last winter and expanded across San Diego last week, is part of a larger trend of chain eateries turning tablets into your full-time restaurant buddy: equal parts menu, server and paycheck. Applebee’s, Panera Bread and even airport bars have installed tablets to allow diners to order food or booze without a wait.'

McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a machine - The Washington Post


This is what happens when - among other reasons - you start demanding higher pay then your position is worth (like fast food workers demanding $15/hr.).

If these fast food workers force Congress to adopt a $15/hr. minimum wage? I guarantee you that the above will be the result...automation and mass layoffs.

It ain't rocket science people - you are VERY replaceable.

Click to expand...

I do believe you have stretched a point here, linking automation with minimum wage, that 80 year old "progressive" demand.

Please accept the new reality. Many big stores are moving to automation, self check outs etc. McDonalds has always appealed to youth, the generation on the move, and that generation today lives by the smart and tablet.

In the end, as they remove more and more workers due to nifty automation machines there will be fewer and fewer workers at any given Mcdonalds, but they will need higher training to run the computerized equipment. So the minimum wage argument goes out the window entirely, a moot point. The real issue is the continuing loss of entry level jobs for Bachelor of Arts graduates.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

Just like waitstaff, they have an excess # of part time cooks to call on. If not, they call up another restaurant and ask them if they can arrange for a cook to come in

Click to expand...

Other restaurants owned by the same owners? That might be possible. The menus might be similar and the resources of labor considered shared. But other restaurants/chains? Not on your life. You're living in a dream world.

Depends on the restaurant. In many restaurants, the servers make more money on average.

Besides, we're talking about order takers, not cooks. Those iPads aren't going to cook the burgers

Click to expand...

Hourly. Servers are the lowest-paid hourly employees. We were talking specifically about the costs of labor, so I am obviously talking about their hourly wages paid by the restaurant. Order takers are paid at the same hourly wage as cooks, generally speaking, as they do not make tips. The fact that I have to explain this to you is fairly sad. It seems like you are intentionally misunderstanding the facts at hand so you don't have to deal with the argument (which you are losing terribly).

Good thing onbody said that "it's nothing really". Only an idiot would think someone has.

Click to expand...

You've made the assertion that 10% of gross is insignificant, over and over again. It's not. It's quite significant.

I'm sure you have proof that McD's is lying about this and it's really motivated by cost-cutting

Click to expand...

I'm sure people ordering on a tablet is faster than having an order taken by virtue of being able to cheaply furnish more order taking stations and thus serving more customers simultaneously, thus increasing sales. But do you think McDonald's has held off on this specifically so they can keep paying for expensive labor? No! The most reasonable conclusion is that customers might react negatively to forced interaction with a machine instead of a person. A small effect in this vein was noticed when big box supermarkets started installing a few self-checkout stations. After several years and continued labor scale backs, people are pretty much ok with self-checkouts now, but there was pushback at first. McDonald's is obviously trying to avoid the "impersonal/robot/vending machine" vibe that automated order taking is likely to impart at first. Which makes this a marketing campaign to sell it to the consumer. Campaigns take time and money, which is obviously why McDonald's hasn't rolled this out yet. Money makes almost all of the decisions in a globally spanning enterprise.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

Which makes this a marketing campaign to sell it to the consumer. Campaigns take time and money, which is obviously why McDonald's hasn't rolled this out yet. Money makes almost all of the decisions in a globally spanning enterprise.

Click to expand...

Yes. Precisely. I agree 100%. The wage of the employee isn't the deciding factor. Raising their wages to $15/hour doesn't make this go any faster. The tablet is already way, way cheaper. It's just a matter of getting the customer to accept it.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Fearandloathing said:

I do believe you have stretched a point here, linking automation with minimum wage, that 80 year old "progressive" demand.

Please accept the new reality. Many big stores are moving to automation, self check outs etc. McDonalds has always appealed to youth, the generation on the move, and that generation today lives by the smart and tablet.

In the end, as they remove more and more workers due to nifty automation machines there will be fewer and fewer workers at any given Mcdonalds, but they will need higher training to run the computerized equipment. So the minimum wage argument goes out the window entirely, a moot point. The real issue is the continuing loss of entry level jobs for Bachelor of Arts graduates.

Click to expand...

It's a moot point to you, not to me.

The main reason for automation is to save costs. If a company could pay it's workers a penny a day, they would probably never automate.

And to me, my point is that if fast food workers push through a $15/hr. wage in America (which they are trying to do), then they will be signing their own pink slips (in many cases) because that move will massively increase the places where they work's incentive to automate.


As for 'accepting' it?

I already have, I would FAR prefer to be served by a robot then a human at McDonald's...by miles. And a TON of other places as well.

They could automate 80+% of businesses and that would be absolutely fine wih me.

I have no idea where you are getting the impression I feel otherwise.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

US Conservative said:

Every time these union thugs try to agitate management calls their bluff. The worst part is these union thugs ONLY supported this mcdonalds striking because it raised their own wages. But now the consequences are left to the mcdonalds guys alone-it was never about them.

Click to expand...

You may be right.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Deuce said:

Exactly my point. The cost of the machine has long since stopped being a factor. It's already cheaper to buy a tablet.

edit: for clarification, that means the bigger issue is development cost and development time. That's already underway. They could accelerate that development by throwing more engineers at it, but there are diminishing returns to that, and these folks have higher salaries.

Click to expand...

"Doubling of labor costs will simply increase a fast food restaurant’s incentives to adopt technology like this. And if fast food wages doubled everywhere it would spur the development of these technologies even faster."

The Real Change In The Cost Of A Big Mac If McDonald's Workers Were Paid $15 An Hour: Nothing - Forbes

Not saying that the industry isn't headed that direction....But, why push it?

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

DA60 said:

It's a moot point to you, not to me.

The main reason for automation is to save costs. If a company could pay it's workers a penny a day, they would probably never automate.

And to me, my point is that if fast food workers push through a $15/hr. wage in America (which they are trying to do), then they will be signing their own pink slips (in many cases) because that move will massively increase the places where they work's incentive to automate.


As for 'accepting' it?

I already have, I would FAR prefer to be served by a robot then a human at McDonald's...by miles. And a TON of other places as well.

They could automate 80+% of businesses and that would be absolutely fine wih me.

I have no idea where you are getting the impression I feel otherwise.

Click to expand...

OK, I gather you have an MBA then.

The main reason for automation is what? To save costs?

I suggest you rethink that part of the equation and look into the development of automation in the auto industry.

I don't give a fiddler's **** what your personal preferences are, it is irrelevant to the conversation. The point which you appear to deliberately ignore is that there are going to be far fewer jobs all around and the US is NOT keeping pace with the demand of technological training; the reason you have a higher unemployment rate than any other industrialized country.

Minimum wage won't mean squat when there are no minimum wage jobs. That is the reality you seem to miss. and when the **** are "progressives" going to drop the 100 year old mantra about minimum wage; it was a good meme for Obama in 2012 but it is largely as irrelevant today as it was when it was first raised over 100 years ago.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

DA60 said:

It's a moot point to you, not to me.

The main reason for automation is to save costs. If a company could pay it's workers a penny a day, they would probably never automate.

And to me, my point is that if fast food workers push through a $15/hr. wage in America (which they are trying to do), then they will be signing their own pink slips (in many cases) because that move will massively increase the places where they work's incentive to automate.


As for 'accepting' it?

I already have, I would FAR prefer to be served by a robot then a human at McDonald's...by miles. And a TON of other places as well.

They could automate 80+% of businesses and that would be absolutely fine wih me.

I have no idea where you are getting the impression I feel otherwise.

Click to expand...

While this is true on principle, you're wrong about the $15/hour number being some tipping point for the fast food industry.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

j-mac said:

"Doubling of labor costs will simply increase a fast food restaurant’s incentives to adopt technology like this. And if fast food wages doubled everywhere it would spur the development of these technologies even faster."

The Real Change In The Cost Of A Big Mac If McDonald's Workers Were Paid $15 An Hour: Nothing - Forbes

Not saying that the industry isn't headed that direction....But, why push it?

Click to expand...

Unintended consequences. I rarely eat there but its always a disaster when I do-why should an unskilled worker get 15 an hour to screw up my order and raise costs for me the consumer? The only thing McDonalds has going for it is being cheap and easy and this isn't going to help with that.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Deuce said:

Yes. Precisely. I agree 100%. The wage of the employee isn't the deciding factor. Raising their wages to $15/hour doesn't make this go any faster. The tablet is already way, way cheaper. It's just a matter of getting the customer to accept it.

Click to expand...

If operating costs suddenly jumped, betyourass those ordering stations get fast-tracked to the market. Given a potential small decline in sales vs a LARGE jump in operating costs, money would once again drive the decisions. Right now, it's probably cheaper to maintain the status quo and wait for society to get better used to more and more automation. That, and perhaps one of the other chains will implement it first and take a brunt of the marketing costs (and R&D, and social experimentation) on their own chin.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

Other restaurants owned by the same owners? That might be possible. The menus might be similar and the resources of labor considered shared. But other restaurants/chains? Not on your life. You're living in a dream world.

Click to expand...

Restaurants owned and run by other people. McD's may not do this, but restaurants do this all the time. So do chain restaurants. I had a friend who ran a TGIF's and one day he had to fire his entire wait staff. He called HQ and they called the other TGIF's in the area who sent workers.

Hourly. Servers are the lowest-paid hourly employees. We were talking specifically about the costs of labor, so I am obviously talking about their hourly wages paid by the restaurant. Order takers are paid at the same hourly wage as cooks, generally speaking, as they do not make tips. The fact that I have to explain this to you is fairly sad. It seems like you are intentionally misunderstanding the facts at hand so you don't have to deal with the argument (which you are losing terribly).

Click to expand...

Yes, the cooks wages are higher than wait staff, but wait staff often makes more. you said the opposite and that's what I was addressing.

And we're not talking about cooks. This thread is about the counter people who take orders.

You've made the assertion that 10% of gross is insignificant, over and over again. It's not. It's quite significant.

Click to expand...

It is not a large part of their expenses.

I'm sure people ordering on a tablet is faster than having an order taken by virtue of being able to cheaply furnish more order taking stations and thus serving more customers simultaneously, thus increasing sales. But do you think McDonald's has held off on this specifically so they can keep paying for expensive labor? No! The most reasonable conclusion is that customers might react negatively to forced interaction with a machine instead of a person. A small effect in this vein was noticed when big box supermarkets started installing a few self-checkout stations. After several years and continued labor scale backs, people are pretty much ok with self-checkouts now, but there was pushback at first. McDonald's is obviously trying to avoid the "impersonal/robot/vending machine" vibe that automated order taking is likely to impart at first. Which makes this a marketing campaign to sell it to the consumer. Campaigns take time and money, which is obviously why McDonald's hasn't rolled this out yet. Money makes almost all of the decisions in a globally spanning enterprise.

Click to expand...

IOW, you insist that McD's is lying but have no evidence to support that.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

Restaurants owned and run by other people. McD's may not do this, but restaurants do this all the time. So do chain restaurants. I had a friend who ran a TGIF's and one day he had to fire his entire wait staff. He called HQ and they called the other TGIF's in the area who sent workers.

Click to expand...

I clearly said "other restaurants/chains". Calling one TGIF to staff another is the same chain.

You're doing this on purpose, right? Nobody is that blatantly obtuse and oblivious who can pay for their internet connection.

Yes, the cooks wages are higher than wait staff, but wait staff often makes more. you said the opposite and that's what I was addressing.

And we're not talking about cooks. This thread is about the counter people who take orders.

Click to expand...

Perhaps you really are that oblivious. Cooks and cashiers at McDonald's make the same amount. They have the same staffing requirements, just like cooks in traditional restaurants. Waitresses, however, fall under slightly different rules since you can pay them a quarter of what you pay cooks. So, while waitresses get waaaaay overstaffed, because they don't cost the restaurant very much money per hour and you can train a new one in a day (and are a dime a dozen), cooks and cashiers (the higher hourly-rate workers) are not as overstaffed. But when a cook or a cashier calls in sick, it is a much bigger deal than if a waitress calls in sick, so there needs to be some overstaffing built into the schedule. This drives up cost. If a cook or cashier is missing, food takes longer to order and be served, which not only leads to fewer sales in the short term but also a long term sales drop if these conditions continue. Sales loss is the same as an increased cost when considering the bottom line.

I know you know this is true. You're just stalling and muddling things so you don't have to defend an argument (or actually attack a well constructed one). Come on, get on the level. It's super annoying when you do this and it makes you look like a jackass.

It is not a large part of their expenses.

Click to expand...

At one point you said a 24/7/365 shift "is nothing" compared to what it brings in. Three nothings, according to you, is "not a large part of their expenses." But those three nothings are in the ballpark of 10% of the total gross, which is between a quarter and a third of their of the total wage expense. When you are talking about a multi-million dollar enterprise, 1% is significant. And you're scoffing at 10% like it's no big deal. You clearly have no idea how business works.

IOW, you insist that McD's is lying but have no evidence to support that.

Click to expand...

It's obvious you don't know the first thing about marketing, either.

This is sad. You need some school, son.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

Gonzo Rodeo said:

I clearly said "other restaurants/chains". Calling one TGIF to staff another is the same chain.

You're doing this on purpose, right? Nobody is that blatantly obtuse and oblivious who can pay for their internet connection.

Click to expand...

Decades of experience in the industry has taught me that restaurants hire more part time people than they need so they always have someone who can come in when someone calls in sick. In the case of kitchen staff, they not only over hire, but they can also call other restaurants for a favor.

Perhaps you really are that oblivious. Cooks and cashiers at McDonald's make the same amount. They have the same staffing requirements, just like cooks in traditional restaurants. Waitresses, however, fall under slightly different rules since you can pay them a quarter of what you pay cooks. So, while waitresses get waaaaay overstaffed, because they don't cost the restaurant very much money per hour and you can train a new one in a day (and are a dime a dozen), cooks and cashiers (the higher hourly-rate workers) are not as overstaffed. But when a cook or a cashier calls in sick, it is a much bigger deal than if a waitress calls in sick, so there needs to be some overstaffing built into the schedule. This drives up cost. If a cook or cashier is missing, food takes longer to order and be served, which not only leads to fewer sales in the short term but also a long term sales drop if these conditions continue. Sales loss is the same as an increased cost when considering the bottom line.

Click to expand...

McDonalds also hires extra people and gives them less hours to work, which is why so few of their employees are full time. When one calls in sick, they call in another.

It's really simple. I have no idea why it's taking you so long to catch on.

At one point you said a 24/7/365 shift "is nothing" compared to what it brings in. Three nothings, according to you, is "not a large part of their expenses." But those three nothings are in the ballpark of 10% of the total gross, which is between a quarter and a third of their of the total wage expense. When you are talking about a multi-million dollar enterprise, 1% is significant. And you're scoffing at 10% like it's no big deal. You clearly have no idea how business works.

Click to expand...

Instead of ranting, you'd be better off if you could show that the costs of the counter people make up a large part of their expenses. Unfortunately for you, that's impossible to do.

Re: McDonald’s fresh hope to turn around slumping sales: Ordering burgers from a mach

sangha said:

Decades of experience in the industry has taught me that restaurants hire more part time people than they need so they always have someone who can come in when someone calls in sick. In the case of kitchen staff, they not only over hire, but they can also call other restaurants for a favor.

Click to expand...

Ignoring your continued stubbornness about calling other restaurants (which does not happen outside of the same chains and co-owned businesses), there is a ton of overstaffing on the books. But every person you hire to cook (or cashier) requires training. Training costs money. This is an added cost, making the 10% figure a minimum expense. After taxes, SS, medicare, benefits, training requirements, and overstaffing the schedule, 10% is an incredibly low estimate. 10% is just wages, and just for cashiers.

McDonalds also hires extra people and gives them less hours to work, which is why so few of their employees are full time. When one calls in sick, they call in another.

It's really simple. I have no idea why it's taking you so long to catch on.

Click to expand...

That's rich. You are either blatantly ignoring the argument - that training and overstaffing represents additional expense - or you are illiterate. I'm not catching on? You're not reading. Perhaps you just don't have the ability. It's beginning to look that way. If you even once responded to the argument as it was presented and brought up salient points instead of trying to confuse the issue enough to trip up your opponent into a "gotcha!", people couldn't accuse you of illiteracy. People couldn't accuse you of arguing in bad faith, or intentionally misconstruing arguments down nonsensical paths, or ignoring inconvenient points in favor of blatantly lying and insulting and sticking your fingers in your ears, if only you read the damn argument and responded in kind. Do that once and see how liberating honest discourse really can be.

Instead of ranting, you'd be better off if you could show that the costs of the counter people make up a large part of their expenses. Unfortunately for you, that's impossible to do.

Click to expand...

You mean like the very generous analysis of likely required manning for register shifts (84 man-hours, or 3.5 24-hour shift blocks) which equates to roughly 10% of gross sales, just for wages (not other expenses), that you called not a large part of their expenses?

Get out of here. You're lying again, saying I haven't provided the very thing we've been talking about for pages upon pages now. Or you're just illiterate.