So yesterday one our our co-managers says to me "I hear you don't like the way things are going to change around here?" These include what ever E-schedule spit outs that's it, everyone will trained to do everything including bakery, part timers required to work two nights a week, and multiple people a day doing chicken.
So I tell him that I didn't. He tells me our production isn't where it needs to be and too many wonder around talking instead of working and people need to change their availability. Basically stuff that would be remedied by hiring more people and putting hours into the store and department. He pretty much said it's all the employee's fault, no one else.
I explain to Mr. co-manager that we haven't had any new hires in our department since before the holidays but we've lost more than we've gained. I also told him that were all being punished by one or two idiots not pulling there weight and that even customers are asking me why are the shelves are so bare and why don't we have enough help in the deli?
His answer again is that were not producing enough (maybe because we only have 4 people a day?), the company isn't going to put any hours in when that happens, and customers need to realize the companies "financial situation". Financial situation!!!! What the hell, my 401k has risen nearly 8% since the first of the year and our stock price is nearly $60 a share.
The only thing Co-manager of the year could say is "it is what it is and it's not going to change!" No wonder this company is going to hell in a hand basket!
BTW Mr. Co-manager of the year has been a co-manager at 5 different stores and 2 have went out of business!
the added cross training doesn't seem so bad. i don't work the dept so why is multiple people doing chicken bad?
that Co sounds like one who can't think for himself, sees only numbers, has an attitude and not able to connect the dots. he also probably believes whatever is fed to him by the company and is slow to respond when called. wonder if he's at my store haha.
These managers...I swear. We lost people in the deli before the holidays. Nothing is being done to bring in bodies, and no hours are being given. I'm sure the customers notice how understaffed the deli is, especially when they have to wait 20 minutes for a bag of popcorn chicken. When you have just 4 people working in a single day (two in the morning, and two for closing) of course ****'s not gonna get done. Throw in the fact that they don't want people staying over...yeah.
Although, I wouldn't mind having a couple of people doing the cooking, and then having a couple of people on counter. This way, we can be stocked on hot side efficiently and we wouldn't have a solitary person trying to run it all. The other day I was literally the only person on counter. This wouldn't be bad if it was on a slow night. But this was on a Sunday.
-- Edited by thestruggleisreal on Thursday 12th of February 2015 05:09:30 PM
I'm sure the customers notice how understaffed [Kroger is] . . .
They do . . . to the point of commenting about it in their highly unsatisfied shopping experiences.
I've been approached by customers when the other person goes on break and they'll ask if I'm by myself. I'll tell them that there's someone else, but they're on break. It's nigh impossible to coordinate breaks without someone being by themselves. That is, unless you don't take a break, but that's breaking a law.
Our deli and bakery aren't together, they are close to each other but on different sides. We've always had one person doing chicken, now with multiple people it just sets up to cut even more hours and put more work on everyone else. And in my experience, cross training everyone just sets it up to be easier to cut hours and overwork people.
I'm sure the customers notice how understaffed [Kroger is] . . .
They do . . . to the point of commenting about it in their highly unsatisfied shopping experiences.
I've been approached by customers when the other person goes on break and they'll ask if I'm by myself. I'll tell them that there's someone else, but they're on break. It's nigh impossible to coordinate breaks without someone being by themselves. That is, unless you don't take a break, but that's breaking a law.
What law? There is no federal law requiring breaks.
I'm sure the customers notice how understaffed [Kroger is] . . .
They do . . . to the point of commenting about it in their highly unsatisfied shopping experiences.
I've been approached by customers when the other person goes on break and they'll ask if I'm by myself. I'll tell them that there's someone else, but they're on break. It's nigh impossible to coordinate breaks without someone being by themselves. That is, unless you don't take a break, but that's breaking a law.
What law? There is no federal law requiring breaks.
Not a federal law, but in certain states there are laws regarding breaks (think Cali's is pretty strict with labor laws). But I meant, if I remember correctly, there is something in my union's handbook that says if you work at least 4 hours you get a 15 minute break. Being denied that is pretty bad.
So yesterday one our our co-managers says to me "I hear you don't like the way things are going to change around here?" These include what ever E-schedule spit outs that's it, everyone will trained to do everything including bakery, part timers required to work two nights a week, and multiple people a day doing chicken.
Does that mean everyone will have to learn how to bake bread and decorate cakes too, or does cross training only go one way?
I know the company is required to give employees breaks (that's the law), but are we required to actually accept the offer for a break? I mean, not that I wouldn't want to take a break, but just curious.
I think you're "supposed" to in case of payroll audits or something (like if there's no record on Kronos that you've clocked in/out for your break and you worked the required number of hours for it, the company could probably get in trouble for that).
I know the company is required to give employees breaks (that's the law), but are we required to actually accept the offer for a break? I mean, not that I wouldn't want to take a break, but just curious.
I think you're "supposed" to in case of payroll audits or something (like if there's no record on Kronos that you've clocked in/out for your break and you worked the required number of hours for it, the company could probably get in trouble for that).
We never clocked out for breaks, just clocked in before and after our shift. They told us if we were going to leave the parking lot that was the only time we had to clock out.
