Italian Grocer Deploys ‘Scan and Bag’-Style Technology

[Sherman A1]

As part of its renovation, the Conad supermarket of San Benedetto del Tronto -- one of more than 330 Conad Adriatico stores in Italy – added a self-shopping service that allows customers to scan their own items as they shop the store.

The service is similar to Stop & Shop’s Scan N’ Bag service, using a scanner, called the Joya pod, from Eugene, Ore.-based Datalogic. Eighty-four Joya pods are available for customers to help them shop. To use, the shopper simply points Joya pod at the product barcode and click on a button to make the price of the product appear on the display, along with the shopping total and complete list of products already scanned and packed in the shopping bags. When shopping is done, instead of waiting in line at the checkout counter, the shopper can go directly to the reserved self-payment machines.

http://www.progressivegrocer.com/top-stories/headlines/technology/id35588/italian-grocer-deploys-scan-and-bag-style-technology/

These times they are a changin.......

[LiberalEsto]

1. One of our local Giant supermarkets does this

in Gaithersburg, MD.
Giant and Stop & Shop are owned by the same company.

[Vincent89]

2. Spam deleted by Violet_Crumble (MIR Team)

[GoneOffShore]

3. Not a good thing at all. This technology means someone loses a job.

[Nye Bevan]

5. Just like when the mechanized loom was invented (nt)

[Sherman A1]

10. Agreed

It will mean an eventual loss of jobs.

[alcibiades_mystery]

11. So you want unnecessary busy work for people, so long as they get a paycheck?

There are better busy work jobs than grocery clerk, I assure you.

[Zalatix]

15. Really? Where? Have you seen the unemployment rate lately?

Your argument, in reality, translates to, "they're better off unemployed".

[Nye Bevan]

18. If accountancy firms would get rid of computers, and hire an army of people with quill pens,

that would create a lot of jobs too.

[Zalatix]

19. And if every job you could hope to have was automated

you would have no income. Byebye accountancy firms.

BTW if everything WAS automated, most humans would starve. The Plutocracy would not give them food rations, which is what you'd need to survive at that point.

[Mairead]

59. I don't believe you've thought this through carefully enough

If there is no grocery clerk, who does the work? The customer. Is the customer getting a paycheck? No, the customer is unwittingly donating the value of her labor. Is she donating it to the out-of-work clerk? No, she's donating it to the owners of the store.

That is not good.

[alcibiades_mystery]

64. The customer also labors to select the items

Perhaps the customer should come in with a list and hand it over to a grocery selector. More jobs for all!

[Mairead]

80. Completely different issue. The customer benefits from selecting.

There are stores who will fill and deliver a phoned-in order, but it's anyone's guess what quality produce you'll get.

[Sherman A1]

84. At a point in time

that is how grocery shopping was done.

[siligut]

12. Vincent89 is just trying to build up a post count

The MO is to copy the OP subline and then put some pat statement in the body. 2nd time this person has been PPRed, as far as I know.

[Sherman A1]

85. It would appear

that you are correct

[GoneOffShore]

91. It would also appear that he's disappeared.

[LiberalEsto]

13. Precisely!

I will not use these scanners or the self-checkouts for the reason.

[Freddie Stubbs]

14. Do you refuse to ride in elevators without elevator operators?

[Zalatix]

17. Perhaps you should read this.

http://marshallbrain.com/manna1.htm

A lot of the early tech mentioned in there is already in use.

[CTyankee]

74. I don't use the scanners at all and try not to use self-checkouts for

the same reason. In addition to the checkout person, there are individuals with disabilities who bag the groceries. They are extremely hard working and proud of their work. While I am not in favor of the old "sheltered workshop" idea, I think this kind of work, maintained in a mixed environment, is best for the disabled person and the non-disabled customer and staff. It encourages better understanding of people with differences from the "norm" (which is probably a misnomer). I am pleased that my supermarket is unionized and I think that improves work environment for all.

[snooper2]

20. No, it means a higher paying job has more work..

Like the designer working on the next version of scanner to be more ergonomic based on user feedback..

[Zalatix]

96. There aren't very many jobs of that type. Certainly not as many as the jobs it eliminates.

So what will we do with the extra people who can't find a job no matter how much they retrain?

Ah yes that question is the one everyone avoids.

[HiPointDem]

127. in china.

[4th law of robotics]

47. To this day I hold a grudge against Ford

cost me my lucrative job making buggy whips.

/Using machines to replace people in manual, low level jobs so they can be freed up for more productive tasks is kinda part of having an advancing civilization. We could have 100% employment rates if we went back to everyone digging around in the mud to grow crops. But many would argue that would not be an improvement.

[jp11]

109. It would be fine if our advancing civilization was advancing towards

having people not worry about how to feed themselves or keep from living in poverty. Our technology continues to outpace our society's evolution and many people will be freed up not for more productive tasks but to simply be unemployed or homeless.

If this were a country/planet moving toward a Star Trek utopia then yeah getting people out of low level jobs would be great so they could help advance civilization be it through creating art or joining in to create new technologies or care for loved ones, establish deeper communities etc. But that isn't the case our society continues to value more profit over anything else and we seem bent on reducing the programs we offer people out of work.

Where we should be offering more career training to at least give people a chance to go from a job that had very little in the way of requirements to a higher level one we don't do nearly enough. Even that will only do so much as machines continue to put people out of work we just won't need as many people to get more work done and the population continues to grow. People are expected to both live longer and work longer as jobs continue to vanish.

[4th law of robotics]

135. It isn't?

Famine is far less of a concern in the developed world than it was 100 years ago. Far more than a thousand years ago.

Poverty today in developed nations is far superior to poverty in those same nations 100 years ago.

We are getting better. We're told everything is the worst it's ever been because that sells papers. But really things have been steadily improving over the centuries.

[belcffub]

48. here here... what we should do is emulate the Amish

they picked a point in time and shunned all newer tech as well... keeps the whole family gainfully employed...

[Zalatix]

89. Or we could just wait until technology makes most of humanity redundant and unnecessary.

Not a single person who religiously defends automation in this thread has been able to answer what we will do with the increasing throngs of unemployed people.

[SoCalDem]

114. They are just "throwaway people"

"useless" to society..unworthy of any consideration.

[Zalatix]

116. Yup, and that's what causes rebellions.

[treestar]

120. Hasn't that been happening all along then, though?

I think it may be incorrect to assume technologies destroys more jobs than it creates.

The population has increased since earlier times, too. It may be that the technology created more jobs than it eliminated.

[Zalatix]

125. In the past. Now we have hit the tipping point.

Where's the next big job boom? We haven't seen one since the late 1990s.

[Nye Bevan]

4. I've been shopping like this for years at my local Stop & Shop.

Just scan everything when I take it off the shelf, and put it straight in the bag. No more packing, no more checkout lines. It's great.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

21. Same here

I do this at my local Giant all the time. Gets me in and out of the store much faster.

And although I understand that cashier work is brutal, both physically and mentally, I'm beyond tired of being treated as though I'm inconveniencing the cashiers by simply going through their lines. I don't expect over the top happiness, but common courtesy and something short of outright rudeness isn't too much to ask, IMO.

[Mairead]

61. How odd. I always get a smile and a cheery word from the cashier

Perhaps that's because I treat her as a human being rather than a work-unit?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

78. As do I

It's just not a store where friendly customer service is stressed or valued, at any level, from the manager down. To be sure, there are some employees there that are very courteous and professional, but they are the exception, not the norm.

I'll stick with the self-checkouts - much faster, and the self check machines are never bothered that they have to work.

[Mairead]

81. Yet you still trade there? I wouldn't.

I find that only a tiny minority of cashiers are surly, and I avoid them. Were nearly everyone that way, I'd find a different place to trade, if at all possible.

What I would not do is donate my labor to the owners of such a store.

[Sherman A1]

83. Agreed

I have found that there are certainly folks that shouldn't be checkers or baggers, but when they are surly chances are it's something that came down from above. Increased workload, cut hours (reducing the paycheck) and alike. This is hard work that they do and very, very often under appreciated. Chances are with the reduced staffing in the stores, these are the only employees you will see during your trip there.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

86. It's the closest store to my house

And since I have the option of self checkout, they can be as surly as they like, since I don't have to deal with them. The gas points deals are good, as is the meat department, and I can be in and out in no time without dealing with the cashiers.

Absent the self checkout option, I would go out of my way to shop elsewhere.

[HopeHoops]

6. Ahold uses those in their Giant stores. Silly devices. I've watched people shoplift.

One of our K-Marts put in self-scan checkouts a few years ago. They took them back out a short time later and I asked a manager why. She said they were losing way too much merchandise from people who put items in the bag without scanning them. Clerks were cheaper. Way to go - I refuse to use the things. I'm the same way with the "loyalty" cards that alter the price. If there's a tag on the item with a "BONUS BUY" or such, I rarely purchase it. I don't shop at such stores in general, but I will go in for a quick run due to proximity. AND, they are required by law (at least in PA) to use a store card if you request it.

I do most of my shopping at a small regional family-owned chain and their prices and quality are better than the advertised "specials" at the card places. I try to get my produce at the farmer's market whenever possible, but the family-owned chain goes out of its way to get local produce so I don't feel bad about purchasing it there. I don't think Ahold uses any local produce. It's all trucked in to a central distribution site and sent out to the stores from there. It sucks.

As for times changing - remember when an attendant would come out to fill your tank and wash the windshield? I haven't seen that in 25 years.

[Bluenorthwest]

8. Here in Oregon, all fuel is pumped by an attendant, always. 'Self service' is not allowed.

Same thing in NJ.

[HopeHoops]

9. That's good. I've seen people smoking while they pump gas. That frightens me.

Fortunately the pumps have auto-shutoff valves, but it could still cause a flame-out that would make the vehicle explode. Cell phone use is debatable, but smoking is not.

[snooper2]

30. LOL, was smoking at the pump a while back at QuickTrip

The dude came over the little speaker from inside saying "you know it's dangerous to smoke at the pump"

I replied back "you don't watch mythbusters do you LOL "

What you shouldn't do is light your smoke outside your car by the pumps. Open flame, fumes bad. Now, once you are lit go ahead and puff away

[HopeHoops]

31. That is correct - the open flame is the issue. Still, I've seen that.

Frankly, myth or not, I wouldn't trust a lit cigarette anywhere NEAR gasoline, propane, natural gas, or anything else that can blow the hell out of everything in the vicinity. I wear a full face shield just to use a propane torch. I don't let anyone enter my woodshop without safety goggles (I've got a few dozen pairs). Seatbelts are mandatory before I put a car in gear. No farting near the stove. No showering when there's thunder. No cell phones while driving (except in emergencies). Yeah, I'm a prude that way, but so far I still have all of my original body parts.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

32. The guy in the video is an idiot.

Swirl that gas around and/or pump it though a nozzle in to a container and then stick your face near the fumes and take a drag off the cigarette.

Call us from the burn ward and let us know the results.

[snooper2]

34. You didn't do well in chemistry did you :)

Next time you're bored take your smoke and get the cherry glowing real hot and then take your butane lighter and depress the button so butane leaks out and see if you can light your lighter...


Here's a video you might like,

"Is it a good idea to microwave gasoline?"

&feature=related

[Hassin Bin Sober]

36. Not sure what this video has to do with anything?

I don't smoke. Probably because I did well in 8th grade chemistry and health class. But that's another issue, isn't it?


http://www.physlink.com/education/askexperts/ae1.cfm

We performed a series of experiments in order to determine the actual temperature of the lit cigarette. Here are the results for the temperature at different locations and under different conditions:

Temperature without drawing:
Side of the lit portion: 400 deg C (or 752 deg F)
Middle of the lit portion: 580 deg C (or 1112 deg F)

Temperature during drawing:
Middle of the lit portion: 700 deg C (or 1292 deg F)

The above numbers represent the average we obtained by performing several trials and can be considered accurate to within 50 deg C. A standard Fe-CuNi digital thermocouple thermometer was used in all trials.


The Autoignition Temperature of a standard unleaded gasoline can be anywhere from 260 to 460 degrees C (or 500 to 860 deg F) as quoted on the FAQ: Automotive Gasoline Web Page by Bruce Hamilton (this page is also an excellent and accurate resource about the science of gasoline)

So as you can see the temperature of the cigarette, even at the side of the lit portion, is more than enough to cause gasoline to autoignite. However, there are many other factors that one should take into account. It matters how the cigarette actually falls onto the surface to the gasoline. There is a lower chance of autoignition if the cigarette falls on it's side where the temperature is lower. Also, the temperature of the gasoline itself matters. If the gasoline is cold to start with then there is again a lower chance of autoignition. One should also consider the amount of the gasoline that you have, namely if you have a large volume of gasoline that would mean that the there is enough surrounding liquid for the heat to go into and therefore the temperature of the gasoline-cigar contact spot would due to heat conduction of the gasoline decrease rapidly, therefore reducing the chance for autoignition. On the contrary, if you have a nice thin film of the gasoline, the chances of the autoignition increase. Also, the evaporation of the gasoline at the point of the contact will also act to reduce the actual contact temperature rapidly.
We are aware of at least one experimental trial (conducted by our colleague at the university) where the gasoline did not ignite upon contact with a lit cigar. This just means that all of the above conditions were not in favour of the ignition.

However, It is important to realize that the gasoline vapour has a much lower autoignition temperature than the gasoline itself. Namely, if you spill gasoline on a hot road (say in the hot summer day) you will be able to ignite gasoline by contact with a cigarette easily, just because of the gasoline vapour layer that would be produced above the surface of the gasoline. Not to even mention throwing the cigarette into the container with gasoline that has been closed for some time and is therefore full of gasoline vapours.

So for all of you smokers out there that are wondering why you are not allowed to smoke at gas pump stations, these are the real scientific reasons. It is dangerous and science is telling us that the temperature of the cigarette, given the appropriate conditions, is enough to cause gasoline to autoignite (and in case of the gas pump station this would be disastrous.)

So, Mike it looks like John Grisham has done his homework before writing his book.
WARNING: All above mentioned experiments were performed by professionals under controlled conditions and with proper precautions. You are in no way to attempt this on your own. This is dangerous and you can cause serious injuries to yourself and others. PhysLink and its authors will not be held responsible.

PhysLink would like to thank Dr. Michael Ewart for his kind assistance in performing these experiments.

Answered by: Michael Ewart, Researcher at the University of Southern California and Anton Skorucak, Creator & Editor of PhysLink

[Robb]

39. "Given the appropriate conditions" is the hang-up, here.

The conditions necessary for a burning cig to ignite vaporous gasoline do not exist at a gas station.

However, the public safety issue is that smokers almost always light cigarettes with open flames, which can ignite gasoline. The easiest message is: don't smoke until you leave the station. Although that message is imprecise, it is adequate -- see also, "never put metal in the microwave." Many kinds of metal are OK in a running microwave, however the conditions and exceptions are too complicated to list on the side of the machine.

As an aside, this is why in Ye Olde Dayse, cars were equipped with heated coil cigarette lighters. It was not a convenience so much as a safety feature, at a time when most smoked.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

45. How can you say the conditions do not exist?

If one puffs on the cigarette, they increase the temperature enough to ignite vapors. The act of pumping gas creates vapors.

Not to mention how careless smokers can be.

I've been around planes and fuel my entire adult life (I'm a pilot). I've seen what vapor ignition can do.

[Robb]

46. Simple.

The vaporous gasoline is not in an enclosed space. This is one of many reasons they do not keep gas stations indoors.

To add to my explanation above: this is not to say a burning cigarette cannot be responsible for a fire at a gas station. While there are no instances in history of a gas station fire being started by a burning cigarette igniting gasoline (liquid or vaporous), there are plenty of of other things a burning ember can set afire -- cloth car seats, tissue boxes, etc. -- that can produce an open flame.

[Hassin Bin Sober]

56. The vapors are not in an enclosed space. But the vapors are concentrated at the fill point.

[Robb]

60. Sure. But insufficiently.

The yahoo in the video up there is giving a good example -- an open half-filled container of gasoline with plenty of space above it for vaporous gasoline to gather -- yet it doesn't gather in a sufficient concentration to overcome the other problems, like atmospheric pressure and starting temperature.

You're a pilot; what's more dangerous than no information from an instrument? Bad information. What's worse than bad information? Incomplete information.

You're going to see lower hot-surface (e.g. flameless) ignition points for vapor from higher-octane gasoline (av gas, for example), and at higher atmospheric pressure, and on hot days, etc. But you're not going to get there in open spaces, no matter how much gas you spill.

You can probably hot-surface-ignite av gas at around 500 degrees inside an unventilated lab hood. But you can pour gas on a 500 degree engine manifold all day long and not start a fire.

[Blecht]

42. Before you start accusing people of not doing well in chemistry class

Maybe you should reconsider what you know about chemistry. Hassin's response to this would be a good place to start.

(I have a Ph.D. in chemistry, btw.)

[snooper2]

49. Robb is all over it

[RebelOne]

44. I am a smoker, but I am not crazy enough to smoke while pumping gas. n/t

[mrmpa]

35. Question??........

What exactly is required in PA? I'm not real clear on that.

Thanks.

[HopeHoops]

40. If you don't have a so-called "loyalty" card, they have to scan a store card.

That's not true in all states, but it is in PA. They only have to do it if you ask but they often offer. Most of the time when they offer it doesn't change anything because I've avoided the poisoned products.

[mrmpa]

82. Good to know. Thank you. eom

[Bluenorthwest]

7. Local product making international splash....

I like that...

[littlewolf]

16. local K mart have a few of the scanners ...

I don't use em ... would rather have a clerk help me

[Capt. Obvious]

22. I. Can't. Believe.

There are people freaking out on this thread about the loss of jobs this will create.

Have you ever been to a Stop & Shop? It's not robots working there but actual people. People that scan your items and sometimes other people who bag them.

Stop & Shop also has self check out lines yet they still manage to employ human clerks.

[Nye Bevan]

23. Not a new thing.

[Zalatix]

25. You will never make a credible case for more automation when we have so many people unemployed.

[Capt. Obvious]

27. Despite your hysteria

Bell hops moved on

[Zalatix]

51. Your ostrich reasoning cannot answer one basic question

Where will today's unemployed move onto?

[Capt. Obvious]

57. Maybe they can dig ditches

shovels for all!

[Zalatix]

62. Obviously you don't realize how serious the unemployment problem is.

First of all, it is unprecedented and worldwide in scope.

Worse than that, it is structural, and in fact beyond that. Technology is making all work less necessary. The problem is that without a job, people can't find ways to put food on the table. And we're shedding jobs faster than we're creating them.

Increased automation will only benefit those of us who still have jobs. Everyone else is going to be sliding into homelessness, starvation, disease and death. If you disagree with me, you can go check out the homeless population in your area. More of them are whole families now, not just military veterans and crazy people. I'm sure you also know about the fact that population growth in America has outstripped job growth since Dubya got in office. Hint: it ain't just because of Dubya, although he was a large part of it.

The fact of the matter is, automation is helping us do more now with less people. That leaves a lot of people without work. Worldwide.

This is not a problem any self-described DEMOCRAT can just ignore or play down. We're talking about people's lives here. Not just their livelihoods... but their lives.

[Capt. Obvious]

68. What is the self-described DEMOCRAT Nancy Pelosi doing about these bag boy/clerk jobs?

Is she filing legislation to outlaw robot workers? Is she trying to crush markets that already employ this technology and have for many years?

Or is she acting like a plutocrat?

And as pointed out above any self-described DEMOCRAT should shun all technology if they truly care about the unemployed.
And they should quit their job so an unemployed person can have it.

[Zalatix]

70. Oh that bullshit "Nancy Pelosi is a Plutocrat" crap again?

And nobody said we should destroy all automation. What I said, more than once, was we don't need MORE of it than we already have.

Again, this is your way of avoiding the question of "What do we do with all the unemployed out there?"

[Capt. Obvious]

72. I told you - give one of them your job

Let the rest dig ditches and operate switchboards.

If you want technology to stop - move to Amish country.

[Zalatix]

75. Perhaps your tune will change when your job is automated away

and you find yourself retraining only to have to compete with 500 other retrained people for a single job opening.

That's poetic justice.

[Capt. Obvious]

77. And maybe you'll walk your talk

and do something for the unemployed

But you won't.

[Zalatix]

87. Your challenge is bullshit.

There's no point in giving up my job to give to someone else when I, unlike you, want everyone to have a job.

Actually, you're the one who is asking for karma to happen.

[Zalatix]

90. BTW I notice you have nothing to offer all the people who are losing their jobs because of this.

I guess we'll end this with you not having any answer for the tragic consequences of your arguments - that is, all the people who can't find work.

[former9thward]

102. The dirty little secret is that no one knows what to do with the unemployed.

Obama doesn't, Romney doesn't, no one has a credible plan. But trying to stop technology is harmful and useless. Technology can't be stopped. The computer you are using put millions out of work in offices and countless other fields. It created jobs but eliminated far more -- especially entry level type of jobs.

[Zalatix]

105. Thanks for an honest answer. That's a rarity in society now.

At the dawn of the Internet age we were doing everything but sweeping people off the streets for all the new jobs. When manufacturing computers was in the US they were scooping up the unemployed for that, too.

"Technology can't be stopped." Neither can an armed revolution when you're dealing with tens of millions of unemployed people. The Middle East just learned that the hard way. When populations in the West gets tired of being made redundant, it'll be even worse.

Slowing automation, stopping offshoring, none of that has as drastic consequences as the kind of mass redundancies we're seeing now - and the violence, starvation and war that said mass redundancies will cause. see: Youth Bulge. You do what you have to do to keep the masses employed or you may find yourself dealing with a failed state. Ask Tunisia about that.

[former9thward]

110. You mention the Middle East.

Currently I am the director of a non-profit that exclusively works in the ME and I travel there frequently. Yes there has been armed revolutions but I am not optimistic that will solve their economic problems. All of the ME countries have huge amounts of unemployed young men. That spells trouble for any society.

[Zalatix]

115. Yes indeedy it does. And sometimes armed revolutions do make things worse.

The Western world is plagued by 3 major job killers: offshoring, automation and productivity increases.

We need to stop that cycle. If we do not, we could face a rebellion by the poor and unemployed like they rebelled in the Middle East. Offshoring will stop. Automation will stop. Productivity will grind to a halt. The economy will do more than just collapse.

Offshoring, automation and productivity increases, are not gods we should be afraid to offend. Everyone says "if we put the brakes on any of those factors, it's the end of the world". No, less automation, less offshoring and a slowing of productivity growth are not going to bring an economy to a halt. An angry populace of unemployed, desperate people, however, can bring a nation to a halt. Economy and all. This JUST happened in the Middle East; we're just fooling ourselves if we think it can't happen here.

Globalization, technology and endless productivity growth aren't as important as jobs, jobs, jobs.

[snooper2]

138. We used to have techs manually configure switches and equipment for provisioning of telecom services

You know, simple stuff like building router interfaces, VC's, trunk groups...

A big pain in the ass, lots of room for error, continual training

Over the past 12 years we have put in a lot of software to do this instead of humans. Auto provisioning...

Folks that were doing that gradually moved into Care/Repair and other areas. IT has grown with departments servicing and developing software based on requirements folks like me write.

We are always evolving. So you are whining about a problem that doesn't exist. Society always grows and jobs become obsolete and new jobs are created. Get over yourself.

Were you around like a worried nelly when switchboard operators were replaced by well, a switch?
How about when portable compressors became available? Did you go out on the streets and scream for all the construction jobs that would be lost because one person can be 3 times more productive?
Where were all the alarm system companies in 1905? Oh yeah, they didn't exist LOL...


(We can do this for hours or days if you want )

[Zalatix]

151. Yes I can do this for hours. Years, in fact. Show us the job boom. Where is it?

I'm not whining. You are intentionally putting your head in the sand.

Show us where new job growth is outstripping job losses. There has been no such example since 2000. Come back and sell me your purple kool-aid when such an example surfaces again.

Unemployment is driving revolutions in other nations. I dare you to accuse them of 'whining'.

Edit: oh and, while you're at it for hours and hours, show us how automation is creating jobs for these people:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002793530

I can cite stuff like that for hours and hours, too, if you want!

[LanternWaste]

52. And outsourcing continues too...

And outsourcing continues too...

as always, the most effective tools and conditions for the lowest overhead and highest profit.

[Zalatix]

53. The system will collapse in on itself as unemployment continues to grow.

[LanternWaste]

79. We all prognosticate, and pretend we know what will happen.

We all prognosticate, and pretend we know what will happen.

[Zalatix]

88. I am very confident about EXACTLY what will happen.

People will get more efficient, old jobs will vanish far faster than new ones will appear.

We are entering into an age of severe, mostly artificial shortages - shortages of food, jobs, you name it. That's why prices are going up, wages are going down: there is a mass culling in progress.

[NYC Liberal]

33. Does that go for all automation then?

What about the people who have to design the machines? The people who have to write the software? The people who have to service them?

[Sherman A1]

38. These are not self checkouts as we are accustomed to seeing

but rather hand held units that you will scan items as you shop. Eventually your purchase will be debited from either a bank account or a credit card and you will simply bag your own groceries and very possibly never interact with a human being while you shop for your groceries.

Yes, there will be jobs lost.

[Capt. Obvious]

41. That exists now

At Stop & Shop. It's not robots working there. It's humans.

[Zalatix]

95. We're either going to address the accelerating loss of jobs

or we're going to see a global revolution.

[RadiationTherapy]

24. This is good. Let's not pretend corporate stores haven't been cutting staff

and indirectly "forcing" customers to bag their own groceries after waiting in line at understaffed checkout lines as prices go ever upward. It's nonsense. Let's end it and go. Only a certain percentage of jobs will be "lost" since the equipment must be made and maintained and stores restocked.

[Zalatix]

26. Made in China, not the USA.

And when these things break down, I've seen these machines stay broken down for a week at a time at local big chain grocery stores. Most likely there are only a very few people who have jobs maintaining these machines and they're overworked running from place to place to deal with them.

Restockers are a non-issue here, since there is neither growth nor loss in the number of people they need for that. However it is possible to automate that, too.

[RadiationTherapy]

28. I am not going to fall for any nonsense such as freezing technology and innovation

for a handful of low paying jobs.

[RadiationTherapy]

29. And I ain't baggin my own feckin groceries either. 10% off or the line waits!

[Zalatix]

50. Then you will fall for increasing unemployment. Enjoy!

[Bluenorthwest]

139. You have a few areas of confusion. The devices the OP speaks of are hand held pods, not self

check out stations as you describe. Also, the company making them employs 250 people or so here in Oregon. They are based in Italy, not in the US.
And anyone with a shred of inventory experience would tell you that growth and loss are very much possible in stocking positions, as the more turnover of product there is, the more stocking is needed and of course the inverse in true. How could you think that stock positions are static in number?

[Zalatix]

152. Growth and loss, but over time things will balance out.

That is, until they find a way to automate stocking, which will mean more machines made in China and less jobs here.

[Sherman A1]

37. Stores do need to be restocked, however

you will see a greater trend towards pre-made palletized modules that are simply run out onto the sales floor, dropped & then replaced as they empty, saving more labor and costing more jobs at the store. In some cases that will include removing large sections of shelving to allow space for these drop pallets to be located. Skeleton staffing is or will be the norm.

[Capt. Obvious]

43. It will be just like The Jetsons

[Zalatix]

54. Keep dreaming.

[haele]

55. What the Jetsons never showed you was why "everyone" drove around in flying cars and lived

and "worked" in a society built up on quarter-mile high stilts.

The ground was either un-inhabitable, or a wasted world covered with sparwling prison-labor plantation or mining camps, with isolated bands of roving groups of "extra" workers or run-aways searching for anything to survive on. "Earth" on the ground was not someplace to live or take your family...

When I was growing up, I always wondered why they never showed the actual ground or even ocean - just platforms on which there were park-like biospheres, similar to the movie "Silent Running".

Haele

[Capt. Obvious]

58. Your mind can come with even better scenarios

The Jetsons never showed that the ground because it was on fire. Just a blazing inferno instead of a sun to keep them warm.

[Zalatix]

63. Haele has a real point. All you've got is snark.

[Capt. Obvious]

67. All you have is laughable hysteria

Why aren't you out helping the out of work switchboard operators.

[Zalatix]

69. All you have is an ignorant ostrich approach.

When you are asked "what will we do with all the unemployed" you just avoid the question.

[Capt. Obvious]

71. And you don't care about the unemployed switchboard operators

You should be ashamed of yourself.

[Zalatix]

73. And you don't care about unemployed people at all.

[Zalatix]

65. Now that is shockingly insightful. Come to think of it you never did see the Earth's surface

in those cartoons.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

100. Thanks for playing...

[mythology]

111. Oh now you've done it.

You ruined a perfectly good argument about a cartoon future and what impact it might have on the actual future.

Unless of course those scenes were actually photoshopped so that we would fall into Mr Spacely's dastardly plot.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

117. Indeed...

I am sure there is a secret vault in Hollywood containing censored dystopian episodes of The Jetsons, and had they aired would have warned America about the post-industrial hell that awaited.

My ex had a saying about people like this, she couldn't stand them - but it would wear out the html alert button if I posted it.

[haele]

154. Thanks for bringing those up -

We didn't watch a lot of TV (didn't have one when I was growing up) and all the episodes I remember seeing were never had the earth. I barely remember the Flintstones, and only know of the B&W episodes pre-Bam-Bam by word of mouth and the occasional "clip".

Ah well, a perfectly good theory shot to hell by a little thing called evidence.

Haele

[haele]

66. As usual, the employment issue comes to bear.

In my working experience, there are only so many jobs that go into supervisory or management. There are only so many administrative jobs. There are only so many medical or legal jobs, and only so many professional jobs requiring engineering, certified technical or mechanical that can be supported by any economy. There are an decreasing number of jobs in the public arena - from janitors and clerks to professionals.
There are only so many small entrepreneurial businesses that will succeed - if there are 55 different types of contractor businesses(working out of their homes or local storefronts), 42 "home" and/or "ethnic" restaurants, 30 private tutor/instructor/coach businesses, 25 sitter and personal caretaker businesses, 20 coffee and baked goods shops, 17 property management/real estate storefronts, 15 consignment, craft, or thrift stores, 14 florists, 12 beauty shops, 10 specialty breweries/pubs, 9 pet-based stores, 7 spas, 6 mechanic, 5 computer/IT, and 4 local produce or specialty food stores that are started by smart, talented and driven "unemployed" residents in a two mile radius, only a maybe quarter of those businesses will survive the first year. This is approximately the ratio of small businesses that started up and subsequently ended over a period of 6 years in the neighborhood that had just finished a cycle of "gentrification" that I was living in up to last year.
The cycle started out with professionals who had been hit with "downsizing" and the tanking economy. Now, that neighborhood is filled with families of engineers, lawyers, and administrative people who are struggling to find any work to keep their houses - and they are now competing with the lower income families in the neighborhood who had been eaking out a living working multiple jobs at places like Hooters, Home Depot and local union grocery stores.

And of course, there are really only so many people who are so "perfect" that they are easily employable at any job - most people are around average, not significantly above so they stand out for the fewer and fewer jobs available. And people have a nasty tendency of not staying disposed of when their jobs are disposed of - they don't just disappear.

It's not just a matter of technology in business, it's also the limiting of available work for people who are being displaced, of what you do with people who are left with increasingly less resources to survive on. There is no frontier for them to go to to start over. There is no place to "homestead" and create new communities where everyone can be pretty much gainfully employed.
If we can't get a handle on healthy communities in the pursuit of profits and increased technology, we will have a permanent underclass and a lower standard of living for anyone who has to work for a living.
The only people who will have a decent standard of living are those who will be able to figuratively "pay cash" for it, or those that they choose to patronize.
The self-fulfilling prophecy - as society becomes more and more enamored with "the ownership society" Plutocrats who are calling themselves "job creators" will actually become "job creators" as that "socialist" idea of being part of a healthy community disappears; they will be the only ones with enough cash to own the means to get a job - thus they will own the rest of us.

Haele

[Zalatix]

92. Ever notice how you bring up the unemployment issue and everyone avoids it?

[SickOfTheOnePct]

93. No one is ignoring

But most of us aren't on board to stop all progress and automation.

[Zalatix]

94. So you're on board to see unemployment increase unabated. Gotcha.

You are stuck in a world where automation created more jobs than it eliminated. That was the past. The current reality is that it's eliminating more jobs than it creates.

Why do you keep ignoring that? Of course I understand why - you have no answers. You're completely helpless but to watch as millions of people every YEAR are made redundant, and no amount of retraining in the universe will ever reverse that.

Global population growth is outstripping job growth. It's the one fact everyone is scared to death to talk about.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

97. Why are you on a computer?

Do you know how many postal workers you've put out of work because you communicate on-line instead of by mail?

Have you gotten rid of your telephone so that we can bring back telegraph workers?

Have you gotten rid of your fridge? What about all of the out of work icemen?

I take it you don't drive, right? Poor buggy whip makers.

No electric range, correct? What about the woodman that should be supplying the wood for your wood burning stove?

For shame.

[Zalatix]

98. What are you going to do when your job gets automated

and you retrain for new skills only to find you're competing with 500 people for one job opening?

Betcha you will regret all of what you said.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

101. Should it ever happen, I'll be sure to let you know

So why are you still on your computer?

[Zalatix]

103. LOL that's your problem. You think you're immune.

That's a long fall to take when you realize you're not.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

104. Nope, no belief that I'm immune

It could well happen.

Now, when is the iceman and the woodman coming to your home to make their deliveries? Because anyone as sanctimoniuos and holier-than-thou than you appear to be surely can't be hypocritical enough to utillizing modern appliances that cost jobs.

[Zalatix]

106. And what will you do if it does happen, and you can't find another job?

You'll sorely regret what you've said here.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

108. No, I won't

I'll deal with it like I've dealt with every other bad thing that's happened to me in my life, including prolonged unemployment.

I do find it interesting that you've posted time and time again that no one is addressing the issues you raise, yet you refuse to address the fact that you yourself, in spite of your protestations against automation and progress, do in fact partake in the conveniences of said automation and progress.

Do you not find that to be hypocritical on both counts?

(Assuming this question will be ignored, as it has been every time I've asked it)

[Zalatix]

112. You'll deal with it by being unemployed. How much can you buy on $0 an hour?

I'm ignoring your question because you intentionally base it on something I never said. I didn't say roll back automation. I said we don't need MORE of it. You're shooting at straw men.

Have you not seen the revolutions in the Middle East? Those were because of mass unemployment.

You may find automation goes away (something I never advocated) when civil war destroys our infrastructure. Or worse: STUXNET. I bet you have no idea what that is.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

113. Well at least you answered

Even a dishonest answer is better than none at all, I guess.

And anyone that works in IT or pays the least bit of attention to what's going on in the world, particularly regarding Iran, knows all about STUXNET.

[Zalatix]

123. Not a dishonest answer, just not one you want to hear.

If we "can't stop technology" then we also can't stop industrial viruses, either.

[Bluenorthwest]

145. Unless you are in NJ or Oregon, you probably pump all of your own gas and refuse assistance

to save a few pennies, and we can bet the farm on the guess that you have never done a thing to alter your State's laws to make 'self serve gas' illegal, and thus to create multiple jobs instantly at each gas station. In Oregon, about 5,700 people are employed pumping gas. Yes our gas costs a bit more, which I'm sure is part of why most people do not organize their State to outlaw the automated customer labor method of selling gasoline.
Have you even once suggested such legislation in your State? If not, why not? Probably never crossed your mind.
I bet you pump your own, without so much as thinking of going to a full service station, if such a thing even exists in your area.

[Zalatix]

149. Actually that's one of several things I wrote my state assemblyman about. So, next try please?

[treestar]

121. Why didn't that happen before?

The computer eliminated certain jobs, but then created IT and programming jobs.

You may be wrong about technology not creating many more new jobs.

If you were correct, this crisis would have occurred much earlier. Especially since world population increases with each generation. Unemployment would be at 99% by now if you were correct.

[Zalatix]

124. It didn't happen before because we had new industries creating lots of jobs.

Now we don't have any new industries that create job booms. The era of job booms is over. If you see a new job boom coming then please do tell.

You know that global warming tipping point we're worried about? An equivalent has already occurred in the job market. It didn't happen before, but it is happening now.

This will end in a major revolution. Like it did in the Middle East.

[treestar]

126. OF course there are new industries

This scanner was invented, produced, manufactured and marketed, sold and operated.

What is the difference between now and before? You've declared this tipping point out of the blue, without giving a reason explaining it.

Why didn't it happen when the typewriter industry lost jobs to the computer industry? Or when the buggy industry lost out to the auto industry? And in the midst of increasing population?

[Zalatix]

131. Please re-read carefully. I said, no new industries that are creating LOTS of jobs.

I am not declaring a tipping point out of the blue. We have had no major job booms created since the tech crash in 2000. That is the problem that we're facing.

This is different from the typewriter industry losing to computers, and the buggy industry losing to cars. Both situations led to huge new explosions in jobs. Like I said, my employers back in the late 90s were talking about shoveling unemployed people off the streets, we had so many help wanted ads for totally inexperienced people to become tier-1 tech support people, and that's not counting the web design and quality assurance work we had piled up for moderately savvy folks.

Computer manufacturing and auto manufacturing were much the same way. You could come out with a high school education, or less, and jump right into factory work.

Where do you see that happening now? See what I mean?

Please, the next time you respond, tell us where the job boom is happening.

[treestar]

132. I don't see the statistics on this anywhere

We have 8.2% unemployment now, but that has happened before. And been recovered from. It's not like there is some difference. But there is history that when one type of jobs disappears, another opens up. It may not be on a right now sort of time schedule.

This article is about the scanners and the clerks losing their jobs due to the scanners. As usual those who are upset for these job losses are not looking at the fact that the making of the scanners creates jobs that didn't exist before. You've given nothing to show that the new jobs are fewer than the lost set.

[Zalatix]

136. Of course you don't see the new job boom being created

because there is none. There hasn't been any in the last 10 years. You've given nothing to show that there is any net job creation.

10 years counting. Where is the job boom?

[treestar]

146. Neither of us knows

I don't know if the jobs the technology creates outnumber the jobs lost. But then neither do you know of the opposite.

I suspect I may be correct in that population is always increasing. So if unemployment stays the same while the advances take place, the new job set is likely more numerous.

Advances in technology are therefore likely desirable, and the Luddite has been proven wrong.

Even with the scanners, the store still needs employees, too. The scanners can break down, or you can need help with them, and there's someone popping up immediately, since the store doesn't want a line and a wait to occur. There is some increased risk of theft. The people working at the scanner making are not there to be seen, but they count as employed people.

[Zalatix]

150. As I said, show me the job boom, otherwise you really don't have a good argument here.

[treestar]

153. Straw man. I don't have to show a "job boom."

The number of jobs overall and relative to the population may have increased. For the reasons I stated. Your "job boom" is your own requirement. Why would there ever be one? It would be a steady increase rather than a sudden "boom." That actually sounds like more or a bubble than a true advance.

[Zalatix]

155. Yes you do have to show it. The jobs overall and relative to the population have NOT increased.

Auto manufacturing was a boom. Computers, initially, was a boom. These were big job creators with no attendant bubble. Wages went up, too.

The only thing you can show in the last 12 years is jobs not keeping up with population growth, U3 unemployment hiding a large number of people not even looking for work, oh and the overall percentage of employed people DROPPING.
Only 47% Of Working Age Americans Have Full Time Jobs


Your turn. Evidence to support your claim, please?

[muriel_volestrangler]

129. The only supermarket I've seen use hand-held scanners in the UK is a cooperative

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Waitrose

It's interesting that the store with the most worker control over it is the one using automated technology the most.

[Bluenorthwest]

141. That's because when workers control the work place, they say 'being a checker sucks and is

harmful to the body due to repetitive motions and non ergonomic work stations. There are some chains that do not allow anyone to check full time, they rotate duty to minimize the harm.
Most people in this thread think this is about 'self check out stations' they do not understand the hand held devices are not the same...

[SickOfTheOnePct]

142. Not only is it physically strenuous it is mentally draining

My ex was a cashier for the first couple of years we were married, and she came home absolutely drained, both physically and mentally. Having to always be "on" for the customers is hard, as is constantly dealing with the public.

[Capt. Obvious]

76. This turned into an amazing thread

Rec

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

99. I worked for a retailer that mucked around with all this...

Five locations: West Hollywood, Huntington Beach, San Diego, Scottsdale and Las Vegas.

We were robbed blind at all of them, organized theft rings would just print themselves their own barcodes at home for less expensive items and wander out the door as loss prevention obliviously looked on from CCTV.

I suspect we sold more cheap Honeywell Air Purifiers in San Diego than were ever manufactured.

[Sherman A1]

118. Indeed

They will be a boon to the organized theft rings and I am certain that they are currently watching the development and deployment of this technology. As store staffs are gutted and replaced with technology, it simply becomes easier and easier for them.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

128. There wasn't even a reduction in staff

The five trial locations were chosen just because they had space set aside at the front of the store for a stupid service that was never launched to setup the self-checkouts.

We had an internal viral video circulated far and wide that was a security guard in Huntington Beach helping a shoplifter to her car with a home theater speaker set that had been rung up as a $49 Honeywell Air Purifier. The same assholes would hit all three California locations in the same day, several times a week with sheets and sheets of bar code stickers for the stupid air purifiers. And the resolution on the security cameras was so poor we couldn't really tell what they were doing at the kiosk beyond the number of items scanned. Whether they had the correct barcodes or not was a mystery to us. So unless somebody ran up a formal dress as an air purifier we were in the dark.

The fact the company had a hands-off attitude towards shoplifters to begin with didn't help following a security guard nearly being beaten to death by a meth addict. We would trespass warning known shoplifters entering the store but otherwise just ignored them.

[Sherman A1]

130. There may not have been a staff reduction at your store

but be assured this is all about saving labor & cutting store employees hours. I have seen hours cut for the last 30+ years as stores add one labor saving technique after another.

There was a time when each item had to be priced, then they replaced that with bar codes (fewer hours), then increased vendor stocking, then boxed beef, then automatic watering systems in produce, then cutting back or eliminating in store bakeries, then bringing in more pre-packed items for the perishable departments, then more pre built displays that simply are wheeled to the sales floor and dropped into position as runs of shelving are removed.

As this scanning technology advances it will be an app on the consumers smart phone directly debited from their bank & the consumer will eventually be doing more and more of the work (checking & bagging) and providing the equipment (smart phone), providing the store with a huge amount of information for marketing & tracking purposes, with I assure you no reduction in pricing.

[Sen. Walter Sobchak]

133. I don't dispute that,

But any organization where loss prevention has ANY sway will shut these down pretty quickly.

Before these things the single largest shrink problem we had was transvestites destroying designer clothing as fully grown men would try on a dozen outfits from Junior Contemporary, rendering all of them unsalable.

After self-checkout every high-value uncaged item was being stolen by the pallet load.

Do I miss retail? Oh hell no...

Working retail internal audit probably saved my professional career after a period of unemployment/underemployment if for the title alone, but I would never go back.

[Blue_In_AK]

107. I hate those scanners.

They put a lot of retail clerks out of work.

[treestar]

122. But then they create jobs for scanner makers

and scanner programmers.

[treestar]

119. The person can see how much they are spending as they go along

It might tend to lose sales for them in the long run.

Seems like they'd have a theft problem, too. Is there anything to stop unscanned items from being thrown in?

[Sherman A1]

140. Good point

I don't know if these allow for a running total or not, but I normally just take a copy of the weekly ad and use it to write down the prices as I shop, using a calculator to total them as I go avoiding sticker shock at the register.

As to the theft problem, most certainly it would make it much easier to steal things as there will be fewer eyes on the sales floor & the front end, so the possibilities increase.

[dont hassle the hoff]

134. This is news? I just did it an hour ago

and do it almost every day.

[Sherman A1]

137. Wow

that was quick....

[Bluenorthwest]

143. Where did you use a hand held pod device to shop in the US?

nt

[SickOfTheOnePct]

144. Giant has had them here in NOVA for two or three years now

There is a big station with 20 or so devices, and you scan your loyalty card. That releases a device, and off you go.

When done, you can either go to a regular cashier to finish or to a self-checkout where you scan a barcode about above the scanner, then scan your loyalty card again.

[Bluenorthwest]

147. So just as in Italy, the system you use is a customer choice option....

I assume they do not limit themselves to 20 shoppers at a time, so it is an option, much like self service gasoline.

[SickOfTheOnePct]

148. Absolutely

You can scan all of your own, part of it (finish as self check), part of it (finish with cashier), etc.

You're never limited to only using the handheld device, or even to using it alone in the same order.