I was at fooda earlier. At the counter, I saw the cashier having her trainee as her back-up. I felt sad every time I see those trainees because it means, some staff have to go. After 2 years in fooda in Consolacion, I noticed that they always have new staff. So I asked them once why, and they said, they’re all ‘contractual.’ After 6 months, they would leave.
I don’t understand why management has to do that. I mean I know that they have to do that because if they keep a regular employee, they have to pay all those benefits. Of course, i don’t own their business so they must have other reasons than that. I guess it’s better that way than no employment opportunities at all.
It reminds me of the conversation I had with a friend who works (worked) as an HR for a coffee shop. How she wanted to quit because she can no longer take the stress of having to deal with different human issues. She gave me an example like how to explain to an employee he needs to be ‘re-shuffled’ (tranfser) to a different branch. But the employee begged to stay in the same branch because he does not want to be away from his family. She feels like ‘naipit.’
So I asked her why not your staff can stay in 1 branch? Their reason was that if staff will become familiar with the customers, they tend to not sell any thing new to the customers because they already what those customers will order. I tried not to think of it that after all, it’s all about profits. I mean I cannot also blame business owners with how unstable our economic environment can be, they somehow need to be bold.
But starbucks has another way of doing it though based on schultz’s book (but it’s from the book so might be different in the real world). Starbucks make it a rule to have their staff stay in one place because those people already build a connection with the regular customers. You notice how starbuck’s barista will try to remember your name. They ‘found out’ that people will be more loyal customers if they build a connection, familiarity with the people that serve them.
If you look at the two coffee shops, they’re all about ‘profits.’ But I guess, at least in Starbucks, we could say not at the expense of the employees or their family. Or, maybe in a subtle way. It just makes me think, is the difference in profit really that big that it’s worth for the employees to endure some ‘pain’ on their part?
On another part, we some times get some kind of a surprised look when we would say we are totally alone on weekends — no help around. Is that weird?
It’s not that we’re nice for giving day-offs and such. It’s for selfish reasons. We’d rather be grumpy on weekends for lack of ‘rest’ than to have grumpy ‘ates’ on weekdays who will be watching over my kids. Happy ‘ates’ make happy kids make happy mothers. =)
Thus, you can book us any day as long as it’s weekdays. We’d rather give up work day, than the ates’ day-offs. You know, we already asked for their time 24/7, I guess they deserve to have their weekends on their own. If we feel injustice when we’re asked to go for OT, how much our ates being deprived of day-off, right?