{"id":32859,"date":"2025-01-12T18:23:40","date_gmt":"2025-01-12T23:23:40","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/ianchadwick.com\/blog\/?p=32859"},"modified":"2025-01-12T18:23:40","modified_gmt":"2025-01-12T23:23:40","slug":"the-rise-and-fall-of-self-checkout","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/ianchadwick.com\/blog\/the-rise-and-fall-of-self-checkout\/","title":{"rendered":"The Rise and Fall of Self-Checkout"},"content":{"rendered":"
<\/div>\n

<\/g><\/svg><\/i> \"Loading\"<\/p>\n

<\/div>\n

\"Self-checkout<\/a>I<\/span> refuse on moral, ethical, and simply human grounds, to use a self-checkout<\/strong> at any local store where they are installed. My initial reaction to them was outrage: this is how big retail chains get rid of employees and reduce their staff and thus human costs. This is how people at the lower end of the wage scales get unemployed but CEOS and executives get bonuses.<\/p>\n

It also means the customer is forced to play the role of cashier without any monetary benefit from doing so.<\/p>\n

I am almost always pro-worker and believe any so-called innovation that affects workers and reduces their numbers or hurts their wages should be viewed through very skeptical eyes. Not that these are always negative. Automation and robots have changed the nature of many jobs, particularly in an industry such as car manufacturing, and in many cases those changes are positive. I am not a Luddite about technology or change.*<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

But retail is not the same as an assembly line. It is a personal experience that works best when customers and staff have mutually positive interactions. Having worked in retail many times over my lifetime, I believe I have some small insight into it. And if retailers want to compete successfully against online shopping, the best thing they can offer is a good customer experience in-store. Self-checkouts don’t provide that.**<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

That wasn’t what they were supposed to do. As The Independent noted<\/a>, “When the concept of self-service checkouts was first devised in the 1980s, it was with the vision of a utopian shopping experience where consumers could breeze in and out at speed.” As the article also notes, anyone who has encountered a glitch or problem while scanning an item knows that any potential gains in “speed” are usually lost waiting for an employee to fix the problem. Most outlets with self-checkout need to have one or two employees available all the time to respond to customer issues, but cannot mitigate customer frustration with the technology. At least with a human cashier, you can talk about something, and resolve an issue face-to-face. Talking to a device to solve a problem is highly ineffective (just try getting Alexa, Siri, or Google to fix something…).<\/p>\n

Worse: their presence suggests a hostile or adversarial relationship between store management and employees. It suggests the store doesn’t value its employees as much as its profits and reducing overhead. Retailers may see self-checkout kiosks as a one-time cost (from $10,000 to $40,000 USD per kiosk<\/a>, although this site suggests<\/a> an average $30,000 USD per kiosk) but there are also annual maintenance fees ($1,000-$3,000 USD per unit<\/a>), software licensing, repairs, update fees, installation fees, increased utility costs, etc. to consider. As a piece on Seneca Journalism’s site<\/a> suggests, some retailers bluntly prefer profit over people:<\/p>\n

Four Self-Checkout lanes cost over 100,000 dollars, according to Cardfellow. Compare that to the average Canadian minimum worker making 30,000 dollars a year, with chances to miss shifts and self-checkouts looks tantalizing to companies.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Those extra and mounting costs, a CBC story tells us<\/a>, may have encouraged many retailers to remove self-checkout kiosks:<\/p>\n

“Stores anticipated that this technology would allow them to significantly reduce labour costs,”\u00a0said Christopher Andrews, a sociologist and author of\u00a0The Overworked Consumer: Self-Checkouts, Supermarkets, and the Do-It-Yourself Economy.
\nBut instead of cutting costs, some stores discovered that self-checkout actually hurt their bottom line, largely due to theft, says Andrews.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Unions, especially, have been vocal about the potential loss of jobs through their use. A recent Forbes Magazine article<\/a> noted that, “Introducing self-checkout technology in the retail sector has led to concerns about job displacement, with a potential reduction in cashier roles. However, it also creates new job opportunities in areas like system maintenance and customer assistance.” But that’s false. You don’t simply move a cashier over to system maintenance or tech support. Many people who work in retail do so because they don’t have the skill levels or education for that sort of work.<\/p>\n

Forbes adds, “As roles shift due to automation, providing workers with opportunities to upskill or transition to new roles becomes vital.” But I don’t see any efforts at, say, local grocery stores with self-checkout, to provide the sort of training that would allow their cashiers to transition to more technical roles relating to the machinery.<\/p>\n

Yes, some cashiers may be shunted to customer service, helping customers who have problems with the machines, and doing theft prevention, but that will be lessened as these devices start to use more advanced AI “for image recognition, significantly reducing errors and theft.” In stores where they are installed, there are often far too few cashiers to handle the lines of customers, forcing many people to use self-checkouts simply to avoid the lengthy wait to get their purchases scanned and paid for. But that means longer lines at the self-checkouts, so all that happens is that the problem gets moved from one line to another. Hiring more human cashiers could solve it easily.<\/p>\n

For all the rationalization about implementing these devices, it’s hard not to see them as a crass profits-before-people move. Forbes adds, “One significant concern is the responsible distribution of automation’s benefits.” Unless I’m missing something, everything I’ve read or watched about self-checkouts says all the benefits go to the bottom line, and none to the workers: they help make bigger bonuses for CEOs and executives, which always happens when workers get laid off.<\/p>\n

In the local Shoppers Drug Mart, for example, for a long time after the devices were installed, employees refused to serve customers on the cash register (unless they wanted to buy a lottery ticket), although they offered to help customers use the self-checkouts. I walked out of the store several times without buying what I had selected because I refused to use the machines. And since then I have been reluctant to enter the store again, and have gone elsewhere for products I used to purchase there. (My wife tells me they are now serving customers on the cash registers again, but my reluctance to shop there still exists.)***<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n

The Forbes article also says “Retail shoppers prioritize speed and convenience…” which may sometimes be true, but in my experience, that depends considerably on the type of retail, the particular store, and the needs of the customer. Every one of us has surely had the frustration of trying to find an employee in a box store to provide help about a product, and then been further frustrated by the lack of knowledge of the employee finally located. And conversely, we can remember having good interactions with friendly, helpful employees.<\/p>\n

That positive experience with an employee can easily give way to an overall negative experience. As noted in a BBC article<\/a> titled, “‘It hasn’t delivered’: The spectacular failure of self-checkout technology,”<\/p>\n

It’s a common sight at many retail stores: a queue of people, waiting to use a self-checkout kiosk, doing their best to remain patient as a lone store worker attends to multiple malfunctioning machines. The frustration mounts while a dozen darkened, roped-off and cashier-less tills sit in the background.
\nFor shoppers, self-checkout was supposed to provide convenience and speed. Retailers hoped it would usher in a new age of cost savings. Their thinking: why pay six employees when you could pay one to oversee customers at self-service registers, as they do their own labour of scanning and bagging for free?<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The Independent adds another twist: using these devices ignores the importance of social interaction, especially to people who may be lonely or vulnerable to the distancing that machines thrust on us:<\/p>\n

While many of us prefer the speed and ease of self-scanning \u2013 and, in fact, the\u00a0lack\u00a0of social interaction \u2013 for some older people, this new normal robs them of what may be one of the few opportunities for conversation, however brief, in their day.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

When we moved from Toronto to our small town of Collingwood, 34 years ago, one of the things we liked and commented on regularly was that we could talk to people in stores, chat with cashiers or other staff, even if that was merely to recognize one another. People in stores were friendly and welcoming. It made shopping feel less impersonal, less transactional, more human. In fact, when I worked at the local\u00a0 retail outlet recently, staff frequently commented that it was easy to recognize out-of-town customers by their behaviour at the cash register. Locals chatted, said hello, and smiled. Out-of-town visitors \u2014 especially those from the big urban centres \u2014 were often on their phones, barely mumbled a response to cashiers, and didn’t make eye contact as often.<\/p>\n

(The same goes for on-street encounters. Susan is particularly aggressive in greeting people we meet or pass while out walking, taking delight in saying hello to people who are on their phones as if the public space didn’t exist or that strangers should be privy to their conversations. Recognizing others is part of the unwritten but accepted social contract that creates communities and neighbourhoods. Not to do so makes a person just a biological analog for those mechanical self-checkouts.)<\/p>\n

The Independent also adds,<\/p>\n

A\u00a0study by UK housing authority Anchor\u00a0found that\u00a0one in four older shoppers find self-service supermarket checkouts intimidating and unfriendly. The study authors also claimed that it can be \u201cquite a miserable experience\u201d for older consumers if they don\u2019t get to say \u201chello\u201d to a single person during their shopping experience.
\nIt chimes with other areas of life where increased digitalisation and automation has left people feeling marginalised…<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Self-checkouts were originally designed for customers with a small number of items to process, not full shopping carts. Some have signs posted with item limits. Yet go to any store with self-checkouts and you will see people with full carts at these stations. As an article in Grubfeed<\/a> notes, “The self-checkout item limit is perhaps the most commonly broken rule in modern retail.”<\/p>\n

Designed to keep lines moving and ensure efficiency, these limits\u2014typically set at 15 items or fewer\u2014are often disregarded by shoppers eager to avoid longer lines at staffed checkouts. This behavior stems from a combination of factors, including perceived time-saving benefits and a misunderstanding of the rule\u2019s purpose. Many customers rationalize that they can scan and bag their items quickly, regardless of the quantity, making the limit seem arbitrary.
\nHowever, this disregard for item limits can lead to several issues. Longer wait times for other customers, increased chances of errors in scanning and bagging, and a higher likelihood of needing staff assistance all contribute to a less efficient shopping experience overall. Retailers have noticed this trend and are increasingly looking for ways to enforce these limits without alienating customers who prefer self-checkout options.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

We cannot ignore the big problem of theft at self-checkouts. The notion that everyone would be honest and ethical when asked to account for and pay for their goods never came from anyone in retail. Most retailers know that people will steal anything<\/em> regardless of need or circumstances. Big stores have dedicated staff for loss and shrinkage prevention and self-checkouts have to be carefully monitored. In an era when greedy CEOs get massive bonuses and salaries<\/a> from overpriced groceries<\/a> and price-fixing schemes<\/a>, and prices skyrocket as wages stagnate, it’s easy to understand that someone struggling to survive on minimum wages would be tempted not to tell the machine about a bag of generic-brand frozen corn or to tell the kiosk an avocado is a carrot. As the BBC article<\/a> noted:<\/p>\n

Some retailers cite theft as a motivator for ditching the unstaffed tills. Customers\u00a0may be more willing\u00a0to simply swipe merchandise when using a self-service kiosk than they are when face-to-face with a human cashier. Some data shows\u00a0retailers utilising self-checkout technology have loss rates\u00a0more than twice the industry average.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The statistics are not good for retailers. According to one article<\/a>, “69% of users believe the machines contribute to shoplifting.” The article continues:<\/p>\n

While not many Americans admit to stealing via self-checkout, those who do don\u2019t necessarily plan to stop.\u00a015% of self-checkout users confess to purposely stealing. While 60% of those who have stolen felt remorseful and 33% say they\u2019ve been caught, 44% say they\u2019ll likely do it again. Although 79% of self-checkout users diligently ensure each item scans, 21% admit to accidentally taking an item \u2014 and guilt didn\u2019t get the better of the 61% who kept it anyway.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Shoplifting is huge and self-checkouts just help it. In the USA in 2022 alone, it cost an estimated $112 BILLION<\/a>.\u00a0 The Retail Council of Canada<\/a> said retailers have seen a 300-percent increase in theft since 2019 in Canada. Those costs get passed on to other consumers through rising prices. That same article asks, “Is it fair to place consumers in a situation where the temptation to steal is higher, especially in times of economic hardship? And what responsibility do retailers have in preventing theft without compromising the customer experience?”<\/p>\n

The Retail Council says understanding the amount of stolen items is hard to gauge, considering not all opt to be open about numbers.
\nSome customers use a trick known as the\u201dCarrot Trick,\u201d such as inputting the code for carrots when scanning pricier produce without barcodes, like lemons.
\nSkip-scanning is another trick, where customers put an item into the bagging area without inputting it into their total costs.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Atlantic magazine<\/a> published a piece in 2018 titled, “The Banana Trick and Other Acts of Self-Checkout Thievery.” The subhead ran, \u201cAnyone who pays for more than half of their stuff in self-checkout is a total moron.\u201d<\/p>\n

Self-checkout theft has become so widespread that a whole lingo has sprung up to describe its tactics. Ringing up a T-bone ($13.99\/lb) with a code for a cheap ($0.49\/lb) variety of produce is \u201cthe banana trick.\u201d If a can of Illy espresso leaves the conveyor belt without being scanned, that\u2019s called \u201cthe pass around.\u201d \u201cThe switcheroo\u201d is more labor-intensive: Peel the sticker off something inexpensive and place it over the bar code of something pricey. Just make sure both items are about the same weight, to avoid triggering that pesky \u201cunexpected item\u201d alert in the bagging area.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

The article continues:<\/p>\n

\u00a0A 2015 study of self-checkouts with handheld scanners, conducted by criminologists at the University of Leicester, also found evidence of widespread theft. After auditing 1 million self-checkout transactions over the course of a year, totaling $21 million in sales, they found that nearly $850,000 worth of goods left the store without being scanned and paid for.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And it’s not just individuals who are stealing at self-checkouts. A CBC story<\/a> noted that it is also organized crime and gangs:<\/p>\n

The Retail Council of Canada says, in speaking with its members, it has assessed that self-checkout theft is on the rise.
\n“People love the self checkout, but at the same time, if there is no control, we’ve seen that theft has grown,” said the council’s CEO, Diane Brisebois.
\nShe says she’s told some of the culprits are organized gangs of thieves who neglect to scan pricey items.
\n“It could very well be three very expensive bottles of face cream, it can be specialized baby formula,” Brisebois said. “They target merchandise that they know has high value on the street.”<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

People “love” the impersonal machinery? I don’t think so. They may like<\/em> the convenience of getting out of a store sooner, but what else do they get from the experience? And what if the kiosks have lineups as well? Where is the convenience then? A CNN piece from early 2024<\/a> suggests many customers have “soured” on self-checkouts:<\/p>\n

A newly-released\u00a0study\u00a0by researchers at Drexel University published in the Journal of Business Research found that \u201cregular checkout\u201d \u2013 the kind featuring a human cashier \u2013 makes customers more loyal to a store and more likely to revisit in the future than self-checkout. The study comes as some companies remove self-checkout machines and others adjust their self-checkout operations.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

To combat theft, some retailers have installed additional security cameras to record each kiosk transaction. This Big-Brotherish surveillance has led to more customer anger and frustration, as The Daily Dot noted:<\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cI scan the one on my left hand first, and I move it to the bag to my right, and the bag is a little bit further away than normal. So I drop it into the bag, and then the screen comes up saying, \u2018Associate Needed,\u2019\u201d the TikToker recalls.
\nConfused as to why an associate would be needed to approve a purchase of dips, the TikToker was startled to see that, once the worker came over, he was presented with a video of himself scanning the item.
\n\u201cAnd we were worried Big Brother was going to be the government,\u201d he concludes.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Loblaws went as far as to have another bit of machinery required to scan customer receipts from self-checkouts before they were allowed to exit the area, a delaying move that angered customers even more than their high grocery prices. If customers failed to scan the receipts, a loud alarm sounded, sending staff to intercept the customer. As CBC noted<\/a>:<\/p>\n

In an attempt to combat theft at its stores, Loblaw\u00a0is testing receipt scanners at four of its locations, the grocery giant told CBC News.
\nCustomers who go through self-checkout must use the device to scan their receipt’s barcode \u2014 confirming that they paid something \u2014\u00a0which opens a metal gate, letting them leave.<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

And what happens if you didn’t buy anything, so have no receipt, and just want to leave the store?<\/p>\n

CBC News asked Loblaw what happens to shoppers who refuse to scan their receipt, and what customers do if they didn’t buy anything and have no receipt.\u00a0The retailer did not respond<\/p><\/blockquote>\n

Self-checkouts, it seems to me, generally appeal to people who believe their imagined convenience is more important than other factors and other people, including human interaction, quality of service, impact on employees, hospitality, personal relations with workers, etiquette, politeness and civility, people who feel the anonymity of a kiosk allows them to bend or break the rules<\/a>, and even steal. And they appeal to criminals, as well. I suspect many of the same people who prefer self-checkouts are the same people who talk on their phones at the cash register, leave their shopping carts in the middle of the parking lot, and litter their cigarette butts on the sidewalk. I’m not saying every such person who likes self-checkouts is selfish and inconsiderate, but if the shoe fits…****<\/strong><\/span><\/p>\n