Leonard Comma, CEO of Jack-in-the-Box says the company is considering swapping some cashiers for self-ordering kiosks . “It just makes sense to consider replacing cashiers with machines as minimum wages rise,” said Comma.
Jack in the Box previously tested technology such as kiosks. According to Comma, the kiosks resulted in a higher average check and helped with efficiency. But at the time Comma said the cost of installing the kiosks wasn’t worth it.
Jack in the Box isn’t the only fast-food chain that has considered using automation to reduce labor costs and modernize.
Wendy’s announced plans to install self-ordering kiosks within a year. McDonald’s is adding kiosks to 2,500 stores, though it pledged not to replace cashiers with kiosks.
“With government driving up the cost of labor, it’s driving down the number of jobs,” then Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s CEO Andy Puzder told Business Insider in 2016. “You’re going to see automation not just in airports and grocery stores, but in restaurants.”
You can have $15. But it will be at the expense of hours and jobs.
Pizza Hut Delivery Vehicle
Introducing the first Pizza Hut fully autonomous delivery concept vehicle. Excited for our future with @Toyota #CES2018 pic.twitter.com/YGNQUgijha
— Pizza Hut (@pizzahut) January 8, 2018
Does anyone think this thing will fly?
Mike “Mish” Shedlock
No @KidHorn, people will plug in their cars whenever the feel like it, but the cars have the option to be scheduled to charge at night. This already exists on the Tesla and it’s rocket science to do, even for a cheap company like Chevy.
As for the problems already being seen, I’m sure there are going to be many but they can all be managed and smoothed out as has been discussed probably a decade ago – but it takes time for ideas to be implemented. A few of the ideas were: modify daytime charging @ work to a trickle charge so the demand is not the typical 6.6Kw but something much slower (eg: 1Kw) to get a charge by the time you leave and not ASAP.
The total power demand for EV, compared to the entire electrical supply is not that large, it’s just in the wrong places and not wired for it. I did some rough numbers and found it was <2% annual production. I only did this because I couldn’t find any studies, just opinions. If you have studies, I’m interested. Arc furnaces tend to be wired for the power consumption. You’ll find the even the high power demand of Tesla SuperChargers are wired specifically for that demand whereas local J1776 chargers that are shoehorned into malls and parking structures are not planned out.
So you think people are going to get up at midnight and plug in their cars. Not going to happen. People will plug them in when they get from from work. The same time Air conditioning at their homes is running and then they’ll go in the kitchen to cook dinner. Problems are already surfacing in some municipalities that have a relatively large number of electric vehicles, bit still under 5% of the total number of cars.
@KnotchoLibre “You can find a lot of articles about the extra load on the power grid with a 100% EV US Market. Bottom line: it’s not that bad, especially when you consider that 99% of the vehicles can recharge on off hours actually smoothing out energy demand.”
Also to clarify, the “extra tissue” – adipose tissue (loose fat not associated with muscle), connective tissue, tendon, blood vessel, nerve tissue…etc., is not present in simple ground chuck in the quantities which it was found in the study mentioned. My understanding was that the extra tissue is being used as a filler.
Obvious mistake there. I meant to say 36% of ground chuck is muscle tissue with 44% being water.
@DB8489
Regarding BS study, I think you may have missed my point. My point was that cost of beef is a small fraction of fast food restaurant operating cost. Thus, when the price of beef doubles it does not hurt the bottom line much compared to increased labor cost. I was not commenting on the quality of the product.
But, since you felt inclined to mention product quality, *median* muscle content at 12.5% is not typical compared to a hamburger that someone might cook at home. Ground chuck, a popular choice for home burgers, is about 80/20 meat/fat with about 55% of the meat being water. According to my math, that means about 44% of ground chuck is muscle tissue excluding water. The extra tissue and plant based fillers used in fast food are not contained in simple ground chuck.
I don’t get it… why spend millions to replace low wage jobs when it makes so much more sense to replace the CEO, board of directors, top 2 executive level… jobs with robots (more than likely you could replace all of them with a single robot that only works a few seconds per day and it would do an infinitely better job). The return of value is instant to shareholders.
Maybe we should eliminate the minimum wage so people can work for $2 an hour. That way everyone would be employed. But wait, how would they get to work if they can’t pay for transportation? At $2 an hour, you have a job with lots of hours and can’t afford anything. I would rather work less, get paid more and do something else with the extra time. Maybe go to school or work another part time job at a higher wage.
Machines should perform this type of labor – That’s why they were developed and employees in those jobs better start looking to the future. Management will reduce expenses where it can be reduced and labor is a significant portion. I certainly would
Polls show a majority of Americans support a higher minimum wage, however, raising the minimum wage will make America less competitive and slow job growth. The solution of mandating a higher minimum wage to address growing inequality sidesteps the core issues we face.
It is my feeling the many people that believe this will put more money into the consumers pocket and thus create economic growth fail to recognize it will also spark inflation and reduce opportunity. The article below delves deeper into this complex issue.
link to brucewilds.blogspot.com
@CautiousObserver
Bullshit study.
All uncooked ground beef contains various levels of water. One of the main reasons cheap ground beef shrinks so much when you cook it is because the water boils out.
The cheaper it is the more water it contains, thus the more it shrinks.
Rib eye steaks – without being ground – contain water, adipose tissue (fat), connective tissue, tendon, blood vessel, nerve tissue…etc.
Same with a whole roasted chicken, or duck, or whatever.
@FelixMish
You are correct – if you just hit “Enter,” your post will be pushed to the board.
To “paragraph” on this system use the “Enter” key in conjunction with the “Shift” key.
It isn’t *great* but it’s the best option.
OK. An hour later.
@xil The Enter key on my machine and browser pushes the comment out. No more editing. I’ve assumed the algorithm involves whether there are other comments interceding. I’ll push this comment out now and wait a bit before typing some more.
No, this is the one that flies: link to youtube.com
@baldski: Why no bitching when beef doubled?
There is surprisingly little beef in many fast food burgers and the price of beef does not hurt the bottom line as badly as labor costs.
From the study below, typical fast food hamburgers are comprised of little meat (median, 12.1%):
link to sciencedirect.com
The last paragraph above is not mine. Neither is the picture
What is it with these guys? The price of beef doubled from 2010 to 2013 and you do not hear a peep out of them. Raise the minimum wage and they clutch the pearls and look for a fainting couch. Why no bitching when beef doubled?
Jack-in-the-box will lose the race to the bottom when another fast food restaurant replaces their order kiosks with a QR code and an app. You want to eat our food? Download the app on the phone you paid for, not the kiosk we had to pay for.
Then the next big race to the bottom will be getting rid of the kitchen staff. Eventually fast food restaurants will look like this:
link to t.fod4.com
Pushing the minimum wage up and up only makes it worse.
One thing that never gets mentioned with “Globalization” is the enormous capital flight.
Carl_R: Exactly.
The most employable of those at the bottom, of course, benefit, which facilitates the delusion that this is beneficial. In fact, those that benefit, in many cases, would have moved up in their companies anyway, and their income would not have stayed at the bottom. Oh, and I would be remiss if I didn’t point out that the other group harmed is consumers, who have to pay more. This provides a double harm to those at the bottom who lose their job – Now they have no job, and things cost more.
Small businesses can’t afford to automate, so they become unable to compete, forcing them out of the market, and allowing the big businesses to reap excess profits. Thus, raising minimum wage harms the poor by making them unemployable, and harms small business. It helps the high income people that design, build, and maintain the automation products, and helps big business. Thus, the effect is to increase the percentage of income going to those at the top, and decrease the percentage of income going to those at the bottom. It’s the single most destructive legislation for the poor that I can think of.
Sadly, few people understand economics, which is why we get things like the $15 minimum wage. Supply and demand teaches us that if you artificially raise the price of an item over the market rate you get more supply and less demand, resulting in a surplus. Where the commodity is labor, we give this surplus a specific name, “unemployment”. In the absence of a minimum wage, there would be no unemployment. There would be a job for everyone. As the minimum wage goes higher, businesses can no longer afford to hire the least efficient employees, so groups like teens and handicapped have more difficulty finding jobs. Next, the businesses automate jobs, since the costs of hardware are fixed, and eliminate a lot of problems.
Our wealth consists of the equipment and knowledge to produce the things that people need efficiently.
AWC: You can print money, but you can’t print wealth.
JonSellers: their standard of living is increasing. We financialize our economy and reduced our stock of productive capital. We are getting poorer.
Can we teach robots to spit in my sandwich like those surly teenage kids?
@WildBull: “To increase the general standard of living, the capital stock must be increased thus improving productivity to provide more all around. No free lunch.” The Chinese are increasing the capital stock hand over fist.
The Fed just needs to continue lowering the cost of automation until jobs improve. ZIRP to the rescue…of somebody. FFS! You can’t right this stuff
So, lets put all the marginal businesses out of business, and let those low wage workers starve instead of eeking out a marginal living. Don’t you get it? There is only so much stuff that the economy can produce given the capital available. The rich don’t have more food, clothes, medicine, houses, schools hidden in their garages. You can’t improve the general standard of living by decree or transfer of money. It does not work. It cannot work. Visit Cuba or Venezuela or some other Socialist paradise and let us know how the median income earner is faring. To increase the general standard of living, the capital stock must be increased thus improving productivity to provide more all around. No free lunch.
” I’m saying a permanent end to the non-livable wage. If you can’t afford to hire people at a living wage, you do NOT deserve to stay in business.” How many permanently unemployed people would you like there to be? First of all there is nothing permanent. The economy moves in cycles. Watch Shark Tank or The Profit and you will find that some of the business owners had not been paying themselves a wage for various reasons. One size has never fit all.
Employers pay what the labor market requires. When labor is made expensive by government decree, the employers that can’t afford the labor go out of business or find a way to replace it. Neither is good for those that lose their jobs. The left loves it because it creates an ever larger group of people that need their “help” into lives of perpetual dependency.
@Sechel, Why didn’t all of them?
I note in the article the CEOs in question do not state what the maximum wage is that will cause them to automate the job. That’s because they’re lying. It’s just scare tactics to maximize their own profits.
Taunton – your comment is so riddled with misunderstandings of how an economy creates income and wealth that I am simply not willing to take the time to educate you. In general, the comments here are dissapointing
The solution (for Democrats) is simple: Raise taxes on wage and investment incomes, and initiate a wealth tax on net financial assets, e.g., 2% per year above for net assets above $500,000. With the proceeds, provide a “living wage” hand-out to bring all US residents, legal or otherwise, to a $31,200 per year (~ $15/hr) minimum.
interestingly, the system combines separate comments into a single comment. i’m interested in knowing the algorithm behind it
and continue typing
@FelixMish, to create a paragragh break simply hit Enter
Living Wage,,, a RIDICULOUS concept… no such thing,, requiring businesses to pay some minimum,,, equally STUPID… You folks have obviously never run a business.
You people do realize, with very few exceptions, businesses exist to make money for the owners. They don’t exist to make their employees happy or benefit society as a whole.
It’s inevitable. Growing up, my parents pulled into a gas station and told the attendant what they wanted. Someone opened the hood and checked the fluids. They also cleaned the windows and checked the tire air pressure. Hard to imagine nowadays. In 25 years, my kids will be telling stories to their kids about how they walked in McDonalds and told someone called a cashier what they wanted and they handed them cash, waited a few minutes, and then someone put a tray with their food on the counter.
Lots of typos in the above
The idea of a market in labor is fictitious to begin with. Labor isn’t a thing. There is a market in skills. Unemployment going down doesn’t automatically increase everyone’s wages. It may increase the wages of a small subset of individual states who have skills in particular high demand areas, and generally for only a period of time. Likewise, wages don’t automatically decline when unemployment goes up. Employers aren’t loathe to cause pain to quality employees for fear of losing them. General wage and standard of living growth in the 1950’s through 1990s was a brief phenomena caused by the mass unionization of the working class. Unfortunately, for most people that was a long enough period of time to think it is the normal state of affairs.
@Realist I agree with you (as is often the case) though to say there’s an oversupply of unskilled and under of skilled isn’t how I think of it. That posits too much mushy-ness. Under? Over? Says who? … Instead, drill it down to, “Skilled work generally pays more than unskilled work.” Your conclusions follow in any case. Curiosity: What country?
Oh. Now I remember! Send each paragraph separately! Makes perfect sense. Not.
@Taunton I sure hope I’m not delusional. That would make me hard to hire. 🙂 Anyway, if wages were crashing then, yep, that would indicate a huge oversupply of labor. But wages aren’t crashing, are they? The word, “balance”, comes to mind. No, it never occurred to me there’s a shortage of labor. If there were, wages would go up to balance the shortage.
I agree the bottom line is supply and demand. I agree there’s a huge supply of labor and capital. And jobs, too. Huge supplies all around doesn’t mean there’s no competition.
Like many I don’t hold in any special high esteem investors, rent-seeker, etc. but I do know from experience that investors, at least, have an extremely hard job. Hard to be productive, that is. They live in a world where they all *want* to be productive. In fact, they *need* to be productive or they’ll earn less than zero. Which if you’ve ever earned less than zero, you know that’s an unpleasant job. Very easy job, though. 🙂
As for whether businesses should pay a “living wage”, I’m confused. I thought businesses provided products and services. Muddying up their goals sounds like a great way to introduce corruption and incompetence. (e.g. Consider weirdnesses caused by the currently popular idea that a business’s goal is – wait for it – profits! 🙂 Seriously. There exist people who believe that.)
No, I’m not insinuating people on welfare aren’t working. Just the opposite. We agree some people working low-wage jobs get welfare. Ergo, at least some people getting welfare are working. I imagine (and could certainly be wrong) that we may disagree on the issue of “working class” and what that means. First, my idea of low-wage workers is not that they comprise a “class”. And, anyway, I never bought in to this popular idea that people can only do what their “class” allows. Foo. Too many words. Sorry.
@Taunton
While your argument is hard to fault, who is to say what is a “living wage?” I can’t imagine you would want to entrust the same bunch of overpaid tax feeders that decided to bail out Paulson’s old golf pals, with the task…..
Also, just as increased wealth comes from producers innovating by making more for less, it also comes from consumers innovating and getting more utility for less wages. Both processes work in parallel, and both need to be left alone equally.
Meaning, producers need to be able to build anything, anywhere, anytime, without having their costs increased by having to pay a bunch of leeches, nor their productivity destroyed by “regulatory compliance” and other pure friction.
But simultaneously, consumers need to be left alone to build anything they darned well want on their lots, park their mobile homes anywhere they fancy for whatever duration they feel like, pay anyone from anywhere in the world whatever best rate they can negotiate for drugs, medical treatment and educations/degrees. As well as buy whatever guns they feel they may need to protect their continued right to do the above…
By leaving both processes alone, productive capacity will go up, and costs will go down. Cannot be any other way. Any time anyone interferes with either one, no matter the excuse, you make people, hence society, poorer as a whole. Making ends harder to meet, and lives more miserable than they need be.