Predictive Scheduling in Hospitality

Summary of the Issue

Predictive scheduling is a labor relations issue closely related to the hospitality industry and affects the labor relationship between workers and employees. Hospitality is one of the most dynamic areas from a labor relations perspective. For a start, modern hospitality is relational in nature thus in spite of the proliferation of computerized systems, a personal touch is indispensable. Therefore, as long as a hospitality based center is operational, there is a continuous need for specialized human labor. Further, the amount of labor needed in the hospitality industry is mainly premised on the number of customers that need to be attended to and the specific needs of those customers (Kronos, 2017). For example, a hotel may need 500 employees on a daily basis on a given week then need only 100 employees on an intermittent basis the week following the busy week. It, therefore, becomes impossible for even the best planners in the hospitality industry to determine the number of employees it would need at a given time, yet when the need arises, human labor is indispensable.  The innovative solution that the industry has come up with for this problem has been to retain part-time employees who stand by to be called as and when the need for their labor becomes necessary. A unique characteristic of this part-time employment is that the employees must be available as and when they are called upon to work. Further, there is no telling how long they might be needed to work thus, when they are called upon to work, their shifts might be exponentially expanded. Finally, most of these part-time contract does not include a minimum number of hours per week that the employer needs to actively engage the employee (Boyer et al., 2016). Therefore, in a calendar week, the employee might work a very high number of hours, raking in high wages. Similarly, in another week the employee might not be called upon to work at all, leading to zero income and an inability to even afford subsistence. In some cases, supervisors may favor a few employees at the expense of the rest, resulting to some employees always having work while others are only called in when the labor needs peak and are thus heavily inconvenienced. It is to cure this labor relations predicament that several cities and states in America, beginning with San Francisco have passed laws that guarantee predictive scheduling in the hospitality industry (Kronos, 2017).  Predictive scheduling laws are enacted to ensure that employees working on a part-time basis in the hospitality industry are not unduly inconvenienced by the unpredictable nature of labor needs within the industry. As per the law, the optimum scenario would be where employees have regular working hours on a constant basis. However, when this is not practical, the law envisages a scenario where the employers are able to predict their labor needs with a certain level of certainty (Boyer et al., 2016). These employers will then be able to advise employees on when and to what extent their services will be needed, within a reasonable period of time. For example, the employers can be able to predict how many hours the employees will be needed within a calendar month. The predictions should include the number of shifts the employees would be able to work, the number of hours per shift, and the spread of these shifts. In the case the predicted scenario does not come to pass, the employees who, either work fewer shifts, more shifts or shifts that do not adhere to the predicted spread will be compensated by the employers. An element of stability between the employer and the employee in the referenced industry is not only introduced but also almost guaranteed by the laws (Kronos, 2017).  Pros of Predictive Scheduling in the Hospitality Industry Majority of the advantages of predictive scheduling in the hospitality industry favor the workforce although there are also advantages to the employers and even the customers. Predictive scheduling has cured the massive pecuniary problem that the part-time hospitality employees go through. There is a massive difference between the peak labor demand and the bottom line labor demand in the industry (Kronos, 2017). In most cases, the bearing factors towards the demand in the industry are also unpredictable. For example, sports are among the major drivers of demand in the hospitality industry, due to sports tourism. In many cases, the location of major games is determined by who wins a previous playoff game. If a team from Santa Barbra wins the playoff, the next playoff will have at least one game in Santa Barbra creating major demand for labor in the local hotels. If the local team loses, the demand is lost immediately. Unfortunately, pecuniary needs are not as unpredictable. The car-note, rent and other bills will remain regular whether or not the local team wins or loses. The existence of a law that forces the employer to predict whether or not there will be work, and by extension wages mitigates on the pecuniary problem for the employees as they can tell if they will get money from their normal employment or if they will instead get free time to seek for opportunities elsewhere (Kronos, 2017).  The second advantage of predictive scheduling from the perspective of the employee is the reduction of work-related stress and work-family conflict. Among the most unfair prerequisites of part-time employment in the hospitality industry is an almost full-standby situation that more often than not does not result in wages. For example, in a hotel that lies within the proximity of a major airport, a change in the weather might result in the cancelation of tens of flights thus resulting in an unexpected influx of customers. A change of weather at a time when a large volume of traffic is expected might lead to an exponential reduction in customers. Because of such sudden changes, the employee must remain either alert and available or busy at the place of work. The combination of remaining either at work or ready to be called in creates anxiety and stress for employees. It also makes it hard to schedule events leading to work-family conflict and a diminished quality of life for such workers. Eliminating these adversities is a major advantage of predictive scheduling for the employee and to some extent for the employer too (Kronos, 2017).  The primary advantage of predictive scheduling for the employer lies in the fact that when the employees are less stressed and happy with their world, they become motivated to work hard and smart thus, giving the employer better return for wages paid. By extension, the motivated employees are also able to give better services to the customers who can also be said to have benefited from these laws. The modern understanding of labor relations shows that the best services from any employees are elicited through motivation and not compulsion. This motivational concept is most applicable in the hospitality industry which is relational in nature. Indeed, the guests in a hotel, for example, may have diminished customer satisfaction due to displeasure with only one employee. The said employee may have done everything right but missed something personal such as a smile, a compliment or even a kind gaze. Predictive scheduling ensures employees have a regular income, have a better work-family balance and are less stressed (Kronos, 2017). These employees will, in return value their employers and are motivated to work harder, smarter and better to the benefit of the employer and the customer.  Cons of Predictive Scheduling in the Hospitality Industry Most of the disadvantages of predictive scheduling are against the employer although to some extent, a segment of current and potential employees are also adversely affected. The greatest disadvantage of these new laws is cost towards the management of the hospitality industry due to a number of pertinent grounds (Nation's Restaurant News, 2018). For a start, there is the high cost of predictive research and planning. The employer is not only supposed to conduct research on future labor needs and create plans based on that research but also pay penalties if wrong about the predictions. The kind of research on internal and external drivers of labor demands undertaken on a regular basis will cost the company. Making mistakes, which is a common occurrence in future planning will also come at a cost for the company (Kronos, 2017). For example, if the company predicts that there will be diminished labor needs then there is a sudden and unpredictable surge in customers, the employer will have to compensate employees who are called up suddenly and unpredictably. The normal running of hospitality centers such as hotels has been made more expensive by the new laws.  The second major disadvantage is the reduction of room to maneuver by the managers of hospitality centers who are seeking to survive and make a profit under intense competition. The basic idea behind success in the hospitality industry is to be able to present the best possible and fluid service for the customer while contemporaneously minimizing expenses. Labor costs have always been among the areas where managers innovatively manipulate and reduce the costs involved in running a hotel. The ability to innovatively maneuver has been taken away by the new laws which have introduced strict rules on how to schedule work for employees within the industry. The instant scenario has been exacerbated by the ruling in the case of Erick Monroy v. Yoshinoya America, Inc. In the said case, the district court ruled that under the predictive scheduling laws, when an employee has to call ahead and confirm attendance to work, the call amounts to reporting to work and warrants pay for reporting to work (McLaughlin, 2017). Many players in the hospitality industry have been barely surviving due to harsh industrial conditions caused by security issues and a general economic recession. Inability to innovatively maneuver labor needs will take the lifeline from many players. The end result of the inability to operate will be downgrading or winding up of players resulting in loss of investment and also the loss of employment which extends the disadvantage to employees too.  Predictive scheduling will also reduce the propensity for hiring new members of staff thus reducing employment opportunities (Nation's Restaurant News, 2018). At the same time, the new rule will create the potential for a harsher working environment for employee and might also reduce the quality of service to customers due to a diminished skill-set pool.  Most of the predictive scheduling laws limit the employer’s capability to fire, without hiring. For example, when there is a new labor need in the market, the laws provide that an employer should consider the members of staff already available before seeking to hire new members of staff (Boyer et al., 2016). In the case there is a need for labor with specialized skills, the employer might be compelled to give the work to the available employees instead of hiring new ones. Undertaking work that an employee is not excellent in demotivating the employee and also reduced the quality of that work. The best respite available to the employer under the predictive laws is to fire the current employee so as to create room for the new employee needed.  The firing and hiring are not only expensive but also creates friction in the workplace even as it reduces the sense of security for the employees (Kronos, 2017). From the customer, the manager to the employee, all parties involved will, to some extent be adversely affected by the new predictive scheduling laws.  Conclusion Due to the balance between the pros and cons of predictive scheduling in the hospitality industry, the laws need to be gently eased while taking care to ensure that their implementation does not ruin the hospitality industry in America. The current hospitality industry cannot be said to be thriving. For a start, travel and tourism, which are the two primary drivers of the hospitality industry have taken a major hit from terrorism in general including the war on terror. Intense competition now exists between the players in the hospitality industry in the fight for the ever reducing customers and their ever reducing purses. A major shock in the hospitality industry can, therefore, lead to the collapse of several players. Their collapse will have adverse ramifications on the very workers that the referenced laws are seeking to protect (Nation's Restaurant News, 2018). A law that results in the collapse of an industry must be considered as counterproductive, no matter how well-meaning.  On the other hand, the employees of any industry must be considered as an end in themselves and not as a means to an end for the industry. The dispensation of lord and serfs or kings and pawns is long gone and cannot be justified by economic or pecuniary interests. When the hospitality industry managers maneuver to make a profit, they must not be allowed to gable at the lives of employees alongside their families as merely a means to an end. The predictive scheduling laws are, therefore, necessary and paramount to protect the employees from the extremities of unscrupulous managers who will go any lengths to procure a profit. Employees are desperate for work, more so during economic recessions and may be willing to acquiesce to unfair terms. The unfair terms will affect the employees and their families thus becoming a negative influence on the society at large. The totality of the above presents a quagmire where a practice that has become expedient faces a law that is definitely necessary.  Gently easing in the laws to balance between the necessity of the laws and the expediency of part-time hiring in the hospitality industry acts as the solution to the aforementioned quagmire. For a start, the laws must come with a definitive grace-period for implementation which should allow for research on their impact in the hospitality industry as a whole. Secondly, the laws should be implemented in phases so as to eliminate extremities. The case of Monroy v. Yoshinoya whose ruling is outlined above present a clear example of an extremity. The employer sought to cure the vagaries of the predictive scheduling laws by providing for a call-in option for the employees. The court ruled that employees need to be paid for calling in. Whereas the ruling may be fair, it also presents an inability to cure teething problems in the implementation of the predictive scheduling laws. For the avoidance of doubt, the recommendation made herein supports predictive scheduling since it protects the employees from the extremities of part-time employment in the hospitality industry. However, the recommendation also includes a gradual and eased implementation of the laws, to avoid crippling the hospitality industry in the process.

References

Boyer, A., Thomas, S., Cooney, M., & Hurtando, Y. (2016). Predictive scheduling: An Eexpanding trend impacting the food service, hospitality, and retail industries | stay informed | K&L Gates. Retrieved April 18, 2018, from http://www.klgates.com/predictive-scheduling-an-expanding-trend-impacting-the-food-service-hospitality-and-retail-industries-10-17-2016/  Kronos. (2017). New predictive scheduling laws impact retail, hospitality, and Food service industries: How technology can help organizations achieve compliance with legislative requirements. https://www.kronos.com/resource/download/22446  McLaughlin, G. (2017). Predictive scheduling laws are spreading. Daily Journal. https://www.akingump.com/images/content/6/3/v2/63574/Akin-Gump-9DJ-12-20-17.pdf  Nation's Restaurant News. (2018, April 04). Are you prepared for new scheduling mandates? Retrieved April 18, 2018, from http://www.nrn.com/sponsored-content/are-you-prepared-new-scheduling-mandates