Fewer servers in the future?

[gimmethesimplelife]

Just read an interesting article online to the effect that technology has hit the market whereby guests in a restaurant can order and pay from tablet computers at their table. Obviously this lowers payroll, as servers will still be needed to take food and drinks to the table, but probably fewer of them, meaning that even getting a serving job may become extremely competitive down the road, moreso than it is now. Also for many, serving is a plan "B", a place to make some quick legal cash if in a jam or an unexpected life situation. Seems like perhaps the plan "B" may have to be rethought.....How do you'all feel about ordering from a tablet computer in a restaurant, would this take from or enhance your experience? And how do you feel about technology seemingly reducing yet more employment options? Rob (in a dinosaur profession?)

[Kestra]

I'd prefer it I think. Basically I'm uncomfortable interacting with people in many situations - especially where I don't know them well and there's a server/servee thing going on. Perhaps I shouldn't be this way but I can't help it. Though I haven't really been using the self-check-outs at the grocery stores, though I thought I wanted this when I was younger before they actually existed. It just seems easier to have someone else ring things through, since I buy a lot of produce and bulk goods that are harder for self-check-out.

As far as the job thing, I see two points:
- as jobs are lost with the actual serving, more jobs may be created with the programing/maintenance of such systems.
- in my perfect world, I think the only way to have enough jobs is to have it become more commonplace to work less than 40 hours a week. We need more people working who each work less hours and need less money. I can easily pay my expenses on less than full time work, and I'm not that frugal or well paid. Generally, expenses can go down a bit when someone works less hours. Also healthcare costs may decrease if people worked less. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone else (other than this forum) who seems to also see this as a possibility.

[Wildflower]

I personally don't care for the idea. I would miss the human interaction. We go to the same restaurants all of the time and know the servers there well. I would definitely miss their positive input and great service, plus feel badly that some would be losing their jobs. The ones that were kept on in this type of serving situation then would lose most of their tip pay as well. I know I wouldn't tip as much for someone that only brought food and drink to my table with no other service involved....

[puglogic]

I see the loss of so many lower-paying jobs (though some servers can make quite a bit of $$) to technology. Even The Economist covered the topic this month - the loss of so many such jobs, and how it's creating a challenging new scenario. Creates an interesting question, really - how many restaurant-tablet-software-engineers does a restaurant need? 1/8 of a full-time position? Replacing a dozen human servers? Where do the other 11 go, and what do they do? Ditto for automated systems that build cars, computer chips, food packaging, etc. When technology replaces 50 manual laborers with one white-collar job (the guy who fixes the machines, essentially), what happens to the rest?

It sounds like I'm making a judgment call here, but I'm really not - HONEST. I work in technology and my job probably replaces a dozen 1990s workers, just because of the nifty computing tools we now have. I'm just curious about the economics of all of that. And what will happen to the millions of people who are undereducated, or (you know you know some people like this) simply aren't the sharpest pencils in the box, and would/could never find a place in this brave new white-collar world? Do they compete for increasingly small numbers of manual labor or service jobs, jobs which already don't always pay a living wage unless unionized? Or is there another path for them?

I see servers as the kind people who bridge the gap between the guy cooking in the kitchen and my table -- helping me choose a good thing to eat, carrying my message to the chef, bringing me back a great meal. Like you, wildflower, I know those people in my community, I know their stories and their dreams.

I don't care what restaurants do behind the scenes to improve their bottom line, but I would cease to patronize a restaurant that replaced that human element with yet another machine.

Of course, I also read books. Real books, not electronic ones. So what do I know. >8)

[ApatheticNoMore]

I don't think the job loss will be as great as you think.

All grocery check out people are supposed to have been replaced by machines now. While some stores try to follow this model, there are still grocery store clerks. Even in restaurants alternatives to servers have been around for a long time, such as restaurants where you basically get restaurant food out of the equivalent of a vending machine. They haven't replaced servers. Now for all I know the tablet ordering model will take off, become HUGE, and servers will lose their jobs in droves, but it's just as likely it won't as many other automation ideas have failed in the marketplace.

There are very few jobs that have real job security these days and I don't think servers are necessarily any worse off than anyone else. To be blunt: most jobs are producing non-necessities. In hard times (even harder than these times) demand for all these things would fall. And if more and more people's jobs are automated even the demand for un-automated jobs would fall because everyone else is out of work (yea there's unemployment insurance and that props up demand some, but that only goes so far). What's secure? Maybe nursing, and other medical services. Even government jobs aren't all that secure these days.


n my perfect world, I think the only way to have enough jobs is to have it become more commonplace to work less than 40 hours a week. We need more people working who each work less hours and need less money. I can easily pay my expenses on less than full time work, and I'm not that frugal or well paid. Generally, expenses can go down a bit when someone works less hours. Also healthcare costs may decrease if people worked less. Unfortunately, I don't know anyone else (other than this forum) who seems to also see this as a possibility.

+ a million

Yea I easily easily could pay expenses on less than full time work (I was fairly well paid but not super rich or anything AND cost of living is high here and still ....). Others don't see it as a possibility, well it's a cause without an advocate really. And it has some obstacles, some countries have laws that workers can't be punished for working part-time that's one way, or mandate a 30 hour week (but alas we both know the later is probably never going to happen). Another way is to try to change the fixed cost structure (which is the whole reason employers would rather have 1 full time employee than 2 part time ones).

They won't fight for it, and they won't even ask for it from their bosses, but some people would really prefer to work less (they'll tell you it on the sly). We almost had a 30 hour week in this country.


I'm just curious about the economics of all of that. And what will happen to the millions of people who are undereducated, or (you know you know some people like this) simply aren't the sharpest pencils in the box, and would/could never find a place in this brave new white-collar world? Do they compete for increasingly small numbers of manual labor or service jobs, jobs which already don't always pay a living wage unless unionized? Or is there another path for them?

It's not just them. There are already more college graduates than jobs that really need a college degree. The white collar world was hit by this recession (maybe not as bad as some other things but .... it was hit)

[Shari]

I would eat out more probably. I dislike dealing with people particularly when they are angling for me to spend more.

I only want whatt I ordered. That's why I asked for it. (I order quite a few things "plain" and while you would think that would be simple it seems to cause no end of confusion.)

I will pick self checkout at the store whenever available.

[Merski]

We deliberately go to a check out staffed by a person over self-check.