Archived Backroom has gone from 280 hours a week to 150.

[rooster]

We struggled at 280. Now nothing is getting done. We are a B volume store. Was wondering how many hours your backroom gets a week.

 

[Hardlinesmaster]

Our hours got cut, too. I am thinking 130 to 140 hours at my store.

 

[balthrop]

Our total backroom hours got cut by 60% for the first wave, and they've continued to drop. At first the weakest members of our team were the only ones that got hit, but now even the best of us have went from 40 all the way down to 25. I'll never be able to understand how Target is willing to let their best workers leave just to save the tiniest bit of money. Seriously, you're not willing to retain the people that do 3-4x as much work as your average worker?

the good people tend to be the longest tenured. meaning they make the most meaning they are expensive to keep around meaning they eat payroll. so according to the red and khaki monster they must go. target only cares about the numbers if they look good you are good.
it does not matter whether or not it gets done properly only that it gets done fast.
the man would rather employee two cheap no nothings than one person who costs them more payroll.

 

[Rock Lobster]

the good people tend to be the longest tenured. meaning they make the most meaning they are expensive to keep around meaning they eat payroll. so according to the red and khaki monster they must go. target only cares about the numbers if they look good you are good.
it does not matter whether or not it gets done properly only that it gets done fast.
the man would rather employee two cheap no nothings than one person who costs them more payroll.

At the store level we pay no attention to payroll dollars anymore, only hours. We do not take pay into consideration (and therefore HQ has no tool to apply pressure for us to do so either). However, when hours do get cut, we are supposed to cut evenly based solely on total availability. If everyone is wanting 40 and is open availability in the example above, there were 7 getting 40 hours. Now they should be 7 getting 20. However, if somebody is pickier on the team (I can't work Saturdays), they should be cut more (say down to 16) and the others get slightly higher.

 

[SFSFun]

Also B volume store and we have been holding steady at 240 hours so far this month, which is pretty normal for us.

We are going down to 4 trucks next week, so it probably dropped a bit for that.

Our backroom hasn't come clean in like a year though, so it's all relative.

 

[Rarejem]

At the store level we pay no attention to payroll dollars anymore, only hours. We do not take pay into consideration (and therefore HQ has no tool to apply pressure for us to do so either). However, when hours do get cut, we are supposed to cut evenly based solely on total availability. If everyone is wanting 40 and is open availability in the example above, there were 7 getting 40 hours. Now they should be 7 getting 20. However, if somebody is pickier on the team (I can't work Saturdays), they should be cut more (say down to 16) and the others get slightly higher.

This is just wrong, IMO. Availability has to be approved so you should not be punished for it. It should be a percentage. If there is a 60% cut in hours, cut everyone 60%. That is fair.

 

[SFSFun]

This is just wrong, IMO. Availability has to be approved so you should not be punished for it. It should be a percentage. If there is a 60% cut in hours, cut everyone 60%. That is fair.

So if there's only 48 hours between 3 TMs, it would be fine to give 16 hours each to the two TMs with open availability and 16 to the TM who can only work Monday nights, Thursday mornings, and Saturday between 10am and 7pm?

 

[Rock Lobster]

This is just wrong, IMO. Availability has to be approved so you should not be punished for it. It should be a percentage. If there is a 60% cut in hours, cut everyone 60%. That is fair.

If I want 40 hours but only am available 8-4:30 and another team member wants 40 hours and is available at anytime, then it should be fair to cut the dayside person twice as much as the completely open person (so they lose two shifts for every one the open person does) because they are available half the time.

 

[Rarejem]

I disagree. If there is a need for a tm during their availability the hours should be distributed to all of the tms. I just don't think that a tm should be cut more than the others on their team when that availability was approved. Cuts in hours should be equitable. If a tm1 is available for 40 hours and tm2 is available for 30 and hours are being cut by 60%, then I think that tm1 should be scheduled for 16 hours and tm2 for 12 hours. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

 

[Firefox]

We haven't been hit too bad, we've had 220-240 a week I think.

 

[Rock Lobster]

I disagree. If there is a need for a tm during their availability the hours should be distributed to all of the tms. I just don't think that a tm should be cut more than the others on their team when that availability was approved. Cuts in hours should be equitable. If a tm1 is available for 40 hours and tm2 is available for 30 and hours are being cut by 60%, then I think that tm1 should be scheduled for 16 hours and tm2 for 12 hours. I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Yes if the availability is good for both TMs then this could be true it just depends. If I have a cashier that wants 25 hours and is only available 8-1 M-F she may get cut down to 1 day per week because we do not need those times. There is likely only 1-2 morning cashiers in that time range, and an open availability cashier who wants 40 still deserves an equal mix of opening and closing shifts. If you do not cut the TMs with the tight availability like this, then they take all those shifts and therefore your open availability TMs get stuck with closing or late mids more often which is not fair to them. The open availability TM should get cut in equal relation during those time periods but not overall.

 

[Rarejem]

If their availability is open, then they aren't being stuck with hours. They are getting hours for which they are available.

 

[Guest]

Hours are a joke everywhere at my store. I worked noon to 7pm today. I finished the 6pm caf batches at 650pm. I pulled one box of lovely Halloween seasonal shit as price change. Yes, it was Halloween seasonal stuff. I did that and plugged in all the machines and the ff printer and clocked out at around 705pm.

 

[Kartman]

Silly humans.

 

[logisticsismygame]

If the purpose for having TMs is to get stuff done then you have to factor in performance. I have a second job. I'm available one night a week. I get scheduled that one night a week, it's a pretty coveted shift. It's mine for as long as I want it because I work my guts out when I'm there. When I want more shifts there mine for the taking. I guess my point is cuts are cuts and sometimes you gotta make them but try to take care of the guy that produces 30 hrs of workload in the 20 hrs he is available. Payroll sponges are abundant, schedule them around your top performers. Is my viewpoint HR friendly? Maybe not. In this case, don't care. I guess there is a certain freedom from having two jobs, you can walk away from one or the other if they piss you off.

 

[OffYaPhone]

If the purpose for having TMs is to get stuff done then you have to factor in performance. I have a second job. I'm available one night a week. I get scheduled that one night a week, it's a pretty coveted shift. It's mine for as long as I want it because I work my guts out when I'm there. When I want more shifts there mine for the taking. I guess my point is cuts are cuts and sometimes you gotta make them but try to take care of the guy that produces 30 hrs of workload in the 20 hrs he is available. Payroll sponges are abundant, schedule them around your top performers. Is my viewpoint HR friendly? Maybe not. In this case, don't care. I guess there is a certain freedom from having two jobs, you can walk away from one or the other if they piss you off.

Absolutely to that bolded sentence. They know that I am willing to walk away from this job. This is play money for me right now, but that doesn't mean I don't work my ass off when I'm there. That's why HR accommodates me when I put in certain requests.