Want to read Slashdot from your mobile device? Point it at m.slashdot.org and keep reading!

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Businesses Robotics United States

Walmart US CEO Says Automation At Stores Won't Displace Workers (businessinsider.com) 57

Posted by BeauHD from the you-don't-say dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Insider: Walmart will be increasingly relying on automation at its stores in the coming years -- but that won't diminish the country's largest private employer's workforce, company leaders said during an investor event this week. The Bentonville, Arkansas-based retail giant recently made headlines when it announced that 65% of its stores will be "serviced by automation" by the end of fiscal year 2026. Walmart currently has more than 4,700 stores throughout the US and employs roughly 1.6 million people nationwide.

More specifically, one area where Walmart is seeking to increase investment is in market fulfillment centers (MFCs), which are automated fulfillment centers built within, or added to, a store. Walmart piloted this concept at a store in Salem, New Jersey, in 2019, using automated robot technology from Alert Innovation -- a robotics company Walmart acquired in October 2022. Since then, Walmart has built MFCs at several stores, such as in Jacksonville, Florida, and Dallas, Texas. Those include "manual MFCs," where associates pick items for online orders but in a separate area from the sales floor.

Walmart will still need at least the same level of workers to help in stores even as automation picks up, company leaders say. John Furner, Walmart US president and CEO, told investors this week that automation "helps" employees, as it will result in less manual labor. "Over time, we believe we'll have the same or more associates and a larger business overall," Furner said. "There will be new roles emerging that are less manual, better designed to serve customers, and pay more."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Walmart US CEO Says Automation At Stores Won't Displace Workers More

Walmart US CEO Says Automation At Stores Won't Displace Workers

Comments Filter:

  • "CEO lies through teeth" (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:11AM (#63434788)

    Wouldn't be the first time.

  • Shoplifting (Score:4, Interesting)

    by dhrabarchuk ( 1745930 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:26AM (#63434806)
    More self checkouts have shown more theft. Which causes the stores to put in crazy amounts of gadgets and cameras to âoestopâ shoplifting. Stores that were profitable (Portland) are closed instead of simply reverting back to the profitable state. Probably all to avoid paying people a bit more.

    • Re:Shoplifting (Score:5, Insightful)

      by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:33AM (#63434814)
      The market fulfillment centers he's talking about replace checkout (whether by yourself or cashier). You order your items online, somebody or a robot picks them from the shelves, and you just come pick them up ready to go. Our local Walmart Corner Store has free pickup so we rarely roam the aisles any more. For now it's employees who pick items from the shelves, so at certain times of day if you do go in it feels like a 50/50 split between warehouse (with employees quickly filling special carts) and retail store.

      For us, it's a big timesaver.

      • Re:Shoplifting (Score:5, Informative)

        by dfm3 ( 830843 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:51AM (#63434852) Journal
        We had a trial of something like this at two Walmarts in our area - large octagonal orange tower structures in front of the checkout lanes where your items are locked away until pickup. They worked fine until they didn't... more often than not they were either malfunctioning, under repair, didn't work with large items, or were otherwise not being used so that you had to go to customer service and pick up your items anyway.

        Then there's still the human factor of confused customers who either don't know how to use the things, or take FOREVER to fumble through the process while everyone else has to wait impatiently. That's one of the reasons why I absolutely hate those self-serve kiosks in fast food restaurants... the slow customers who have to tap through EVERY possible option, all the while acting like they've never seen a fast food menu or a computer before.

        Eventually, our Walmarts got rid of the towers... I don't know if the trial ended, or if the apparatus simply broke and was not replaced.
        • Till it does and then it's normal. Early automobiles were pretty dodgy and now look at them. And there was a lot more money being put to behind this kind of automation then there was behind automobiles in their early stages

        • I had a similar experience at Home Depot. My stuff was trapped in a locker and the system to open it was down. I just went in the store and bought what I needed, canceled the order stuck in the locker. Dumb.

        • Re: (Score:3)

          by Kokuyo ( 549451 )

          I am confused by your jab at fastfood kiosks...

          Isn't it a widely known meme that people used to stand in line at the register for several minutes only to go "Uhhmmmm... I'll have.... Gee, I don't know..." when it was their turn?

          I live in Europe so my experience may vary but where we usually had two cashiers, three at the most, now there are six to eight kiosks alongside one to two cashiers.

          So all in all the clientele hasn't evolved, sure, but I am astounded to think that you wouldn't get your food ordered t

        • Our walmart replaced the pickup with outside delivery the same as with groceries, for much of the same reason. It's easier to keep the items in the semi-secured back area and just have the guys handling groceries bring the stuff out to you.

          It's a hell of a lot faster than customer service, which normally packs a huge line.

      • Same for me- almost never go in the store, much better just having them shop for me and they find stuff that I would just be wandering around looking for= I love it.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by q_e_t ( 5104099 )
        Back in the 1980s this innovation was called "Argos". Welcome to the future, er past, or something.
    • I hear Portland cops did not attend shoplifting : I wonder if the scanners were programmed to ring cops over about $970. One thing wrong about automated pickup - is often large sizes are not listed/missing when online! So I have money - but can't buy. One thing missing from automation is like when I buy a shirt in-store, you never get an email 6 months later, saying, Hey customer, like that shirt you got 6 months ago, we have exactly the same shirt same size, discounted 25% if you pick it up online. We don;

      • Re:Shoplifting (Score:5, Insightful)

        by timeOday ( 582209 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @09:45AM (#63434920)
        Our biggest problem with pickup is produce. The store pickers of course are not going to stand around carefully choosing apples without soft spots or avocados that aren't overripe. So although we like pickup for the most part, we might go inside (maybe somewhere else) for produce.

        • Ordering online, one is either forced to buy a set value/amount of items, thus increasing spending OR there is a shipping and handling price, which increases the price of items directly.

          On the other end of the equation is elimination of impulse purchases - which is a negative for the seller. And no, ads can't fix that. We've been trained to ignore online ads for over a generation now.
          Once again, it's only the people selling shovels who are profiting from the "automation" gold rush.
          Well, until they automate

          • Ordering online, one is either forced to buy a set value/amount of items, thus increasing spending OR there is a shipping and handling price, which increases the price of items directly.

            The walmart service where you go pick it up has a minimum of only $30, which isn't much when it comes to groceries, and there's no fee beyond that, and I think the prices are the same as in-store. I have wondered why it pays for them to hire people to gather up your order. But retailing is expensive. People shoplift, they

            • Must be a bad local Lowes. When I've used it(~3 times), they've had the stuff waiting for me.

              And you're right - managing a retail store has expenses of its own. We're already seeing that having employees pull groceries off of store shelves is temporary, they're starting to have stock areas specifically for said employees to pull from, which should reduce all sorts of expenses. Maybe not shoplifting(because employees are often your biggest shoplifters), but staging, presentation, space needed, cashiers, c

          • I have noticed stores are increasing the price of stocked items and subsidizing or loss making delivery - never mind their IT costs for online, will probably never beat Amazon. I resent subsidizing stores doing that. Even worse - free returns - somebody wears that. I want to see 'You are in the top 10%' of returns - We do not want your business' Then you have Aliexpress $2 item, $8 postage scam for bait and switch pricing.
      • It seems that the Walmart US CEO's statement about automation not displacing workers is questionable. According to the article, the automation plan includes a 65% reduction in staff, which contradicts the CEO's statement. As someone who studies economics and reads articles such as those found on https://writingbros.com/essay-... [writingbros.com] for research purposes, it is important to note that while automation may increase efficiency and productivity, it also comes with significant maintenance costs. To offset these cost
        • I would mod you up. But Walmart KNOWS automation will not work for storm / disaster panic buying. You just set up a tent selling plywood/ water bottles and Gaffer Tape in the carpark. It also knows online orders have less impulse buys. IMHO automation works for the top 100 sellers, and 15,000 other lines maybe not. Then cosmetics. You need a counter. If you do online the good cosmetic makers will not sell to you if you sell at a discount price. Repeat for other products.
    • The self-checkout. The Portland store wasn't closed because it wasn't profitable it was closed because it was starting to talk about unionization.

    • > More self checkouts have shown more theft. Which causes the stores to put in crazy amounts of gadgets and cameras to "stop" shoplifting. Stores that were profitable (Portland) are closed instead of simply reverting back to the profitable state. Probably all to avoid paying people a bit more.

      We have mostly self-checkouts here too, but not the massive amounts of theft, nor the cameras, so our stores haven't closed.

      Weird.

    • Re:Shoplifting (Score:4, Informative)

      by pete6677 ( 681676 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @05:45PM (#63435686)

      The Portland shoplifting epidemic has nothing to do with self checkout and everything to do with people just walking out with armfuls of stuff. They know they can get away with it because most laws are no longer enforced in Portland. Who would have thought this would have a bad effect on business?

      • Very valid point

      • Same in California. Cops won't show up and people of low moral fiber realize they can just grab what they want and casually walk out. Employees can yell all they want but they can't actually stop them. Security guards can't touch them either.

        I literally saw a guy stealing stuff from Target telling the security guard, "You can't touch me, we both know that. I'm taking this stuff and nothing you can do about it." He took the stuff and left.

        Had it not been California, I may of got involved but they would proba

  • Less manual labor means less jobs (Score:4, Informative)

    by S_Stout ( 2725099 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:36AM (#63434816)
    There are never any consequences for lying so of course he will lie about this.
    • Several reports show that after the automation they'll be roughly the same number of jobs. But that ignores is that the population is still growing and automation means that the total number of jobs will be stagnant. So that every year you've got another three to five percent who have absolutely no jobs available to them whatsoever.

      We're going to be in the absolutely ridiculous scenario where we're fighting among ourselves for what Little scraps of work are left, all killing ourselves to see who can ple

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by Kokuyo ( 549451 )

        Automation slowing the growth of available jobs has been going on for several decades, yet we feel the crunch for workforce at every angle of our society right now.

        Unless you have a good explanation of how that is temporary and misleading, I'm unsure I can believe the scenario you are painting.

        • The jobs are shitty because good jobs have been consistently moved to wherever the labor is cheapest but that's not anything related to automation that's just capitalism in action. Made worse by a lack of unions and a confused body politic that gets obsessed with moral panics.

          The problem here is that we're going to have job growth that's no longer keeping Pace with even the very very modest population growth we have. That means unemployment is going to skyrocket. Worse you're going to have tons and tons

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gweihir ( 88907 )

        Indeed. Automation will make sure there are increasingly not enough jobs. And that means more and more people will not be able to work, no matter how much they want to. And that is a very dangerous thing to happen.

        • In Germany we have a job crisis ... erm no, the opposite. How write it? Perhaps worker crisis?
          We lack high educated workers: everywhere.

          • That's what we did in the United States. We have plenty of people who can take the advanced education needed but they can't get it into college because they can't afford to go because we cut all the government subsidies that made higher education affordable..

            • Re: (Score:2)

              by gweihir ( 88907 )

              Well, a theocracy (obviously where the US is going) does not want educated people. And, as somewhat recent events demonstrate, you can even get to be US president when having failed college and being illiterate.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by gweihir ( 88907 )

            In Germany we have a job crisis ... erm no, the opposite. How write it? Perhaps worker crisis?
            We lack high educated workers: everywhere.

            So? And how many employees are not "highly educated"? Or educated in the wrong specialty? Or not any good at it despite education? You think they do not need jobs?

            • No idea.
              Since 30 - 50 years we hardly have such a kind of employee. So I did not pay attention how their percentage of unemployment is fluctuation.

              • Re: (Score:2)

                by gweihir ( 88907 )

                Oh? Here are some actual numbers: https://de.statista.com/statis... [statista.com]

                This is about 30% with low to very low qualifications already. Then there are the 24% with Realschule that often go into mid-level clerk positions and especially there the effects of AI will be savage.

                Looks to me like Germany has potentially > 50% upcoming unemployables. No society can survive that.

                • This is about 30% with low to very low qualifications already.
                  Your link does not say that.

                  So no idea what YOU want to say.

                  Then there are the 24% with Realschule
                  That is the equivalent of a middle (probably even low) quality high school in the US. So no idea what you want to say.

                  The school system does not work that way in Germany anyway. For "low level mechanic work jobs" you go to a "trade school" after "what ever school you came from" before.

                  On the other hand: a guy who has finished "Realschule" most likely

      • Well,
        counties with high minimum wages, high automation and high education levels and a strong safety net, disagree. E.g. Norway.
        There are a few TED talks about "where do the most billionaires live" - the top spots on the list is Icelands, Norway ...

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

      Or it means more workers are still needed because of higher throughput.

      I've seen McD's with those kiosks get MORE busy because of them - when you have 6 kiosks putting orders in, people aren't waiting in line to place their order, and now you have more orders coming in. At the same time, you have people ordering via the app. And they still have people handling the manual order entry people, but usually even at rush hour that's around two people handling that line at a reasonable speed with everyone else usi

  • What he means ... (Score:3)

    by Alain Williams ( 2972 ) <addw@phcomp.co.uk> on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:43AM (#63434832) Homepage

    is that his job will not be "displaced". This is what matters most to him.

  • They may not displace any workers, but they sure won't replace workers as they retire, quit, get fired or whatever.

  • Really? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by backslashdot ( 95548 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @08:59AM (#63434860)

    Then why do it? I am in favor of automation that displaces workers, as long as we have a system in place that provides (ex)workers with guaranteed health insurance/care and basic income. Instead of making up BS, the Walmart CEO should just own it. What he ought to be doing is saying he's going to pay taxes and provide shares of Walmart to the displaced workers. Health insurance should never have fallen on companies to provide. It should have always been a taxpayer subsidized situation like Obamacare. I mean, if I were a Walmart worker I would not mind getting displaced as long as I got a cut of the robot's "salary." That cut can come indirectly via taxation. A friend of mine was hired at a company to do manual data entry .. his first week, he wrote a script that did his job automatically. His boss let him stay on for 2 years doing almost nothing because he'd already been allocated the salary. So why can't it be that way with robots? That's what retirement is right, if you did it correct, you'd basically be living off share dividends. Every person should own at least one robot that could work on their behalf. Welfare can be based on it.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by gweihir ( 88907 )

      Then why do it? I am in favor of automation that displaces workers, as long as we have a system in place that provides (ex)workers with guaranteed health insurance/care and basic income.

      I tend to agree (I think more is needed, people need meaning in their lives and many are not able to find that themselves), but there still is too much mindless and deranged opposition to what is clearly necessary. Not the only issue were nil-wit deniers become a bigger and bigger problem.

      • California's homeless problem is a great example of what life will be like when more and more jobs go away. Liberal California is not providing for those people and their quality of life is continuing to get worse.

        Clearly our political system does not care if you are doing well or not. We don't have healthcare, affordable housing or affordable food. We could but we don't. Losing your job and not getting a new one just sends you spirally downward. I'm sure it's even worse in other states with fewer safety ne

  • Anyone been to a walmart recently?? (Score:3, Funny)

    by evlkind ( 858428 ) on Saturday April 08, 2023 @09:02AM (#63434866)
    Half of them don't work to begin with. Can't "Displace" non-working people. You just replace them with functioning robots.

    • Can't "Displace" non-working people. You just replace them with functioning robots.

      Why bother with functioning robots? Replace a non-working employee with a non-functioning robot and you get the same amount of work, but extra savings.

  • Overall they won't see a decrease in employment because they're still opening new stores. But they're going to have less job growth overall. And that job growth won't keep pace with even the modest population growth in America.

    This aligns with report from the world economic forum. The economy is strong so there is a job growth but automation means that overall the total number of positions is going to be stagnant at best. Population growth is slowing because of economic pressures forcing people to give

  • You can be almost certain the exact opposite will be happening.

  • If you believe that, I have a bridge to sell you ...
  • That's how you pay for the automation by firing the humans.

  • And the 85 year old bag-boys?

  • If automation does not displace workers, then it is not economical, unless it increases sales or otherwise decreases costs. Hard to see how it affects either. Maybe they are hoping that they will grow, and automation will obviate them from hiring more workers. ...In which case, it would still essentially be displacing workers.

  • Robots just cost more than wage slaves.

  • by saying that the merger will "benefit customers." Yeah right, mergers never "benefit customers," they benefit the corporate bottom line and allow corporations to charge more for their products or services because they have less competition.

    If a robot isn't meant to replace human labor, what exactly does it do? That is *exactly* what robots do.

Slashdot Top Deals

Technology is dominated by those who manage what they do not understand.

Close