Adjusting the peak standards

Available under Creative Commons-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

But there is a catch. With only eight servers either four stations would have to be closed down, 22-seat stations would be assigned to servers (175 seats divided by 8 servers), or a combination of the two. What happens if the 200 customers do not arrive at even intervals and the dining room does not turn over according to plan? What would happen if three-quarters of them arrive at the beginning of the hour? If the restaurant is operating with reduced seating, 50 people would be forced to stand in line for a half hour, upsetting many guests on short lunch breaks. An alternative would be to fill those big 22-seat stations, taking the risk that some of the servers will get stuck and give slow service. In fact, between eight and twelve servers are needed for this situation. The manager decided to try ten servers.

The manager then examined the breakfast service. Here a 60 per cent utilization of seats was assumed (the number of actual customers divided by the number of seats available), because there are more single people and parties of two at breakfast than at lunch. A maximum of 2.5 sittings per hour was estimated. This resulted in a 175- seat maximum of approximately 260 people during the peak hour, very close to the actual average of 250 from 8.00 to 9.00 during the week (Table 4).

Figure 4.6 Exhibit 11: Staffing chart-original and revised.  

(Source: Carol A. King. “Controlling Dining Room Labor Cost.” Consultant 15. No 1. January 1982, 37.) 

With lower seat utilization, however, the manager felt the servers could handle larger stations than they could at lunch. It was decided to try working breakfast with eleven servers instead of twelve. This would give each server up to about 24 customers (the 260 maximum divided by 11 servers). Using the same method, it was determined that dinner service required only eight servers.

Finally, there are periods when a minimum staff is required regardless of the volume of business. For late supper, the manager wanted a minimum of two servers on duty until closing. Since this business was somewhat unpredictable, three servers were assigned until 23.00. By 23.00 they could usually tell what the rest of the evening's business would be like. If it looked like a rush, the third person could stay on another hour.

Now the manager had peak-hour requirements for breakfast, lunch, and dinner. Unfortunately, we cannot schedule workers only for the hours we need them; we must give them enough work to make it worth their while to come in.

In fact, most union contracts require that a worker be paid for a minimum number of hours (usually four, if the employee reports to work as scheduled). Therefore, the staffing required at peak periods at least partially determines the staffing of off-peak periods. We can utilize off-peak times for meal breaks and side work and can employ part-time employees to work only breakfast, because tips are lower than at other meals. Most servers want to work lunch as well, to make their tips. Therefore, the manager had to revise the figures for lunch and schedule eleven servers in order to have eleven for breakfast coverage. The revised schedule was charted and the productivity for each hour was recalculated. In the periods when productivity was low, shifts were staggered and part-time help substituted until each time slot was brought to an acceptable level. The revised figures are shown in Table 5 and Table 6 and the lower part of Exhibit 11. The manager also was able to cut the opening crew from twelve to six by putting things on wheels to reduce set-up time.