There is a myth in our industry that being understaffed is the biggest challenge to sales growth, and that is the missed opportunity. But the truth is that, while we all want to have the right number of staff, the bigger enemy to service and sales is overstaffing. 

Let us take the difficult example of when you need 1.5 people on a shift FOH. Clearly you can’t have one, because they would fail, so the right answer is to have two. You might decide that you want one on the bar, one serving and one running food. Then you have three. Comfortable – and many might argue that they have the structure right, service will be great, and they can cope with any increase in sales. Good rostering, right?  

But I have seen countless examples of what actually happens on this kind of shift. One person does the work of 1.5 people, badly, and the other two people chat.  

Of course, the customer is forgiving if you have two people working hard and it is busier than expected, but equally they are unforgiving if they see two people chatting.   

We have all seen it too often. Recently, we were doing some customer training and made this point to managers. There was no argument – they all agreed. 

So, if we can all agree that overstaffing is the biggest enemy, why does it happen? 

Is it because rotas are written without thinking enough about demand? Is it that people think there is a minimum number on shift that is required and can’t see how to run their business on less? Is it fear that someone won’t turn up? Is it that they overstaff in case they are busier? Is it that the manager really wants to do nothing on the shift so rotas extra hands? 

Is it that there are a few standard shift structures that are deployed, and the staff don’t want to create any more? I think it is the combination of all of those reasons that causes overstaffing. 

But what is the cost? The problem with our industry is that the majority of shifts during the week are quiet. If we have 14 shifts a week, then it is likely that at least half of them are quiet shifts, where there is a tendency to overstaff. If say 20% of our labour occurs at these points (for one of my own it is 35%), and we could save 10% of this, then this is still a 3.5% improvement in labour. And we all need that. 

So, let’s come back to the reasons. In truth only the first and the last can be solved through systems, unless you control a manager to death and remove any level of authority – an equally dangerous approach.  

The rest are achieved through education and training. It has been great to have recently seen both managers and kitchen managers get the point in recent training sessions. But the prize is a big one. Reduced cost and increased sales are the dream ticket. So, let’s bust the myth. 

The planned increase to minimum wage has made a substantial change to the differentials between young people. From April next year, over 21s will see a minimum wage of £11.44, whilst under-18s will receive £6.40. 

There is a solid argument against paying under 18s only 55% of the new minimum wage for adults. Many of them are better than that, which poses the question – is this age discrimination at a government level? Here in lies the rub. While a lot of under-18s deserve a higher rate, there is often a high chance that as employees, they will not work out for the following reasons:  

For many under-18s, working in hospitality will be their first real job. We must teach them the basic disciplines of work: turning up, preferably on-time; looking smart every day; smiling, and not just to friends; going to work with a hangover and not hiding in corners; being polite to colleagues; talking to old people; working as a team; accepting proper discipline; listening to instructions and not repeating the same mistake – the list goes on.  

A number of young people fail on any of these measures, and some, sadly fail on all. The churn of under 18s is therefore considerably higher than for those on their second, or probably third job. The training to help them through some of these barriers is also considerably higher.  

The hospitality industry has always been a good training ground for the rest of British industry, teaching the skills that mean those people are better able to hold down and excel at jobs in the future. A job working in a pub means that person has already developed a work ethic, which is a positive sign on a CV. 

The real risk is that if this differential gets eroded, the cost of employing experienced hands may seem more appealing, and so the incentive to employ these first jobbers starts to disappear.  

But what is the right number? The argument we should accept is not a theoretical one, but a practical one. Are these young people getting the chance to start work? The answer is no!  

Less than 5% of the 25-plus age group are unemployed, whereas after a brief dip to under 10%, the unemployment rate for under-24s is now climbing sharply and currently sits at 12.7%. Anything over 15% and I suspect the government will feel grave concern, but it looks like we are heading that way pretty fast. 

Having read the summary of the low pay commission report, it looks to me as though it takes a massive amount of time to pull together, which means it is likely they will not have reacted enough to the stats which changed sharply between April and July this year. 

To layer on further challenges, we also pay our teams tips. Where these tips are through a company, hopefully the low pay commission have taken them into account. But, where they are not, they will not be in the report. This means that young people are certainly earning more than the government are recording. 

My hope in all of this is that wage rates for young people are set at a point. As an industry, we want to employ young people and continue our vital role in helping them start their careers. I am proud of those who have grown through my own pubs – having watched some join as teenagers, gone through a successful university career, and ended up with great jobs. I would really like that to continue.