May 20, 2015
Kroger develops disabled worker program DCs
Through a special arrangement, presented here for discussion is a summary of a current article from Supply Chain Digest.
In 2006, Walgreens launched what turned out to be a very successful program to employ disabled workers across its distribution network that continues to this day.
Howard Green, director, corporate programs for the National Organization on Disability, recently said on a panel at the Warehouse Education and Research Council (WERC) conference in Orlando that at one Walgreens distribution center in Connecticut, more than 50 percent of the workers are disabled, including some 40 deaf fork truck drivers.
Since Walgreens pioneering success, a few other retailers have followed, but overall progress seems slow to SCDigest. Others with active programs include Lowe’s, Starbucks, Toys "R" Us and now Kroger.
Kroger started its program with a single major distribution center in Cleveland, TN, partly because at times the grocer had recruitment challenges there.
Source: jobs.kroger.com
Stan Martz, a Kroger human resources manager, said the DC employs about 1,000 associates, of which 11 are now full-time disabled workers, with a goal of having as many as 100. More have been hired at the DC in the year-plus the program has been in place but, as with other retailers with such programs, its performance standards for disabled workers aren’t relaxed — and sometimes disabled workers need to be let go.
Having a good partner to maintain a pipeline of new recruits coming is essential. In Kroger’s case, the University of Tennessee prescreens potential workers, then provides coaching services for hired workers on site.
Hurdles can include the need for some physical accommodations to the work area, although such changes rarely cost more than $100 and almost never over $500. The interview process also has to change depending on the specific disability.
A fundamental challenge for Kroger was that most supervisors didn’t really know how they were supposed to handle this new workforce group, afraid of saying the wrong thing, etc. Once training helped with that part, the grocer ironically had a kind of opposite problem: Supervisors were reluctant to report it when one of the workers was lagging behind productivity goals.
Lest anyone think this is all just do-gooding, both Mr. Martz and Mr. Green cited real benefits to launching these programs. Disabled worker have clearly shown they have less turnover and are far less likely to call in sick or stay home when it snows in the morning, for example.
"This is just the right thing to do," Mr. Martz said.
BrainTrust
Recent Discussions
Discussion Questions
Why have retailers been seemingly slow to hire disabled workers at distribution centers? Does the DC supervisors’ anxieties and challenges illustrate a broader fear or concern by management as well?
Poll
There are more risks in the distribution center than in the stores. The key is that Kroger has been so aggressive in getting disabled workers into the stores. I shop at Frys, a Kroger arm in Arizona, and have great relations with the many disabled employees at our favorite Frys store. It’s great to see and they’re dedicated workers who love what they do — and we all ignore their challenges.
The article does a good job of summing up most of the reasons but avoids the one key reason: discrimination. People feel uncomfortable around people who have disabilities.
As the article says, and research has shown, employees with disabilities if hired and trained properly can be real assets.
At the risk of stating the obvious: because distribution center (warehouse) work is physically demanding, and often dangerous, and the list of disabilities which cannot be accommodated is long (visual impairment, paralysis, neuromuscular conditions, etc.). Walgreens and Kroger are to be applauded—even if the modest claim of serving their self-interest is true—but I’d be cautious about stereotyping (even a seemingly positive one). I suspect the (perceived) greater reliability is largely due to more rigorous screening.
One of the painful realities that costs retail billions of dollars per year is employee turnover. People with disabilities are notoriously loyal even if only for the severe lack of employment options. With local, state and federal support from many directions, this could be a positive investment if properly structured. The number of reasons for why not can be built to induce the level of fear needed for corporate rejection relatively easily. I must applaud the companies willing to create lists supporting these efforts and making it happen. Change can be good for goodness sake.
More Discussions
How Timely Is the Planned Lowe’s Website Renovation Focusing on Personalization?
Is Lowe’s being timely with its website reno, and is it right to be placed as…Should Costco Be Opening Members-Only Gas Stations?
Is this the right move for the warehouse club?As Boomers ‘Age Out of Peak Purchasing,’ How Can National Brands Retain Interest With Gen Z?
According to a recent First Insight study titled “Is Gen Z Still Choosing Your Brand,” while…
There are more risks in the distribution center than in the stores. The key is that Kroger has been so aggressive in getting disabled workers into the stores. I shop at Frys, a Kroger arm in Arizona, and have great relations with the many disabled employees at our favorite Frys store. It’s great to see and they’re dedicated workers who love what they do — and we all ignore their challenges.
The article does a good job of summing up most of the reasons but avoids the one key reason: discrimination. People feel uncomfortable around people who have disabilities.
As the article says, and research has shown, employees with disabilities if hired and trained properly can be real assets.
At the risk of stating the obvious: because distribution center (warehouse) work is physically demanding, and often dangerous, and the list of disabilities which cannot be accommodated is long (visual impairment, paralysis, neuromuscular conditions, etc.). Walgreens and Kroger are to be applauded—even if the modest claim of serving their self-interest is true—but I’d be cautious about stereotyping (even a seemingly positive one). I suspect the (perceived) greater reliability is largely due to more rigorous screening.
One of the painful realities that costs retail billions of dollars per year is employee turnover. People with disabilities are notoriously loyal even if only for the severe lack of employment options. With local, state and federal support from many directions, this could be a positive investment if properly structured. The number of reasons for why not can be built to induce the level of fear needed for corporate rejection relatively easily. I must applaud the companies willing to create lists supporting these efforts and making it happen. Change can be good for goodness sake.