Custom-Designed Employee Work Schedules
8:00am - 5:00pm (Pacific Time Zone), Mon-Fri
Search Results
The most efficient shift length (one that requires the fewest staff) depends the nature of the hourly coverage requirements, i.e. whether the coverage needs are constant or vary on a regular basis throughout the day. It doesn't matter if the group operates 24/7 or something less than that. Here's a flow chart of the steps involved:
24/7 Operations
If the coverage requirements are steady throughout the day, then the best choice is either 8-hour or 12-hour shifts. That's because these shift lengths don't overlap during the 24-hour day. Other shift lengths (9, 10, or 11 hours) would overlap. This not only doubles the coverage during the overlap(s), but it also increases the staffing requirements. Three 9-hour shifts require 12.5% more staff, three 10-hour shifts require 25% more staff, and three 11-hour shifts require 37.5% more staff.
If the coverage requirements vary fairly regularly by time of day, the organization can either use:
Fixed shifts with different staffing levels on each shift that match the coverage requirements, e.g., 4 people on day shift, 3 people on evening shift, and 2 people on night shift.
Overlapping shifts, e.g., 9 or 10-hour shifts. By changing the shift start and end times, the daily overlaps can be consolidated and matched to the busy period.
An overlay shift that boosts the coverage for the length of that additional shift, e.g., a 6-hour shift from 3 p.m. to 9 p.m.
Less than 24/7 Operations
If the coverage requirements are steady, the best choice would be a shift length that matches the hours of operation - up to a maximum of 12 hours. For example, if the company is open for 11 hours a day, the most efficient choice would be an 11-hour shift, since this would require the smallest number of employees and would avoid any overlapping shifts. If the daily hours exceed 12 hours, then 2 shifts are needed each day. For example, a company that is open 14 hours a day could have two 7-hour shifts or one 8-hour shift and one 6-hour shift.
If the coverage requirements vary by time of day, the organization can either use:
Fixed shifts with different staffing levels on each shift that match the coverage requirements, e.g., 2 people on the first shift and 4 people on the second shift.
Overlapping shifts. For example, if the late afternoon is busiest, a company could use a 12-hour day shift and an 8-hour evening shift that overlaps from 4 p.m. to 8 p.m.
An overlay shift that boosts the coverage for the length of that additional shift, e.g., a 4-hour shift from 3 p.m. to 7 p.m.
Summary
If you want to maximize employee utilization, your shift length should be based on the whether the workload and associated coverage requirements remain steady throughout the day or vary on a fairly regular basis. Steady workloads should have shifts that don't overlap for more than the length of a meal break. Variable workloads can be addressed in several different ways.
Many people choose the shift length for other reasons. For example, they choose 10-hour shifts, hoping to get an extra day off each week, or they choose 12-hour shifts, hoping to get more weekends off. They don't realize that this may increase the headcount requirements, not match the coverage with the workload, or utilize the staff ineffectively.
|
|
Employees and management see shift schedules from entirely different perspectives. When employees discuss their ideal shift schedule, they talk about things like shift length, work patterns, and shift start/end times. That's because these features are related to their primary concern: time off.
Shift length affects the number of scheduled days off and percentage of weekends off.
Work patterns influence the length and frequency of the breaks.
Shift start/end times determine when they get to go home.
When managers of shiftwork operations discuss the organization's shift schedule, they are primarily concerned about the coverage requirements, staffing levels, absence rates, and overtime. That's because these features affect their main concern: the organization's resources.
Coverage requirements define the amount of resources needed (total work hours per week).
Staffing is the primary resource available to the organization.
Absence rates determine the staff's availability and the amount of overtime needed.
Overtime is seen by some as an unnecessary cost and by others as a strategic tool to boost the weekly work hours and/or cover absences.
Employees rarely consider the impact of their preferences on the organization's resources. Go to any employee forum and read the posts related to work schedules. You'll read about a group that adopted 10-hour shifts and how all the employees love them. Or how another group thinks a 6-on-3-off pattern would be better than the 5-on-2-off pattern they work now - because of the 3 consecutive days off. You also might find requests for a copy of someone else's schedule. No one ever mentions coverage requirements, the impact on absence coverage, or how many employees these choices would require. It's all about days off, weekends off, or not having to work too many days in a row.
So how can managers accommodate both the needs of the organization and the preferences of the employees? The only way to satisfy both sides is to start with what's feasible for the organization, and then seek out options that will satisfy employees. If you start with what employees want, you might get inconsistent or insufficient coverage, coverage that's not matched with the workload or staff size, or schedules that consume more resources than available.
Notice that I'm only indicating where to begin the search for a new schedule. Starting with what is feasible may narrow the scheduling possibilities or preclude certain approaches, but it doesn't mean the employees will have terrible schedules. And it doesn't mean they won't have any choices. What it does is join the management team with the workers in finding a solution that is best for both the organization and the employees.
|
|
Your group needs a new employee work schedule. Maybe the staff size has changed. Or the demand for your product/services requires you to increase the hours of operation. Perhaps you've run out of space and need to add a 2nd or 3rd shift. Maybe you're just tired of listening to employee complaints. Whatever the reason, you know that something has to be done.
If you're like most managers in this situation, you may be asking friends or associates in your industry about their schedules. And you're probably searching the Internet for additional ideas. It's important to find a solution that doesn't require a lot of time or money. Your regular responsibilities can't be put on hold and your budget has little room for unexpected expenditures.
Unfortunately, a schedule that's not tailored to the organization's hours of operation, coverage requirements, staff size, and pay week will rarely be a good solution. You will probably end up with problems such as these:
Ineffective coverage
Inconsistent coverage
Over-staffing
Unnecessary overtime
Minimal weekends off
Let's look at each of these problems a little closer.
Ineffective Coverage
The fundamental purpose of the schedule is to ensure the right number of people at work during all the hours of operation, i.e., to match the coverage with the workload.
If the work volume is fairly steady, then the coverage also should be constant. A schedule with hours of overlapping shifts would be ineffective for these situations. For example, using 10-hour shifts in an organization with a steady workload would be a waste. There is no need for the 6 hours of double coverage while the shifts overlap. It would also be costly, since it would require 25% more personnel than a schedule using 8-hour or 12-hour shifts.
If the work volume varies by time of day or day of the week, the coverage should reflect that. Possible solutions include mixed shift lengths, overlay or power shifts, 10-hour shifts, staggered shift start times, or different coverage levels on each shift. An example of ineffective coverage is a police department with a heavier workload on Friday and Saturday evenings that uses a schedule with the same coverage throughout the week.
Inconsistent Coverage
An ideal schedule consistently matches the desired coverage. Some schedules don't do this. Here are two examples:
Sometimes companies have more staff than the minimum necessary. They may have reached this position because they were using an inefficient schedule which required more employees or they thought the extra personnel would help to cover absences. A small food processing firm needs 5 people working on a 24/7 basis. They employ 23 people, three more than the minimum necessary. They could have used the extra employees to build relief coverage into the schedule, but instead adopted a schedule in which the coverage varies between 5 and 6 people.
Sometimes organizations adopt schedules that produce fluctuating coverage because they like the work pattern even though it is a poor match for their requirements. For example, a warehouse needs at least 3 people working around the clock. They chose a schedule with a 6-on-3-off pattern because their employees thought it would be better than the current schedule. Because of their staff size, however, the coverage varied between 2 and 3 people. To maintain the minimum coverage levels, the company was forced to hire 3 more employees. The coverage now varies between 3 and 4 people. In this case, choosing the wrong schedule increased their costs by 25% and it is still producing inconsistent coverage.
Over-staffing
Nobody wants to overstaff, yet it happens all the time. It occurs primarily for three reasons:
The organization sets an annual target of less than 2,080 work hours per employee (<40 hours a week). For example, a police department has a labor contract that limits employees to 1,820 hours a year. This is an average of 35 hours a week. They need 5-person coverage using 10-hour rotating shifts. Because of the reduced work hours, they have to employ 30 officers. If they worked an average of 42 hours a week, they would only need 25 officers.
The organization builds extra coverage into the schedule rather than using relief coverage. For example, small utility needs 4-person coverage at all times. Although they could do this with 16 people working an average of 42 hours a week, they employ 20 people to have 5-person coverage at all times. They could have employed 17 people (rotating shifts) or 18 people (fixed shifts) and built relief coverage time into the schedule which would have accomplished the same thing.
The organization wants a schedule with no built-in overtime. A small hospital needs 3 CNAs on a 24/7 basis. Their 8-hour fixed shift schedule requires at least 12 people working an average of 42 hours a week. However, they are instructed to eliminate overtime from the schedule. To maintain the same coverage, they are forced to employ 15 people at 40 hours a week.
Unnecessary Overtime
People adopt work patterns that were intended for a different pay week. If they don't tweak the schedule, they could end up with highly unbalanced work weeks and more overtime than necessary. Example: A small trucking company found a schedule that was intended for a Sun-Sat pay week. Since their pay week starts on Monday, the employees work 60 hours one week and 24 hours the next, and the company has to pay for an extra 3 hours of overtime per employee every week.
Minimal Weekends Off
Employees want to get as many weekends off as possible. This may not be achieved if the organization chooses the wrong schedule or doesn't modify it to fit their pay week.
A nursing home has a schedule with several split weekends in which employees work either Saturday or Sunday instead of both. A different pattern would have provided more full weekends off.
Many work patterns work best for a certain pay week. For example, a popular 8-hour rotating shift schedule pattern that requires only 4 or 5 consecutive days of work provides 1 weekend off every four weeks - only if the pay week begins on Sunday. Trying to use this pattern with a Monday start will mean the workers never get a full weekend off.
Conclusions
When organizations select a schedule that is not matched to their specific resources or requirements, employees can suffer from fewer full weekends off and the organization can suffer from ineffective coverage and higher costs.
|
|
Search for information about 24/7 schedules and you'll find multiple websites showing examples of popular work patterns, e.g., Continental, Pitman, DuPont, 6-on-3-off, 4-on-2-off, etc. You get the impression that these schedule templates are good for any group that works around-the-clock. All you need to do is choose the option you like best.
This is highly misleading. There are three reasons why:
Coverage. Smaller organizations rarely need the same number of people working at all times. Yet the free templates found on the Internet produce constant coverage on a 24/7 basis. The primary reason you have a schedule is to match the coverage with the workload, so why would you want a schedule that doesn't do that? It would be a huge waste of your resources.
Staffing. Each template works best with a specific number of crews (usually 4). If your staff size isn't a multiple of this number, the crews will not be the same size which will result in uneven coverage. Another staffing issue has to do with schedule attractiveness. Some templates look great, but require way more employees than other, more efficient patterns. Don't get seduced by a schedule's attractiveness.
Pay Week. Each template works best for a certain overtime / pay week, e.g., Sunday to Saturday. Some schedules can be modified, but some can't. This can result unbalanced work week hours and in the loss of weekends off for employees.
So, if looking through popular work patterns is not a good way to find a new 24/7 shift schedule, what's the best approach?
You should always start with the workload distribution and the associated coverage requirements. How many people do you need at work on each shift? Does this stay the same all week?
When we design schedules, we compare the coverage requirements with your staff size and the average hours worked each week to determine what is feasible. Sometimes, overtime may need to be built into the schedule to avoid gaps in coverage. Occasionally there may be more staff than necessary, so we'll show you different ways to utilize these "extra" resources.
We then evaluate your schedule preferences to see if this creates any problems. If the resources are adequate for the coverage and scheduling preferences, we start the actual shift schedule design. Often, we can apply common scheduling patterns as a starting point, and modify them to fit your unique circumstances.
We create several different shift schedule options to show you the range of possibilities, such as the number of consecutive days worked, different shift lengths, relief coverage, and so on. The goal is to satisfy your specifications and explore possibilities you may not have considered.
|
|
I had a client from a local motel ask for help with the staffing and scheduling of her motel's housekeepers and maintenance staff. She said these two groups were running up big overtime bills. The managers complained about being under-staffed and over-burdened with scheduling issues.
I'm going to describe what I did to address these problems because I think they are common to many hotels, motels, and bed & breakfast establishments.
I started by asking my client how long it took the employees to do their jobs. She said the housekeepers only needed 8 hours a day, while the maintenance crew was active for 16 hours day. Both jobs were needed 7 days a week. Then I asked her how many people she needed at work each day.
The housekeepers needed 9-person coverage on an 8/7 basis (8 hours/day for 7 days/week). I told her that this would require at least 12 employees. They could be organized into 4 crews of 3 people each. This was quite a few less than the 16 people they currently employed. However, because this group had a high absence rate, my client decided to increase the crew size to 4 people. This was probably more extra coverage than necessary, but it avoided layoffs. This would completely eliminate the need for overtime to cover absences. They would work a 4-week schedule in which three weeks were 40 hours and one week was 48 hours. This would average 42 hours a week over the 4-week period.
The maintenance crew needed 1-person coverage in the mornings and evenings. They needed 2-person coverage in the afternoons. This would require three 8-hour shifts. Because they worked fixed shifts, this would take six employees (2 per shift). I laid out a 2-week pattern for my client. In order to give everyone 40 hours of work each week, there would be 3 days a week in which both employees on each shift were scheduled to work.
I suggested that she consider two 10-hour shifts instead of three 8-hour shifts. The shifts would overlap for 4 hours giving them the desired 2-person coverage for part of the afternoon. This would only require 4 employees and there would only be one day a week in which all 4 employees had to work. She decided that the absence rate was low enough in this group that it wouldn't be necessary to build in extra coverage like she did with the housekeepers. Due to various problems with some of the maintenance staff, layoffs were not a concern for her.
Do you have a similar situation in your hotel or B&B? Can't figure out the best staff size? Have trouble maintaining the right coverage? Are you experiencing high overtime levels or absences that can't be covered? Instead of having a manager create a new schedule every week, you need a set schedule that produces the desired coverage with minimal staffing/overtime costs. Please contact us today for help. Here's a link to request a quote for our services.
|
|
When covering 24/7 with 10-hour shifts, most people think it takes three shifts since you would simply be replacing the three 8-hour shifts. The problem with three 10-hour shifts is that you are really covering 30/7 which can increase the staffing requirements by 25% or more.
For example, suppose you need 2-person coverage on every shift. With 8-hour fixed shifts, this would require 9 employees (3 per shift). With 10-hour fixed shifts, it would take 12 employees (4 on each shift). This is a 33% increase in the staffing, making it unaffordable for most organizations.
This is not the case for all situations, however. Let's say you needed 2 people on the day and afternoon shifts and only 1 person on the night shift. WIth 8-hour fixed shifts, this would require 8 employees. With three 10-hour fixed shifts, this would require 10 employees. But if you used FOUR 10-hour shifts, it would only require 8 employees. Here's one way to match that.
Assign 2 people to each of the following four 10-hour shifts.
This would produce 2-person coverage from 6 am to 10 pm and 1-person coverage from 10 pm to 6 am. With 2 people on each shift, there would be one day every week in which both people are scheduled to work (since everyone is working 4 shifts or 40 hours per week). This would give you 4-person coverage from 6a to 10p and 2-person coverage from 10p to 6a on that one day every week. You could use this extra coverage for group meetings, training or other purposes.
This approach only works if the coverage for 16 hours a day is double the coverage for the remaining 8 hours. So it would work if you needed 2-person/1-person, 4-person/2-person, 6-person/3-person, 8-person/4-person and so on.
If you want to get really complicated, you could boost the coverage on one shift. This would give you extra coverage for that 10-hour period. For instance, you could assign 4 people to the afternoon shift. This would give you 2-person coverage from 6a to 12p, 3-person coverage from 12p to 10p, and 1-person coverage from 10p to 6a.
Obviously, this can get really complicated. If you are dead-set on adopting 10-hour shifts, why not contact us for help. Get started by filling out this form:
Contact Us
|
|
A majority of the organizations that cover 24/7 use 8-hour fixed shifts. That would be fine if it weren't for the fact that employees hate the schedules. The universal complaint is that they don't get enough days or weekends off. They simply want a better work-life balance.
The employees think 10-hour shifts would be a good choice, but the increased staffing requirements prevent most organizations from adopting them. Most employees don't want 12-hour shifts, though when they see actual examples of 12-hour schedules, they often change their minds. But let's focus this article on 8-hour shifts.
There are a lot of different patterns with 8-hour fixed shifts. Unlike 12-hour schedules that normally use 4 crews, 8-hour schedules can use anywhere from 6 to 27 crews. The number depends on the coverage levels, as shown in the table below:
Coverage
Staffing
Total
Average*
Weekends
Possible
Pattern
Pattern
Pattern
Per Shift
Per Shift
Staff
Hours/Week
Off (max)**
Patterns
#1
#2
#3
1
2
6
37.3
1/2
2
Max. 7 days
Max. 4 days
2
3
9
37.3
1/3
3
Max. 8 days
Max. 7 days
Max. 4 days
3
4
12
42
1/4
5
Max. 7 days
6-on-2-off
Max. 5 days
3
5
15
33.6
2/5
2
Max. 7 days
Max. 5 days
4
6
18
37.3
1/3
3
Max. 7-8 days
Max. 5 days
4-on-2-off
5
7
21
40
2/7
2
Max. 7 days
Max. 5 days
5
8
24
35
3/8
1
5-on-3-off
6
8
24
42
1/4
5
Max. 7-8 days
6-on-2-off
Max. 5 days
6
9
27
37.3
3/9
1
Max. 7 days
6-on-3-off
* Average Hours/Week often can be increased to 40 by requiring occasional extra coverage
** Max. Weekends Off can only be achieved with certain patterns
Are you thoroughly confused? Sorry. There's a lot of information in this chart. Let me try to explain using 5-person coverage as an example. There are 2 rows with 5-person coverage. On the first row, 7 people are required if they work an average of 40 hours a week. On the second line, 8 people are required, but they only have to work an average of 35 hours a week.
Why would you adopt a schedule that only averages 35 hours a week? People do it all the time. Not because they want fewer hours. They chose a popular work pattern without realizing that it averages less than 40 hours. In this case, the pattern is 5 days of work followed by 3 days off, aka 5-on-3-off.
Continuing with the example, you'll next see the maximum weekends off. The maximum with 7 people per shift is 2 weekends off every 7 weeks whereas the max. with 8 people per shift is 3 weekends off every 8 weeks. After that is a tally of the number of possible schedules along with descriptions of those schedules. Max. 7 days means the schedule requires working 7 consecutive days at some point. In general, the more days worked, the more weekends off.
A significant portion of my clients contact me because they have adopted a popular 8-hour work pattern, and they're tired of the employee complaints and never having enough or consistent coverage. I try to show them both alternative approaches (i.e. different shift lengths) and other 8-hour options. This way they can compare the coverage, average hours of work, weekends off, and so on. This chart illustrates the possibilities for 8-hour fixed shifts only.
Are you ready to explore other work patterns or alternative scheduling approaches? Contact us today:
Contact Us
|
|
10-hour shifts are a popular choice among employees. However, when used with companies working 24/7, the 10-hour shifts create a few problems. The biggest is that it takes three 10-hour shifts to cover the day. This means the company is actually running for 30 hours a day instead of 24, which will boost the staffing requirements by at least 25%.
And, if that's not bad enough, how do you handle the fact that the shifts overlap one another for 6 hours a day? Do you overlap each shift by 2 hours or do you consolidate the overlap so there are 6 consecutive hours of double coverage?
If you overlap each shift for 2 hours, do you have one shift sit idle, while the other works? That seems pretty wasteful. The exception would be police departments where the first shift can go back to the office to do paperwork, while the second shift is out on patrol.
If you consolidate the overlaps, you might be able to take advantage of the double coverage. Maybe there is a special project that can be tackled, areas that can be cleaned / repaired, or a new production line that can be operated. Companies with variable work volumes can align the 6 hours of overlap with the busy period to match the coverage with the workload. The downside, of course, is that this may result in some weird shift start and end times that won't appeal to employees.
If you are considering 10-hour shifts in your 24/7 business, I hope you'll read the other articles I've written about the limitations of 10-hour shifts. Here are links to the most popular articles:
1. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/10-Hour_Shifts
2. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=10-hour-shift-schedules-and-police-management
3. https://www.shift-schedule-design.com/Blog?m8:post=10-hour-shift-schedules-for-police-officers
|
|
Here's another comment I read at the 911Dispatch forum from someone who wants to adopt 10-hour shifts:
"Our center has been looking into getting away from our 8 hour shifts. Most everyone here wants either 8's or 10's, 12's are out of the question for now anyways. We have 12 full time dispatchers, 3 being leads. Has anyone found a way to work a ten hour schedule with that number of people? Most of the research I've done says it is not able to be done."
I'm going to break my comments down into a couple of categories:
1. Workload. Is there ever a mention of a variable workload? No. So why are they considering 10-hour shifts? 10-hour shifts are only appropriate for organizations whose workload varies throughout the day. I suspect that the desire to adopt 10-hour shifts is merely employee preferences to get more days off and more weekends off. Unfortunately, this is insufficient justification. 10-hour shifts require some major sacrifices, so you'll need a lot more than just employee preferences to support the change. Sorry to be so blunt about it, but there are several limitations to 10-hour shifts that employees fail to recognize. Some of them will be discussed below.
2. Coverage/staffing. To provide 3-person coverage on a 24/7 basis using 10-hour shifts would require 15 employees working an average of 42 hours a week. This organization only has 12 employees. They could have 3-person coverage on one shift and 2-person coverage on the other two shifts. If they tweaked the start/end times on the shifts, they could make the overlapping shifts cover another 6 hours of the day. The end result would be 4-person coverage for 6 hours, 3-person coverage for 10 hours, and 2-person coverage for 8 hours.
3. Crews. Most 10-hour shift schedules don't use crews. They are what I refer to as "crewless" schedules. For this group, I would create a 12-week schedule. Each employee would be initially assigned to one of the 12 weeks. When they finished the first week, they would rotate to the next week of the schedule. They would continue doing this until the finished the entire schedule, at which time they would go back to the first week of the schedule.
4. Leads. There are 3 leads. If they are working 10-hour shifts and are needed at all times, the organization would need 2 more leads. Even then, they would have to work 42 hours a week on average. And they wouldn't always be working with the same set of employees. This will make it much more difficult to supervise.
5. Overtime. Sometimes people think that changing to 10-hour shifts will allow them to have a schedule with no overtime built into it. Unfortunately, that only occurs with certain levels of coverage. The most efficient 10-hour schedule will have multiples of 7 people on each shift which will produce multiples of 4-person coverage. For the 3-person coverage this organization needs, overtime would be needed to ensure consistent coverage. As with their current 8-hour schedule, they would average 42 hours per week if they had 15 employees.
|
|
Everyone wants to find free examples of shift schedules, especially with 10-hour shifts. The problem is you can't trust what you get. Here's one I found today. I won't say where I found it, because I don't want to embarass anyone. I'm merely showing it to you to illustrate a point about the risks of adopting a schedule example or template you found on the Internet.
When I first saw this schedule I thought, "Wow, they figured out a way to make a 10-hour shift schedule using a 4-on-3-off pattern. That's awesome!" But then I started looking closer at how it worked. Here are the things you'd have to live with:
1. Rotating shifts. Sometimes rotating shifts are necessary for various business reasons. I'm not saying rotating shifts are bad, but these rotate backwards from nights to evenings to days. That's bad.
2. Fixed days. This schedule has fixed days of work for each team. Some teams have to work every weekend while others have every weekend off. That's just not fair. All employees should be treated equally when it comes to the days of work.
3. Overlapping day. One day a week, all six teams are scheduled to work. That's not an efficient way to use your personnel. And will the organization using the schedule have adequate capacity for that many employees working at the same time? How about when the shifts overlap for 6 hours that day? This will increase the coverage by 4 times. So if the normal coverage is 3 people, you would have 12 people at work for that six hour period. Not only is it wasteful, but I doubt that many places could accommodate that.
4. Staffing requirements. With rotating 10-hour shifts, you could achieve the same coverage with 5 teams working an average of 42 hours a week. Let's say the teams were comprised of 3 people each. The 6-team schedule shown above would require 18 employees working 40 hours a week or 720 hours a week. A 5-team schedule would require 15 employees working 42 hours a week or 630 hours a week. When you account for the overtime in the 5-team schedule, the total hours of pay would be 645 hours / week. Even with low average wages of $8/hour, the free schedule example would cost $600 a week more than the other schedule.
So you tell me, is this free schedule example really worth it? I know it's hard to believe, but there are organizations that will implement this schedule. And they'll brag about how great their new 10-hour schedule is. They haven't a clue what they're missing. I hope you aren't seduced by the lure of free schedule templates like this one.
|
|
Copyright © All Rights Reserved 2023 by Shift Schedule Design