I'm Lost! back room errors

[lemon sprinkles]

Do all Target stores post each person's number of back stocking errors at the ends of the back stock aisles? Does any one else find this embarrassing?

 

[BoxCutter]

If you're careful with your pulls and backstocking then there will be nothing to be embarrassed about.

 

[lemon sprinkles]

Mine have never been below 98.6, but I feel bad for others. More wondering if all stores post those.

 

[allnew2]

Mine have never been below 98.6, but I feel bad for others. More wondering if all stores post those.

Some do pictures 8x10 of the person and post it on their aisle. We don’t do that at my store ours do get coach for even 3-4 errors . Especially if you don’t have a lot of scans even 1 error will get you a coaching in that situation.

 

[allnew2]

We use to post caf monitor and post it back in the day

 

[happygoth]

What the effing what...?! Good heavens no, we do not do that at our store!

 

[Exhausted]

Our full BRLA is posted in the back room in one location and everyone’s name is visible with their score and a breakdown of how many of each error

 

[soyaxo]

My old team lead used to threaten to write people up for their BRLAs, but he made a lot of threats about anything he could to make himself feel more powerful. He never followed through with them. ASANTS, but they could just be wanting to make people more aware of the possible operational loss errors may cause.

 

[Exhausted]

Something I have been wanting to clarify. If I discover a ghost location and trigger a baffle, does that go on my report against me, or on the TM who originally back stocked against them?

 

[allnew2]

Something I have been wanting to clarify. If I discover a ghost location and trigger a baffle, does that go on my report against me, or on the TM who originally back stocked against them?

against you

 

[lemon sprinkles]

Exhausted:
It goes against the person/people responsible for that particular aisle. Even if a new seasonal person would make a mistake backstocking, it goes on your aisle report. Doesn't seem to matter who makes the mistake.

 

[Aae19]

Everyone's aisle is labeled in the backroom with their name so you know who owns it. Some team leads post the score Weekley while others dont.

If I do find errors in my area, Its because of the team members who pull and backstock when I am not there. They like to put things in wackos without scanning the location.

One of the DBO's doesnt understand backstocking and pulling to the point he has to have his area audited every month because his score is VERY much in the red.

 

[allnew2]

Exhausted:
It goes against the person/people responsible for that particular aisle. Even if a new seasonal person would make a mistake backstocking, it goes on your aisle report. Doesn't seem to matter who makes the mistake.

It sure does matter who makes the mistake if he owns or not the aisle . Everyone should be trained on how to fix it before creating the baffle , match the item in the Waco with the picture that is asking to pull . Don’t just scan randomly. And you avoid errors by auditing that location.

 

[60SecondsRemaining]

The entire brla personal percentage system is idiotic and inaccurate.

What if someone backstocks something without scanning it?

What if someone pulls something without scanning it?

On my team we did daily peer audit scans - 20 items per aisle to check for accuracy. The team was held accountable based on those findings.

 

[allnew2]

What if someone backstocks something without scanning it?

What if someone pulls something without scanning it?
/QUOTE]
Then you wouldn’t call it backstock you would only shove things in location without actually doing the BACKSTOCK part. And you create a baffle

Then you wouldn’t pull you would actually take it without scanning therefor you wouldn’t PULL it and you would create a ghost

 

[allnew2]

The entire brla personal percentage system is idiotic and inaccurate.

What if someone backstocks something without scanning it?

What if someone pulls something without scanning it?

On my team we did daily peer audit scans - 20 items per aisle to check for accuracy. The team was held accountable based on those findings.

Then you wouldn’t call it backstock you would only shove things in location without actually doing the BACKSTOCK part. And you create a baffle

Then you wouldn’t pull you would actually take it without scanning therefor you wouldn’t PULL it and you would create a ghost

 

[60SecondsRemaining]

Then you wouldn’t call it backstock you would only shove things in location without actually doing the BACKSTOCK part. And you create a baffle

Then you wouldn’t pull you would actually take it without scanning therefor you wouldn’t PULL it and you would create a ghost

Yeah...no. Let's look at an example:

You go into the backroom and you're scanning along. Let's say you're in toys, location 01A 016 A027. You pull some hot wheels. You finish up, away you go.

An hour later, I come in the back looking for some hot wheels. I find them in 01A 016 A027. I decide I'm just going to take them.

Later that day, Steve drops a batch for some hot wheels. He gets sent to 01A 016 A027. The hot wheels are not there, because I'm a jackass and took them without scanning them out.

As the last person in that location in the SLS, the error is attributed to you, though you're clearly not at fault.

Which is why I think the system is idiotic.

 

[allnew2]

As the last person in that location in the SLS, the error is attributed to you, though you're clearly not at fault.

Not if you fix it before pulling even if nothing is there .
but i get what you are saying about the system however that’s why you fix it to make the system work differently

 

[Exhausted]

Not if you fix it before pulling even if nothing is there .
but i get what you are saying about the system however that’s why you fix it to make the system work differently

I think what 60secs is trying to say is that we shouldn’t have to “make the system work differently” that it should be designed to minimize us as TMs having to work around it’s problematic design

 

[PaRaD0xxR]

If I'm reading correctly, as long as Steve audits that location, no error. That's what we're told to do, if there's a ghost, exit batch, audit, re-enter batch.

 

[allnew2]

If I'm reading correctly, as long as Steve audits that location, no error. That's what we're told to do, if there's a ghost, exit batch, audit, re-enter batch.

Correct

 

[60SecondsRemaining]

Correct

This is inefficient at best and unethical at worst. You're purposely circumventing the functionality built into the system to make your brla look better than it actually is.

The entire point of the baffle/ghost functionality in the SLS was to provide rolling updates as you go, by nature of it's design the system is fixing many errors for you. I disagree with how those errors are attributed but not with the way it functions. Circumventing that functionality gives you a false picture of your overall brla. If this is your standard procedure then of course your BRLA looks great on paper.

If I'm supposed to cook someone a meal, and instead I go purchase them a nice meal and pass it off as my own I may have accomplished the goal. Doesn't make me a chef, it makes me a liar.

 

[PaRaD0xxR]

Exactly, I agree, just doing what I'm told. I also am on the fence about not just scanning boxes indiscriminately so as to not create a baffle. I almost think at least that item, possibly more than 1 of something is now at least located, whereas if you don't scan anything til you're sure what you're scanning is the item you need, that item could remain unlocated indefinitely. Creating a baffle in this sense, would be a "good" thing, no? But anyways, yeah, I think exposing the error with AIS would be a good thing, but we have been told not to do that anymore.

 

[Bosch]

If I'm reading correctly, as long as Steve audits that location, no error. That's what we're told to do, if there's a ghost, exit batch, audit, re-enter batch.

I already waste so much time, I give no fucks about baffles.. If it was right there would be nothing for me to find..

 

[60SecondsRemaining]

Exactly, I agree, just doing what I'm told. I also am on the fence about not just scanning boxes indiscriminately so as to not create a baffle. I almost think at least that item, possibly more than 1 of something is now at least located, whereas if you don't scan anything til you're sure what you're scanning is the item you need, that item could remain unlocated indefinitely. Creating a baffle in this sense, would be a "good" thing, no? But anyways, yeah, I think exposing the error with AIS would be a good thing, but we have been told not to do that anymore.

The way the SLS was designed to work (as told to me by the people who designed it a looooooong time ago - probably some time around 2000) was that you are sent to a location, as you scan items in that location looking for the item it wants, each item scanned is verified against the SLS. If an item is scanned that isn't located in the system, it's added in and a baffle is attributed. If the item you're looking for isn't there, it's removed and a ghost is attributed. I can't recall how the system defaulted quantities for baffles, it's been a very long time. I'm sure the system has changed with the technological modernization Target has done, but I would assume it's fundamentally the same. It's an extremely good system.

The act of gaming BRLA has been around as long as BRLA. First it was shift7 toggle to LOCU and update the location. Once they disabled the LOCU application from the toggle menu, backrooms started setting aside a secondary device so they could go grab it and do the LOCU that way. Now you have the leave batch and audit location method apparently. Is there still a function akin to M-Delete (once you scanned all items in a location you could hit M to delete any items it thought were in location and move on) in the newer device infrastructure when pulling batches? Keep in mind I haven't worked at Target, or retail in general, for quite some time now, so I can't say with any certainty that the way you're being told to do it is incorrect, though I strongly doubt it's how it's supposed to work.