ST Alpha - "It isn't a straight "for $9 we could have prevented $2000 in theft." That would require knowing when the theft would occur and staffing for just that" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 155

In response to "Which requires staffing someone to potentially do that but of course they can't schedule over the hours they've been budgeted." by Tim

It isn't a straight "for $9 we could have prevented $2000 in theft." That would require knowing when the theft would occur and staffing for just that

Posted by TWuG Jul 16 '09, 17:27

period.

What the real cost is is $9 X 40 hours X 3 employees to cover most every shift the store is open.

So one week's payroll to stop one extraordinary theft is $1080. That doesn't include the cost of benefits.

Multiply that over 52 weeks (keeping in mind that two of those weeks are paid vacation) and you are looking at an annual cost of $56,160 (not including benefits) to prevent what might amount to an every three months event.

From a cost/benefit point of view it isn't terribly smart to spend $56k to stop $6k in losses.

Responses:

Oh if only it was every three months. - Tim Jul 16, 17:33 1
- I've worked both sides - TWuG Jul 16, 17:38

Post a message top

It isn't a straight "for $9 we could have prevented $2000 in theft." That would require knowing when the theft would occur and staffing for just that

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.