How the automated pilot verifys the net labour: connects old new actions one by one

After the automation pilot, the original site was less manual and did not mean that there was less labour in the system. Work may be transferred to upstream pre-treatment, night work supplement, new cleaning, programming, maintenance or extraordinary recovery. Middleby ' s article suggests that current operating and labour costs be known and that the reasonableness of the automated investment be judged.[1] This is not a substitute for the old practical exercise of the shop, nor does it prove that multiple, procedural or control panels necessarily save people.

First, freeze the old process and change the one mechanism at a time.

The old process records complete mission boundaries: from raw materials or orders to the handover of qualified outputs, including preparation, loading, active handling, having to guard, waiting to leave, unloading, cleaning, refilling, handing over, returning to work and recovery of anomalies. Each incident has its number, location, responsibility, beginning and ending time, parallel relationships, frequency and original evidence.

The pilot scheme for the new process will include changes and maintenance items. For example, changes to the processing mechanism alone would allow for the maintenance of comparable menus, input specifications, batches, eligibility criteria, class ranges and recording patterns. The time difference cannot be attributed to automation alone if the materials are replaced at the same time, the batch is changed, the personnel are replaced, the cleaning is modified or the posts are adjusted. Conditions that could not be maintained should be recorded as deviations and analysed in layers.

Positions and responsibilities are one dimension, and time change is another.

Do not label an action with a "disappear, shorten, transfer" each other. An action can be transferred simultaneously from a midday cook to a night shift preparer and reduced from 4 minutes to 2 minutes per batch. There must therefore be two sets of event lines: old new locations, shifts, roles and responsibilities; old new frequency, number, person minutes and fluctuations.

The state of affairs can be divided into pairs, new events, no response to old events, inadequate observation and disputed borders. A “suspension” cannot immediately be labelled as a real disappearance. Upstream, downstream, night, storage, cleaning, worksheets and cyclical maintenance are checked and repeated in representative loads before they can be listed as candidates disappear. It was still necessary to retain the scope of observation in the report and not to write a permanent conclusion.

How to write down the transfer and shorten a fictional circuit.

The table below is a purely hypothetical teaching example and is not a performance test for any real equipment. It is assumed that a number of eligible tasks of the old process will be pre-processing, operation and on-duty cleaning; the new process will be shared with the additional night work supplement and cycle maintenance.

Old Event	New Event	Change of location/responsibility	Change in minutes per batch	Decision
Midday cook pre-processing	The night shift preparers are centralized.	Cross-shift, shift of responsibilities	4-2.	It's not going away.
The lunch cooks are running on a continuous basis.	Load, set and unmount	Roles change, actions change.	6/2.	Shortened Matched
On duty cleaning.	Clean-up on duty.	Part shift to night shift	2 x 1 + 1.5	The total increase is 0.5, not just on duty.
None	Maintenance of procedures and work orders per instalment	New responsibilities to authorized personnel	0-0.5	Add Event

In this scenario, the old process is 12 person-minutes, the new process is 2+2+1+1.5+0.5 = 7 person-minutes with a net surface difference of 5 person-minutes. This figure is, however, valid only when all lines use the same assessment period, and upstream/downstream, back-to-work and anomalies are covered. The two minutes of night work cannot be removed from the general ledger as a result of leaving the lunch break; the cycle of cleaning and maintenance should be apportioned on the basis of the actual frequency of the same period, without the use of unapproved estimates.

Net Man Minute Formula must contain new events

Under the same comparable task, it can be written as: Net Man Minutes Change = All old processes have been paired with person minutes - New processes have been paired with person minutes - Add up and down, clean, maintain, return to work and abnormal person minutes. As a result, only a reduction in the number of human minutes in the range observed does not mean that the number of posts can be reduced.

When an employee handles two tasks in parallel at the same time, the minutes are recorded only once. The active operation is assigned to the main task at the time; the time during which the equipment is removed from operation is recorded separately as the time of the equipment and is not added to the manual. They operated 20 person-minutes at the same time, not just 10 minutes after the mission. The disputed sharing time period is shown separately and is subject to a financial and operational approval of the rules for apportionment before entering a net change.

Only initial samples are created at a peak

An observation on the peak day reveals congestion, recourse, error and restoration of the path, but does not prove to be a stable, clean economy. Pilots should define representative loads in advance: different menu combinations, low to medium-high task loads, shifts, patches, cleaning cycles and permitted operator ranges. Each layer is repeated many times, and single, median or pre-selected aggregates, fluctuations and missing data are retained in the report for more than the fastest time.

Unusual days are not deleted, but rather the reasons for the events, the extent of the impact, the restoration of human minutes and the relevance of the new mechanism. Normal day and abnormal day layers can be displayed, but full-cycle costs and the ability to retreat cannot be considered non-existent. The learning period should also be separated from the stabilization period: the new person ' s training and procedural adjustments are real migration costs, but they should not average an unexplained number with stable operations.

The failure is only a safe desktop promotion.

The pilot does not create real malfunctions, does not protect by side, does not undermine food or equipment conditions for data collection. The process can be detected, reported, switched and restored in the case of stoppages, cut-offs, unserviceable programs, etc., in an unloaded, unoperating desktop drill. The data must be marked as a rollover and not combined with a live stoppage.

The desktop exercise revealed gaps in the lack of contact details, availability of backup tools, old process personnel who did not maintain skills or material could not retreat. The gap should be entered into the new schedule and cost model, but no precise minutes are given to pretend to be performance. Only when real anomalies occur and security procedures are completed will they be included separately as measured incidents.

Net change reported, no replacement figures published

The final report separates items that have been matched by a reduction in pairs, a shift of responsibilities, additional events, a lack of response, inadequate observation and disputes. Each conclusion is accompanied by a number of tasks, shifts, roles, dates, sample numbers, person minutes and fluctuations. The net change in the scope of the pilot can only be described if the event line is complete and the liner person-minutes are available, representative loads have been duplicated, abnormal days and maintenance have been included.

The reduction in net person minutes is not a replacement figure. Releases may take place over the course of the entire shift or only during unbound periods; they are also subject to service levels, safety, food, rest, shifts and working conditions. The pilot answers where the work goes, and then operations, manpower and finance decide in their respective delegations of authority how to use time, rather than automatically drawing conclusions on staff reductions from the equipment pilot.

Return, cleaning and maintenance to the same denominator

Old processes are also converted to the same comparative period or to each eligible batch if each batch is recorded, the weekly clearance of the new process, monthly maintenance and temporary work orders. For example, a weekly clean-up actually takes up 30 minutes each for each of the two, with 100 eligible batches for the week, and the teaching share for the week is 60 ÷100 = 0.6 person-minutes per batch. If the number of tasks varies from one week to another, the actual molecules and denominators of the week should be applied, instead of Zero Six being considered a permanent constant.

The original job and the redo task are coded separately. Return time, materials, energy and stagnating costs of entering new processes are incurred, but the same remade product is not double counted in the eligible output denominator. It is easy to make the process of returning to work more productive by looking only at the number of missions completed.

The repair worksheets are to distinguish between planned maintenance, programme updating, abnormal diagnosis, spare parts waiting and operation review. The waiting of unauthorized persons cannot simply be attributed to “technical staff hours”, while the operational, management, procurement or logistics time taken is recorded in the respective person minutes. When the period is too short to observe maintenance, the item is marked as not covered and is not counted as zero.

Check if there are any hidden transfers with the line-up reconciliation.

In the respective observation sessions of the old new process, all person-minutes, hand-overs, cleaning, undistributed duty time and calibrated rest should return to the total number of shifts. The new flow chart shows 10 person-minute savings, but the total number of shifts remained unchanged and 10 minutes of unallocated time added, indicating that this time did not result in cash savings during the period, which may have been released but not re-engineered.

If the number of times worked is greater than the total number of shifts, check first that one person is double-counted for two tasks at a time, that the equipment is over time treated as manual, that the number of people performing multiple tasks is duplicated or that the definition of the end of the task is inconsistent. If less than the total, check if night work supplements, pre-school preparation, unusual communication, tools and restoration are missing. The difference shall revert to the original time line correction and shall not be apportioned proportionately to each task.

Phased decision to prevent initial samples from being considered as commitments

The first door only checks whether the event line is complete: whether the old new move is paired, whether the new move is going up and down, night work, cleaning and maintenance is going in, and whether the shift is right. No net savings are mentioned without the data being added at the time of adoption.

The second decision-making door examines stability: whether representative loads have been duplicated, whether learning periods, abnormal days and normal days have been stratified, and whether qualified outputs, service levels and security conditions are comparable to those of old processes. The third decision-making portal is the financial and operational assessment of the value of release time. This sequence makes three independent, reviewable conclusions: “shorter action”, “lower total human minutes” and “realization of economic values”.

References

• Middleby: How to Determine Restorant Labor Costas and Saving Using Automation