Hard physical labor, numbingly boring tasks, continuous deadlines warehouse workers face down stress every day. The challenge is figuring out how to keep stress from flaring up into burnout.
For the average distribution center worker, it's another day, another hefty dose of job stress. You walk in the door and your brain shifts right into overload—trailers have arrived early and the unloading's already behind schedule. Or you're assailed by a supervisor reminding you that pick times will be closely monitored today because of an unusually tight schedule. Or the trucks are late and there's nothing to do but wait for the inevitable crunch. Or you're ordered to cover for someone who's out with the flu but can't get anyone to tell you precisely what you're supposed to do.
And even if you did know exactly what you were supposed to be doing, all too often you can't count on getting the tools and help you need. Two of the four lift trucks are out of commission. Cramped aisles make it impossible to move inventory and equipment around. Vacancies and absenteeism have left the facility pitifully understaffed. You're feeling the strain—both physical and emotional—and nobody seems to care.
No wonder between 20 and 75 percent of all warehouse workers leave their jobs within one year of their hire date. Though some learn to tolerate the stress, huge numbers succumb to the work fatigue. Those burned-out employees eventually respond in one of two ways: they try to wrest more control over the situation or they leave (think fight or flight).
Filling the vacancies can be both difficult and expensive—the cost of replacing a single employee is estimated to be in the thousands of dollars. Alarmed by the high turn over, distribution center managers from Klickitat to Kittery are looking for ways to fight stress and hold on to their workers.
But to fight stress, you have to understand what causes it and who's most affected. For that, we went right to the source, surveying 667 workers in seven distribution centers (see sidebar for a look at the respondent pool). Specifically, we wanted to know the following: How bad is the stress and burnout? Do stress and burnout levels vary based upon employee job tenure, overall job experience in the industry, work shift (early/day/late), or job status (full-time, part-time or temporary)? And most important of all, what can be done about it?
As bad as it gets?
To get an idea of how much stress DC workers are under, we asked survey participants seven questions related to pressures of the workplace— how often they had "been upset because of something that happened at work," for example, or how often they "found that they could not cope with all of the things they had to do." Stress levels were measured on a scale of 1 to 7—1 = never and 7 = every day. Researchers then averaged the numeric scores for each employee's answers to compute an overall stress score for that individual.
We conducted the "burnout" survey in much the same way. Participating employees were asked nine questions such as how often they "felt used up at the end of the workday," "failed to make an effective contribution to the organization," and "felt emotionally drained from [their] work." Responses were again scaled from 1 to 7, with 1 = never and 7 = every day. The respondents' answers to the nine questions were summed to create an overall burnout score for each employee.
Overall, respondents reported feeling a moderate level of stress— 3.53 on a scale of 1 to 7, indicating that they typically experienced stress a few times per month.Most of the stress appeared to derive from what we termed demand related factors—inability to control their immediate work environment or to manage unexpected events. Workers seemed to take problems caused by a lack of resources much more in stride.
The overall burnout score didn't lag too far behind. Workers reported experiencing burnout symptoms on a regular basis (3.43 overall on a scale of 1 to 7), as well. Burnout among distribution center employees most often takes the form of emotional exhaustion—the statement "I'm emotionally drained by my work" resonated loudest among workers. Survey respondents also reported that they felt inadequate or detached on a pretty regular basis.
Feeling the burn(out)
But not every stressed worker falls victim to burnout. Some segments of the workforce continue to function normally even as their colleagues succumb to the stress. What accounts for the differences? Does job tenure, for example, affect a worker's susceptibility? How about work experience, work shift (daytime or nighttime) or job status (full time, part time or temporary)? In hopes of identifying factors that increase the risk,the research team conducted four separate analysis of variance (ANOVA) tests. What follows is a summary of the sometimes surprising results:
Job tenure. Researchers divided the respondents into three groups based on tenure in the current job—less than two years, two to five years, and more than five years. Though you might ex pect the trend line to move steadily in one direction (say, up), the results actually showed that job stress decreased significantly after two years of employment—from 4.44 for those who had been on the job less than two years to 2.78 for those with two to five years' tenure. However, as DC employees pass their five-year anniversary with the same employer, job stress levels climb again.
By contrast, burnout steadily decreased overtime. Workers with less than two years' tenure reported significantly higher levels of burnout symptoms (4.64) than those with two to five years on the job (3.66) or those with more than five years (2.21).
Why does the pattern change so abruptly at the five-year mark, with burnout levels continuing to drop while stress re-escalates? Stress may rise at that point because of added responsibility or deteriorating relationships with co-workers. As for declining burnout levels, it may be that employees develop coping mechanisms over time—they learn to handle stress or they simply decide to live with it. It's also possible that as time passes, these employees begin to feel "institutionalized"—that is, they begin to feel that they're an integral part of the organization (or the work group) and spend less time worrying about being fired, reprimanded or demoted. But it's more likely that the burnout drops over time simply because many quit. The problem (stress) is still there, but burnout is lower because some of the employees have gone.
Work experience. Does overall distribution center work experience (all experience—not just time on the current job) influence job stress and/or burnout? To find out, researchers divided respondents into three groups based on their total years of distribution center experience: workers with less than five years' experience, with five to 10 years of experience, and with over 10 years' experience, and compared their total stress and burnout scores.
What they found was that up to the 10-year mark, job stress and burnout levels remained relatively static. However, after the 10th year of experience, burnout levels declined significantly (to 3.05 from 3.78), while job stress levels rose significantly (to 4.02 from 3.33). The increase in stress later in the career may be caused by physical strain related to aging, increased stress related to increased responsibility or the inability to cope with changes in the work environment. The decline in burnout later in the career may indicate increased ability to manage job stress or simply that some burned-out employees leave.
Work shift. Are some job shifts more stressful than others? It looks that way. Though workers assigned to the early shift (basically the traditional 8-to-5 workday) and the overnight shift (any shift that begins after 5 p.m. and lasts until after midnight) reported moderate levels of both job stress and burnout, employees working the mid-shift (any shift that begins in the afternoon and lasts late into the evening) reported significantly higher levels of job stress and burnout.
There are a number of possible reasons. Traditional shift workers can usually count on their work day following a ro utine—when they arrive in the morning, they know what tasks they can expect —picking, packing, loading or unloading. Stress arising from unexpected events tends to be minimal. Early-shift workers can also expect to work under the guidance of a full supervisory staff and with a full complement of co-workers for help. Overnight shift workers also reported relatively low stress levels—albeit for very different reasons. DCs often hire these workers to create work teams that come in very late or very early to perform a specialized task. The uniqueness of the task, smaller workforce and unusual hours can create camaraderie among workers that helps to reduce stress.
Mid-shift workers, by contrast, often come in while the early-shift workers are still around but stay long after they've left. Fewer managerial personnel are available for guidance. This crew often experiences volatility in workrelated demand—they may be assigned to complete whatever tasks were not finished by the early shift in addition to their regular responsibilities. There generally are fewer midshift workers than early-shift workers. As a result, they're much more likely to be randomly assigned to unfamiliar tasks or given responsibilities that they consider someone else's jo b. These factors, in addition to the added st ress o f working hours that are generally reserved for life outside the workplace,may explain the peaks in both job stress and burnout relative to early and overnight shifts.
Employment status. Is it more stressful to be a full-time worker than a part-time employee? Or a temporary/summer worker than either of the others? Though we found only minor differences in job stress and burnout between the full-time and part-time distribution center workers, temporary/summer workers reported much higher stress levels than the other two groups. Temps are often given a variety of unrelated short-term assign m ents to cover immediate demand or replace workers who are on leave. The wide variety of tasks performed and/or the uncertainty of expectations related to daily tasks may create stress.
Though stressed, temporary/summer workers are much less likely to experience burnout than regular full- or parttime employees. That's not surprising. They're aware that their positions, and therefore their stresses, aren't permanent. They may be miserable, but they know there's an end in sight.
Redress for stress
Understanding the reasons behind workplace stress is one thing; doing something about it is another. Generally the solutions involve some combination of psychological rewards, training, raising self esteem and more sensitive management.
What can managers do? Our study didn't address this question, but based upon the current research and our professional work experience, we believe workplace stress can be greatly reduced if managers provide the following:
More training. Improved skills can lead to a greater sense of accomplishment. Plus, the right type of training will better prepare workers to handle unexpected events.
More control over the work environment. Delegating responsibility to workers cuts down on their stress. Empower workers to develop best practices and/or change their job designs.
Clear and precise definitions of job responsibilities. Identify the scope of the job and the expectations. Specify exactly what performance measures will be used.
Relief from boredom. You can ease the tedium by instituting cross-training, varying their tasks and responsibilities or instituting periodic job rotations.
Recognition of individual accomplishments. Don't stint on feedback and praise. And let your stars shine: Post weekly performance measures in the break room, including employee names, goals and achieved performance.
A sense of place. Workers want to know how their efforts contribute to the larger goals. Emphasize that work is a team effort. Encourage team meetings and mentoring.
R&R. Organize recreational activities outside of work—a softball team or a bowling league. Not everybody's an athlete, of course. But then again, laughter can be a great stress reliever.
study group
The survey data, of course, don't reveal how the largely male respondents felt about filling out a multipart questionnaire that focused on their feelings. Nonetheless, a total of 667 employees participated in the study, which was conducted in seven distribution centers in Georgia, Oklahoma, Pennsylvania and Texas. In exchange for their participation, employees, who completed their questionnaires during their coffee breaks or lunch periods, had a chance to enter a cash lottery drawing.
The respondent pool's demographic profile is fairly typical for the warehousing industry. About three-quarters of the respondents (74 percent) were male. Ages ranged from 18 to 65, with most (78 percent) participants falling between 25 and 44. The respondents were a racially diverse group—43 percent white, 19 percent black, 13 percent Hispanic, 11 percent Asian—and fairly well educated: Four out of five participants had at least a high school diploma, and nearly one-third (29 percent) had attended at least some college.
Congestion on U.S. highways is costing the trucking industry big, according to research from the American Transportation Research Institute (ATRI), released today.
The group found that traffic congestion on U.S. highways added $108.8 billion in costs to the trucking industry in 2022, a record high. The information comes from ATRI’s Cost of Congestion study, which is part of the organization’s ongoing highway performance measurement research.
Total hours of congestion fell slightly compared to 2021 due to softening freight market conditions, but the cost of operating a truck increased at a much higher rate, according to the research. As a result, the overall cost of congestion increased by 15% year-over-year—a level equivalent to more than 430,000 commercial truck drivers sitting idle for one work year and an average cost of $7,588 for every registered combination truck.
The analysis also identified metropolitan delays and related impacts, showing that the top 10 most-congested states each experienced added costs of more than $8 billion. That list was led by Texas, at $9.17 billion in added costs; California, at $8.77 billion; and Florida, $8.44 billion. Rounding out the top 10 list were New York, Georgia, New Jersey, Illinois, Pennsylvania, Louisiana, and Tennessee. Combined, the top 10 states account for more than half of the trucking industry’s congestion costs nationwide—52%, according to the research.
The metro areas with the highest congestion costs include New York City, $6.68 billion; Miami, $3.2 billion; and Chicago, $3.14 billion.
ATRI’s analysis also found that the trucking industry wasted more than 6.4 billion gallons of diesel fuel in 2022 due to congestion, resulting in additional fuel costs of $32.1 billion.
ATRI used a combination of data sources, including its truck GPS database and Operational Costs study benchmarks, to calculate the impacts of trucking delays on major U.S. roadways.
There’s a photo from 1971 that John Kent, professor of supply chain management at the University of Arkansas, likes to show. It’s of a shaggy-haired 18-year-old named Glenn Cowan grinning at three-time world table tennis champion Zhuang Zedong, while holding a silk tapestry Zhuang had just given him. Cowan was a member of the U.S. table tennis team who participated in the 1971 World Table Tennis Championships in Nagoya, Japan. Story has it that one morning, he overslept and missed his bus to the tournament and had to hitch a ride with the Chinese national team and met and connected with Zhuang.
Cowan and Zhuang’s interaction led to an invitation for the U.S. team to visit China. At the time, the two countries were just beginning to emerge from a 20-year period of decidedly frosty relations, strict travel bans, and trade restrictions. The highly publicized trip signaled a willingness on both sides to renew relations and launched the term “pingpong diplomacy.”
Kent, who is a senior fellow at the George H. W. Bush Foundation for U.S.-China Relations, believes the photograph is a good reminder that some 50-odd years ago, the economies of the United States and China were not as tightly interwoven as they are today. At the time, the Nixon administration was looking to form closer political and economic ties between the two countries in hopes of reducing chances of future conflict (and to weaken alliances among Communist countries).
The signals coming out of Washington and Beijing are now, of course, much different than they were in the early 1970s. Instead of advocating for better relations, political rhetoric focuses on the need for the U.S. to “decouple” from China. Both Republicans and Democrats have warned that the U.S. economy is too dependent on goods manufactured in China. They see this dependency as a threat to economic strength, American jobs, supply chain resiliency, and national security.
Supply chain professionals, however, know that extricating ourselves from our reliance on Chinese manufacturing is easier said than done. Many pundits push for a “China + 1” strategy, where companies diversify their manufacturing and sourcing options beyond China. But in reality, that “plus one” is often a Chinese company operating in a different country or a non-Chinese manufacturer that is still heavily dependent on material or subcomponents made in China.
This is the problem when supply chain decisions are made on a global scale without input from supply chain professionals. In an article in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, Kent argues that, “The discussions on supply chains mainly take place between government officials who typically bring many other competing issues and agendas to the table. Corporate entities—the individuals and companies directly impacted by supply chains—tend to be under-represented in the conversation.”
Kent is a proponent of what he calls “supply chain diplomacy,” where experts from academia and industry from the U.S. and China work collaboratively to create better, more efficient global supply chains. Take, for example, the “Peace Beans” project that Kent is involved with. This project, jointly formed by Zhejiang University and the Bush China Foundation, proposes balancing supply chains by exporting soybeans from Arkansas to tofu producers in China’s Yunnan province, and, in return, importing coffee beans grown in Yunnan to coffee roasters in Arkansas. Kent believes the operation could even use the same transportation equipment.
The benefits of working collaboratively—instead of continuing to build friction in the supply chain through tariffs and adversarial relationships—are numerous, according to Kent and his colleagues. They believe it would be much better if the two major world economies worked together on issues like global inflation, climate change, and artificial intelligence.
And such relations could play a significant role in strengthening world peace, particularly in light of ongoing tensions over Taiwan. Because, as Kent writes, “The 19th-century idea that ‘When goods don’t cross borders, soldiers will’ is as true today as ever. Perhaps more so.”
Hyster-Yale Materials Handling today announced its plans to fulfill the domestic manufacturing requirements of the Build America, Buy America (BABA) Act for certain portions of its lineup of forklift trucks and container handling equipment.
That means the Greenville, North Carolina-based company now plans to expand its existing American manufacturing with a targeted set of high-capacity models, including electric options, that align with the needs of infrastructure projects subject to BABA requirements. The company’s plans include determining the optimal production location in the United States, strategically expanding sourcing agreements to meet local material requirements, and further developing electric power options for high-capacity equipment.
As a part of the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the BABA Act aims to increase the use of American-made materials in federally funded infrastructure projects across the U.S., Hyster-Yale says. It was enacted as part of a broader effort to boost domestic manufacturing and economic growth, and mandates that federal dollars allocated to infrastructure – such as roads, bridges, ports and public transit systems – must prioritize materials produced in the USA, including critical items like steel, iron and various construction materials.
Hyster-Yale’s footprint in the U.S. is spread across 10 locations, including three manufacturing facilities.
“Our leadership is fully invested in meeting the needs of businesses that require BABA-compliant material handling solutions,” Tony Salgado, Hyster-Yale’s chief operating officer, said in a release. “We are working to partner with our key domestic suppliers, as well as identifying how best to leverage our own American manufacturing footprint to deliver a competitive solution for our customers and stakeholders. But beyond mere compliance, and in line with the many areas of our business where we are evolving to better support our customers, our commitment remains steadfast. We are dedicated to delivering industry-leading standards in design, durability and performance — qualities that have become synonymous with our brands worldwide and that our customers have come to rely on and expect.”
In a separate move, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) also gave its approval for the state to advance its Heavy-Duty Omnibus Rule, which is crafted to significantly reduce smog-forming nitrogen oxide (NOx) emissions from new heavy-duty, diesel-powered trucks.
Both rules are intended to deliver health benefits to California citizens affected by vehicle pollution, according to the environmental group Earthjustice. If the state gets federal approval for the final steps to become law, the rules mean that cars on the road in California will largely be zero-emissions a generation from now in the 2050s, accounting for the average vehicle lifespan of vehicles with internal combustion engine (ICE) power sold before that 2035 date.
“This might read like checking a bureaucratic box, but EPA’s approval is a critical step forward in protecting our lungs from pollution and our wallets from the expenses of combustion fuels,” Paul Cort, director of Earthjustice’s Right To Zero campaign, said in a release. “The gradual shift in car sales to zero-emissions models will cut smog and household costs while growing California’s clean energy workforce. Cutting truck pollution will help clear our skies of smog. EPA should now approve the remaining authorization requests from California to allow the state to clean its air and protect its residents.”
However, the truck drivers' industry group Owner-Operator Independent Drivers Association (OOIDA) pushed back against the federal decision allowing the Omnibus Low-NOx rule to advance. "The Omnibus Low-NOx waiver for California calls into question the policymaking process under the Biden administration's EPA. Purposefully injecting uncertainty into a $588 billion American industry is bad for our economy and makes no meaningful progress towards purported environmental goals," (OOIDA) President Todd Spencer said in a release. "EPA's credibility outside of radical environmental circles would have been better served by working with regulated industries rather than ramming through last-minute special interest favors. We look forward to working with the Trump administration's EPA in good faith towards achievable environmental outcomes.”
Editor's note:This article was revised on December 18 to add reaction from OOIDA.
A Canadian startup that provides AI-powered logistics solutions has gained $5.5 million in seed funding to support its concept of creating a digital platform for global trade, according to Toronto-based Starboard.
The round was led by Eclipse, with participation from previous backers Garuda Ventures and Everywhere Ventures. The firm says it will use its new backing to expand its engineering team in Toronto and accelerate its AI-driven product development to simplify supply chain complexities.
According to Starboard, the logistics industry is under immense pressure to adapt to the growing complexity of global trade, which has hit recent hurdles such as the strike at U.S. east and gulf coast ports. That situation calls for innovative solutions to streamline operations and reduce costs for operators.
As a potential solution, Starboard offers its flagship product, which it defines as an AI-based transportation management system (TMS) and rate management system that helps mid-sized freight forwarders operate more efficiently and win more business. More broadly, Starboard says it is building the virtual infrastructure for global trade, allowing freight companies to leverage AI and machine learning to optimize operations such as processing shipments in real time, reconciling invoices, and following up on payments.
"This investment is a pivotal step in our mission to unlock the power of AI for our customers," said Sumeet Trehan, Co-Founder and CEO of Starboard. "Global trade has long been plagued by inefficiencies that drive up costs and reduce competitiveness. Our platform is designed to empower SMB freight forwarders—the backbone of more than $20 trillion in global trade and $1 trillion in logistics spend—with the tools they need to thrive in this complex ecosystem."