Human workers take on new roles in a world of warehouse robots
Robots have the potential to transform fulfillment operations, but for now they still have their weaknesses. People are stepping up to fill those gaps, taking on new roles like water spider, crew chief, and “human in the loop.”
Ben Ames has spent 20 years as a journalist since starting out as a daily newspaper reporter in Pennsylvania in 1995. From 1999 forward, he has focused on business and technology reporting for a number of trade journals, beginning when he joined Design News and Modern Materials Handling magazines. Ames is author of the trail guide "Hiking Massachusetts" and is a graduate of the Columbia School of Journalism.
Stop me if you’ve heard this one before: Labor is tight, but consumer demand is booming, so warehouse and DC leaders are turning to automation to keep up with the workload. That basic scenario has been playing out for years, with automated equipment vendors providing ever-more-powerful tools to boost fulfillment rates.
The latest round of warehouse tech includes robotic picking arms, autonomous mobile robots (AMRs), and artificial intelligence (AI). Add it all up, and the resulting combination can seem like a nearly human collection of hands, legs, and brains. Some forecasts even suggest that machines will soon replace people in the distribution center, creating a “dark warehouse” that needs nothing more than a reliable power supply to operate 24/7.
But even as robots become a familiar sight in warehouses across the country, experts say human workers continue to play an important role. That’s largely a reflection of the varied nature of warehouse work. Unlike an automated assembly line, where robots perform structured and repetitive tasks, warehouses demand a significant amount of flexibility—think of today’s e-commerce fulfillment centers, where items, quantities, and packaging vary from order to order, and demands change from shift to shift.
Given those complexities, a successful robotic implementation still requires the participation of humans—whether they’re working collaboratively with the bots to pick orders, handling errors, or supervising fleets.
LEND ME A HAND
When it comes to applications that integrate people and robots, most people think of the collaborative robot, or cobot—a robot that works alongside human workers in a semiautomated process that leverages the strengths of both. An example might be an AMR that can navigate its way to an assigned warehouse rack but lacks the ability to pick individual goods efficiently—a job that is then performed by its human “collaborator,” who selects the items and deposits them into totes on the AMR.
But in many cases, the human worker’s contribution to the operation is less physical than cognitive.
Compared with robots, people are more flexible in their thinking and better at solving complex problems, says Stephen Dryer, senior global product manager for the material handling systems integrator Fortna (which recently merged with MHS Global).
“All the things that robots are not very good at will be the purview of the human,” Dryer says. “There’s a fear that robots are going to take over people’s jobs, and it is absolutely the case that robots can do certain things pretty well. But they are not efficient at higher-order tasks”—particularly ones requiring judgment calls and problem solving.
Dryer compares the current state of warehouse robotics with what’s happening in autonomous trucking. “It’s like the self-driving story; there were predictions of self-driving vehicles taking over and of people not getting jobs in trucking—or deciding not to go into the sector. But we’re not seeing that. Because with driving, you still need human brains, human eyes, human decision making,” he says.
BRINGING HUMANS INTO THE LOOP
The need for that higher-order work has driven the development of “human in the loop” (HITL) robotic systems, also known as “brains in the background” systems. As opposed to working shoulder to shoulder with a cobot to pick e-commerce orders, a person working in an HITL system serves as a supervisor. HITL systems need people for the same reason that a computer printer that can produce hundreds of copies of precisely printed pages still needs a human to clear paper jams or replace an empty ink cartridge.
In the warehouse, an employee working with HITL robots will monitor operations on the DC floor, and when a problem occurs, quickly step in to resolve the issue and avoid a systemwide work stoppage, Dryer says. For example, that worker might notice an operational logjam or a dropped package—known as an “exception event”—and get the robot back on track by resetting it to its “home” position or returning the fallen box to a picking zone, he says.
Many DCs have dubbed these robot supervisors “water spiders,” a nickname derived from their habit of darting around the building the way a water spider scurries around a pond, fixing problems for robots, says Erik Nieves, CEO and founder of the parcel-handling robotics platform Plus One Robotics.
“What people are good at is decision making, dealing with exceptions as they happen, and using our cognition and flexibility,” Nieves adds. “And the warehouse is predicated on variability, not predictability. So the lesson is, ‘Thou shalt have a human in the loop.’”
REMOTE CONTROL
The HITL concept originally grew out of cases where manufacturing facilities would assign people to repetitive tasks that were just slightly too complex for machines, termed “almost automatable,” Nieves says. “When a robot [encounters] something it doesn’t understand, a remote supervisor can step in and give it a command or show it what to do. If you can’t find a way to deal with exceptions, you are DOA, so you need to have HITL,” he says.
In Plus One’s case, that human in the loop is a “crew chief,” the company’s term for the remote supervisors who troubleshoot problems with clients’ automated systems. Available 24/7, these crew chiefs work in shifts from the company’s San Antonio headquarters, watching video feeds of warehouse robots in distant cities and putting things right—say, reorienting a confused robot—with the click of a mouse. Nieves notes that the job requires quick reactions and good judgment, making it suitable for someone with a background in computing or video gaming, but that it doesn’t require a college engineering degree.
That remote oversight allows the company to solve the majority of problems for warehouse robots, barring the rare physical problem, he says. “Occasionally a crew chief might see that a vacuum cup blew out, or a box broke open and there are DVDs all over the floor or something. Then they would alert a local person, usually staff from the maintenance department, and say ‘Cleanup in aisle 6,’” Nieves says.
Human workers play a similar role at Phantom Auto, a San Francisco-based provider of remote operation systems for forklifts. Drivers operate the vehicles from an office cubicle by viewing a live video stream from each remote-controlled lift truck, via a system that provides a 360-degree view and two-way audio. Like Plus One’s crew chiefs, they resolve the occasional physical problem inside the warehouse, known as an “edge case,” by notifying an employee in the building, says Elliot Katz, Phantom Auto’s co-founder and chief business officer.
Katz scoffs at the idea that warehouse robots will someday replace human workers entirely. “When the pandemic hit, people couldn’t go to work in close confines. And if AMRs were fully functional, that wouldn’t have been a problem. But that automation still can’t handle complex environments. There was never a better time for ‘robots to take over our jobs’ than the pandemic, when we couldn’t even go in the building. And it didn’t happen.”
As robotic technology continues to improve, autonomous platforms will take on increasingly complex tasks. But their abilities will always fall short of humans’ capacity to solve problems with creativity, Katz says. “‘Fully autonomous’ doesn’t exist. Robots are always going to be cobots,” he explains. “If and when robots start taking on [expanded roles] in larger deployments, that will just create new jobs for people as you have to have humans overseeing the operation and intervening when there’s an edge case.”
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."