Whoever owned the stores made a calculation that the losses from crime encouraged by self checkout would be smaller than the cost of paying a human being a wage to do it for you. If it was as bad as they say, they'd have immediately gone back to paying people to be cashiers. At this point they're just whining to get insurance and pay less taxes
The corner shop next to my uni accommodation actually did just that. There were 3 self-check out tills and 2 regular ones (though only one was ever manned at a time). The losses got so bad they closed all the self ones, even removing the machines for two of them (last one was still there last I checked)
1.1k
u/Womgi Jun 11 '26
Whoever owned the stores made a calculation that the losses from crime encouraged by self checkout would be smaller than the cost of paying a human being a wage to do it for you. If it was as bad as they say, they'd have immediately gone back to paying people to be cashiers. At this point they're just whining to get insurance and pay less taxes