The Journal of Japanese Operations Management and Strategy, Vol. 6, No. 1, pp.

17-33, 2016

A SHIFT SCHEDULING MODEL INTRODUCING

NON-REGULAR EMPLOYEES FOR HOTEL RESTAURANTS

Kazuki Fujita
Aoyama Gakuin University

Keisuke Murakami
Aoyama Gakuin University

Kakuro Amasaka
Aoyama Gakuin University

ABSTRACT
Research in the field of scheduling has been undergoing a shift in recent years from a focus on
nurse scheduling to that on service industry scheduling at hotels and restaurants. Reducing
employment costs and figuring out how to put non-regular employments in place to cope with
fluctuating demand are critical issues in this sector, particularly when it comes to the
scheduling problem to the service industry that depends on human service providers. To cope
with these challenges, this paper proposes a shift scheduling model that effectively takes into
consideration non-regular employments specializing in food and beverage service in hotel
restaurants. It also considers the use of two types of the non-regular employments who are
called monthly staff and one-time staff with different working arrangements.

Keywords: shift scheduling, hotel restaurants, non-regular employees

1. INTRODUCTION
Shift scheduling represents a challenge for employers trying to plan work shifts for their
employees. Scheduling problem is a critical management issue, as it determines employment
costs and service evaluations. For this reason, it is of great interest to scheduling managers
and business operators alike. The importance of this issue has led to a good amount of
research that approaches scheduling challenges from both business and academic perspective.
Shift scheduling had been of particular interest in the field of nurse scheduling at hospital
wards, with experimental studies broadening in recent years to include many business sectors
such as hotels, traditional Japanese inns, restaurants, and call centers (Fujita and Amasaka,
2015; Okihara et al., 2014; Marta et al., 2012).
According to a literature review of 306 items by Jorne et al. (2013), however, sufficient
verification research has not been done using real-world data. There are several reasons for
the stalled progress, including the difficulty of securing this real-world data and the necessity
of analyzing scheduling challenges involving numerous stakeholders.
Recent years have seen the focus shift to scheduling challenges in the hospitality and
service industry - in hotels, restaurants, and so on. Hospitality management deals with
complex problems that must take into consideration factors like customer demand, customer

17
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

satisfaction, employee satisfaction, and employment costs, and this is a field that is expected
to undergo a host of upcoming developments as well (Marta et al., 2012).
Hotels and resort facilities in particular rely heavily on services provided by their
employees, which results in employment costs making up a critical percentage of their total
expenses. For this reason, the effective scheduling that reduces employment costs by even 1%
can contribute to a significant increase in profit (Ernst et al., 2004).
Furthermore, customer evaluations at the luxury hotels and high-end restaurants that offer
full-course meals are dependent on the employees providing the service, in the same way as
for other service businesses. This means that the employees themselves have a tremendous
effect on the quality of restaurant service, which makes scheduling (deciding where and when
service staff works) a key element of management (Ikegami and Shigeno, 2011). We can
therefore say that shift scheduling issues have a significant effect on hotel restaurants, and that
the necessity of conducting experimental research is growing.

1.1. Current status and issues in hotel restaurant scheduling

In this section, we provide our assessment of the current status of scheduling at hotel
restaurants in Japan as well as the challenges they face. In order to survey the way scheduling
is currently handled at hotel restaurants, we conducted interview-based surveys at 10 hotels
and hotel restaurants (5 urban city hotels, 3 resort hotels, and 2 resort Japanese inns). The
interview-based surveys produced four major findings.
First, we found that customer traffic at these restaurants was highly uneven. It was difficult
to maintain steady customer demand throughout the year due to seasonal fluctuations and
extended holidays. On top of that, there were the day-to-day fluctuations between weekdays
and weekends and the hourly fluctuations depending on whether it was breakfast, lunch, or
dinner time.
Second, we found that the higher a hotel’s standing is, the more is demanded of the service
skills of restaurant’s staff. As a result, fewer part-time staff was employed. Instead,
specialized non-regular employees (monthly staff) with experience in the hotel and restaurant
business are typically contracted for periods of one month to one year at a time. This ensures
that the level of customer service does not fall off with the daily fluctuations in customer
demand, while allowing the hotel restaurants to reduce employment costs by hiring fewer
permanent employees (regular employees).
Third, we found that during irregular spikes in customer demand (such as weddings,
banquets or peak period), hotel restaurants are sent one-time staff, paid hourly for a single
event or meal from temp agency - or borrowed staff with restaurant experience working in
other positions of the same hotel (Front and back office staff) to help them keep the necessary
services level. In this paper, we call the generic name of temp agency for non-regular
employment as “Haizenkai.” “Haizenkai” means temporary-employment agency specializing
in the restaurant and wedding service (Keihin Haizen, 2015; Musashino Staff Co., LTD,
2015). We show a summary about four kinds of hotel restaurants employees who are the point
in this paper in Table 1.
Each staff member has different characteristics in terms of the service level, employment
cost, contract conditions and salary type. In particular, monthly staff, despite non-regular
employments, incurs a fixed employment cost during their contracted period. This payment is
not dependent on the amount of work. This makes it critical that employers appropriately
control the number of these contracts so that too many people do not end up on the schedule.

18
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

Table 1 - Summary about four kinds of employees

Service
Classification Staff Type Contract / Salary type Cost
level
Yearly contract/ Middle Middle
Full-time staff 〜High 〜High
Regular Fixed cost by yearly contract
employees Yearly contract/
Part-time staff Low Low
Variable cost by working hours
monthly contract/
Monthly staff Middle Middle
Non-regular Fixed cost by monthly contract
employees 1 meal(time) contract/
One-time staff High Middle
Variable cost by number of work days

Finally, we turn to the fourth issue, which is retaining personnel in the Japanese hotel
industry and food service industry. Compared to other industries, service employees tend to
have lower salaries and work longer hours, making it difficult to keep employees. In fact,
retention rates have been shown to be the lowest of any industry (Ministry of Health, Labor
and Welfare, 2014). The situation is particularly challenging for the resort hotel restaurants in
tourist areas, which is the primary target of this study. As the local working population
continues to shrink as people concentrate in urban areas, this makes it harder to secure full-
time staff (especially junior employees). The hotels and hotel restaurants have therefore
turned to non-regular employments that are sent form “Haizenkai” (monthly staff and one-
time staff) in order to secure the employees they need to service their customers demand.
It is for this reason that hotel restaurant managers are well aware that better customer
service and higher customer satisfaction are the main reason for people to revisit the
establishment or recommend it to their friends or family members. Despite this fact, they
continue to pour a significant effort into managing employee costs (Hung and Chen, 2013).
We think that the research demonstrating the effectiveness of a scheduling model designed
to reduce employment costs through the utilization of non-regular employments (monthly and
one-time staff) is such a pressing need for today’s hotel restaurants.

1.2. Related works and our contributions

Many studies have been conducted on staff scheduling or shift scheduling problem around the
world (Alberto et al., 2003; Fred and Claude, 1986; Jens and Günther, 2011). Most studies
have focused on scheduling in other industries, including airline crews (Arabeyre et al., 1969;
Bodin et al., 1983; Gamache and Soumis, 1998), railroad crew (Fan and Yanfeng, 2012;
Rosmalina and Erhan, 2014), nurses in hospitals (Aickelin and White, 2004) and service
clerks in call centers (Mehrotra, 1997).
Some classic research in the field of restaurant scheduling was done by Thompson
(1998a,b) in which he proposed “Four-step staff scheduling method.” He put out four
consecutive papers outlining a basic scheduling model for restaurants and other hospitality
businesses.
In part 1, he says that the first step in shift scheduling is forecasting customer demand
(Thompson, 1998a). In part 2, the customer demand is converted into employee requirements
(Thompson, 1998b). Part 3 features a comparison with two traditional frameworks for the
staff scheduling developed by Dantzig (1954) and Keith (1979), in which he provides two
different scheduling models: one to maintain the optimum service standards and the other to
minimize employment costs (Thompson, 1999a). Part 4 offers a method for restructuring

19
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

work shifts in real time when the planned shift arrangement does not match the actual level of
customer demand (Thompson, 1999b). Although he shows the benefits of this four-step staff
scheduling method, he never demonstrated the effectiveness of his research findings in an
actual restaurant. In that sense, his model has not been sufficiently tested (Kyuwan et al.,
2009). In addition, his model does not take into account the part-time staff and non-regular
employments primarily used by restaurants in recent years, making it difficult to apply his
scheduling methods to a modern operation.
Goodale et al. (2003) also offered a market-based labor scheduling model for fast-food
restaurants. They focused on expected customer wait times, coming up with a scheduling
model designed to improve customer service by letting part-time staff to deliver frontline
service promptly.
Kyuwan et al. (2009) made some improvements to Thompson’s four-step staff scheduling
method by creating a model that considered both full-time and part-time staff. They
demonstrated its effectiveness at a restaurant chain in Korea. They simultaneously used full-
time and part-time staff as suggested by Mabert and Raedels (1977) and Bechtold (1988),
making use of their unique characteristics (expensive full-time staff is typically more skilled,
while part-time staff has inferior skills but costs less) to successfully minimize overall costs.
Unfortunately, the objective function that Bechtold (1988) applied in his cost calculations
uses an hourly wage to come up with employment costs for both full-time and part-time staff.
In Japan, full-time staff typically makes a fixed monthly salary (base salary) on which hours
worked has little effect. The cost of part-time workers, on the other hand, is highly variable
and calculated based on the number of hours on the job. For this reason, his model does not
adequately account for the actual lost characteristics of regular employees.
Our surveys show that scheduling research on the hotel and hotel restaurant industry and
other parts of the service sector is insufficient, making it imperative that additional studies be
done. This is because of the need to introduce monthly staff under contract, which is a key
feature of today’s hotel restaurants. And a new scheduling model that takes into account
temporary staff (including hotel workers borrowed from other departments) must be proposed
in order to resolve the challenges being faced by Japan’s hotel restaurants.
The contribution of this paper is to offer a scheduling model that focuses on the use of two
types of non-regular employments (monthly staff and one-time staff) not found in the existing
research. Our scheduling model expands upon the existing models, (Thompson, 1998a;
Thompson, 1998b; Thompson, 1999a; Thompson, 1999b; Kyuwan et al., 2009), to include the
availability and criticality of non-regular employees, which came up as an issue in our
interview survey. Specifically, we present Model 1 that incorporates monthly staff who is
hired on monthly contracts and who works for the same fixed cost as full-time staff. We also
propose Model 2 that introduces both monthly staff and one-time staff who are hired on the
basis of one meal contract.
As a result of the above, our proposed models effectively introduce non-regular employees,
making it possible to reduce the number of excess regular employees (i.e., fixed employees).
In addition, introducing non-regular employees, when there is a shortage of staff during peak
times, allows a larger number of employees to be secured at lower cost, improving the ability
to provide quality service.
We believe there is a critical need for this study as it addresses the use of non-regular
employments. This is an issue common in the actual business practices of both hotels and
hotel restaurants.

20
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

2. SHIFT SCHEDULING MODEL FOR HOTEL RESTAURANTS

The key features of our scheduling models are explained below.
First, the existing research deals with an employee pool made up of full-time and part-time
staff, creating shifts that combine all predefined staff members (Kyuwan et al., 2009; Mehran
and Ashok, 2011). This means that, in the existing models, when hotel restaurants cannot
fully meet peak customer demand using their regular employees (as is the case with today’s
establishments), they do not consider the use of non-regular employments.
Second, our models define the employment costs associated with full-time staff as fixed
costs (base salary). We do this because this is typically the case with full-time staff, and
because, unlike the existing research (Kyuwan et al., 2009) claims, there is not a proportional
relationship between the number of hours full-time staff work and the cost of their staff.
In our interview surveys mentioned above, the managers and administrators for creating
restaurant shifts indicated that the mismatches between employee requests and their work
shifts have a negative impact on employee motivation as well as actual on-the-job attitudes
(Zahn and Sturman, 2008). Experience also made them aware of what Cathy (2009) showed:
meeting employee work time and working condition requests alleviates excessive
psychological strain on individual staff members while it improves staff attitudes and
employee satisfaction over the long term. This reduces employee turnover rates.
When employers make schedules, they must consider not only a way to eliminate
employment costs, but also arrange the work system that their employees want. This in turn
helps to reduce overall costs associated with employees resigning and new hires being trained.

2.1. Problem description

This paper proposes scheduling models that take into account two different types of non-
regular employments.
Model 1 adds monthly staff contracted on a monthly basis to the existing scheduling model
that includes only full-time and part-time staff. These monthly staff is contracted one month at
a time. Therefore, they have a slightly higher fixed cost than junior full-time staff if they work
even once during that timeframe. The aim of the model is to minimize the total employment
cost composed of the cost of both the monthly staff who works at least one shift and the full-
time staff.
In terms of constraints, the model sets up conditions designed to take into account
employee shift constraints and improvements in customer service. For shift constraints, one
shift per employee is selected from the shifts that include days off. Upper and lower limits can
also be specified for the number of each shift and the number of days off shift. Upper and
lower limits can be set for the total number of overtime hours during a given scheduling
period as well. Work request conditions for days off and for working conditions must be met.
Certain consecutive work shift patterns are prohibited.
This problem allows for the creation of schedules that treat part-time staff in the same way
as full-time staff by defining the number of days off as well as work request conditions. With
the related field of nurse scheduling, there are numerous problems with not setting a lower
limit for nurse overtime hours (Ikegami and Shigeno, 2011; Melanie et al., 2009). However,
our interviews and existing studies show that, in order to boost employee satisfaction, it is
important to set limits on employee working hours that include some degree of overtime
during month (Cathy, 2009). This model therefore incorporates the ability to set lower limits
on overtime hours.

21
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

In terms of conditions aimed at improving customer service, the model secures a level of
employee capacity that meets the level of customer demand. There are at least a certain
number of veteran employees working during each meal. It is also necessary, for example, to
restrict the ratio of non-regular staff during each shift.
This model provides a sufficient level of service by setting each employee’s capacity as the
number of customers they can take care of at one time. Shifts can also be made that only look
at capacity and reduce the number of veteran employees, or that put the largest number of
junior and non-regular staff to work. However, since the veterans are the ones leading or in
charge when it comes to actual restaurant operations, ensuring a sufficient number of veteran
and professional staff (for example, sommelier and maitre d'hotel) is a critical factor in
maintaining quality service (Kyuwan et al., 2009; Mabert and Raedels, 1977; Bechtold, 1988).
Model 2 is a scheduling model that introduces one-time staff in addition to the monthly
staff. It is designed to minimize the overall employment costs for both regular and non-regular
staff under contract (composed of a combination of monthly staff cost and one-time staff cost).
One-time staff is hired to work for a one-time meal, and is primarily used by hotels for
weddings or other large banquet events. However, due to the characteristics of hotel
restaurants, it has been shown that one-time staff can be effectively introduced for regular
restaurants service. One-time staff is quite convenient compared to other staff, but their unit-
time employment cost is higher than any other type while the number of customers they are
able to take care of is lower.
There is an assumption that service skill generally deteriorates as more non-regular
employees (monthly and one-time staff) are introduced. However, applying these models is
unlikely to trigger a rapid decline in service quality. The reasons for this are threefold. First,
hotels and hotel restaurants are always bringing in temporary staff (monthly staff) to work at
special events and the routine restaurant service, and thus the non-regular employees do not
increase sharply. Second, restaurant service work is a team effort, and non-regular employees
mostly help out in auxiliary tasks like carrying out food or supplying bread or water. Third,
“Haizenkai” dispatch-agencies are groups of semi-professional food service personnel with a
high percentage of former hotel employees among their veteran workers, giving them the
ability to provide a level of service that exceeds that of junior regular employees.
New constraints that come with introducing one-time staff include an upper limit on the
number that can be brought in at any one meal time and the total number during a month. At
hotel restaurants where this model is applied, it is assumed that one-time staff is hired from
“Haizenkai” dispatch-agencies specializing in restaurant service employees or is temporarily
borrowed from other departments within the hotel. This number must also be restricted in
order to ensure a proper level of customer service. For this reason, the number that can be
supplied at once is limited.
The formulations in this paper use the following notation.
Notation
I1 : The set of ID-numbers for regular employees involved.
I2 : The set of ID-numbers for monthly staff involved.
J : The set of days in the scheduling period.
K : The set of all shift patterns (e.g., [BL], [LD], [BD], [BLD] and [Rest] represent the
shift of [Breakfast and Lunch], [Lunch and Dinner], [Breakfast and Dinner],
[Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner] and [do not work], respectively).
W  K : The set of work shift patterns (e.g., [BL], [LD], [BD] and [BLD]).
Wm : The set of work shift patterns including meal time m  M .

22
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

G : The set of employment group. (e.g., Veteran, Mid-career,…, and Sommelier etc.)
I g  I1 : The set of ID-numbers for regular employees belonging to group g  G .
1

M : The set of meal time. (e.g., Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner)

T : The set of month. (e.g., January, February,…, and December)
Jt  J : The set of days during month t  T .
F01 : The set of vector (i, j, k) that regular staff i cannot be assigned to shift k on day j.
F11 : The set of vector (i, j, k) that regular staff i must be assigned to shift k on day j.
F02 : The set of vector (i, j, k) that monthly staff i cannot be assigned to shift k on day j.
F12 : The set of vector (i, j, k) that monthly staff i must be assigned to shift k on day j.
1
ci : Unit personnel cost of regular staff i  I1 for one month.
c2 : Unit personnel cost of monthly staff for one month.
c3 : Unit personnel cost of one-time staff for one work.
s1 i , : The number of customers served by regular staff i  I1 .
s2 i , : The number of customers served by monthly staff i  I 2 .
s3 : The number of customers served by an one-time staff member.
njm, : The number of customers on day j  J for meal m  M .
a kt, a kt
1 2
: The lower bound for the number of shift k  K for month t  T for regular staff and
monthly staff, respectively.
a kt, a kt
1 2
: The upper bound for the number of shift k  K for month t  T for regular staff and
monthly staff, respectively.
1
b gjm : The lower bound for the number of staff i belonging to group g  G on day j  J .
1
b gjm : The upper bound for the number of staff i belonging to group g  G on day j  J .
d t, d t
1 2
: The lower bound for the total working hours during month t  T for regular staff and
monthly staff, respectively.
d t, d t
1 2
: The upper bound for the total working hours during month t  T for regular staff and
monthly staff, respectively.
p1 , p 2 : The lower bounds on the number of consecutive work days for regular staff
and monthly staff, respectively.
1
p , p
2
: The upper bounds on the number of consecutive work days for regular staff
and monthly staff, respectively.
ek : The standard working hours on shift k  K .
vm : The number of one-time staff for meal m  M .
v’tm : The total number of one-time staff meal m  M during month t  T .
r1 : The upper bound on the proportion of monthly staff to regular staff.
r2 : The upper bound on the proportion of non-regular staff to regular staff.

Variable
x ijk  {0,1}, i  I1, j  J , k  K
y ijk  {0,1}, i  I 2 , j  J , k  K
: Binary variable (=1 if regular staff i is assigned to
shift k on day j, and =0 otherwise)
: Binary variable (=1 if monthly staff i is assigned to
shift k on day j, and =0 otherwise)

23
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

zjm  {Non-negative Integers}, jJ, mM : The number of one-time staff members on day j
for meal m  M .
it  0,1, i  I 2 , t  T
: Binary variables representing monthly staff t  I 2 who
works at least once during month t  T .

2.2. The model introducing monthly staff (Model 1)

We introduce the formulation for Model 1.

Minimize
 c  c 
iI1
1
i
2

iI 2 tT
it
(1)
Subject to
 j 1 
 it    y   y
kW 
ijk
j '1

ij 'k , j  J t , t  T , i  I 2

(2)
0   it  1, i  I 2 , t  T (3)

kK
xijk  1, i  I1, j  J
(4)
a kt 
1
x ijk  a1kt, i  I1, k  K, t  T
(5)
jJt

b gjm 
1
x
iI g
ijk  b1gjm, g  G,j  J , m  M
(6)
dt 
1
 e x
jJ t kW
k ijk
 d 1t ,i  I1, t  T
(7)
7
p1    xi , j   1,k  p1 ,i  I1, j  {1,2,..., n  h1  1} (8)
 1 kW
2
q1   xi , j  1,k  q1 ,i  I1 , j  {1,2,..., n  1}, (k1 , k 2 )  {(Rest, BL), (LD, Rest), (LD, BL)} (9)
 1
1
xijk  0, (i, j, k )  F0 (10)
1
xijk  1, (i, j, k )  F1 (11)
y
kK
ijk  1, i  I 2 , j  J
(12)
akt 
2
y
j J t
ijk  a 2kt , i  I 2 , k  K , t  T
(13)
dt 
2
 e
j J t k W
y
k ijk
 d 2t , i  I 2 , t  T
(14)
7
p 2    yi, j 1,k  p 2 , i  I 2 , j  {1, 2,..., n  h2 1} (15)
 1 kW
2
q 2   yi , j  1,k  q 2 ,i  I 2 , j  {1,2,..., n  1}, (k1 , k 2 )  {(Rest, BL), (LD, Rest), (LD, BL)} (16)
 1

yijk  0, (i, j, k)  F0
2
(17)
yijk 1, (i, j, k)  F1
2
(18)
sx 1
i ijk
 sy i
2
ijk
 n jm , j  J, m  M
(19)
iI1 kWm iI 2 kWm

(1  r1 )  x
iI1 kWm
ijk  r1  y
iI 2 kWm
ijk , j  J , m  M
(20)

24
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

The objective function is (1). It shows the minimum total employment cost of regular staff
and monthly staff for one year. αit indicates the presence or absence of monthly staff i. αit
equals 1 when monthly staff i works at least once during month t  T , and equals 0 otherwise.
For example, when j = 1, ∑ becomes 0. Therefor αit equals 1 if monthly staff i works on
the 1st day during month t  T and 0 otherwise. When j = n ( n  2 ), if monthly staff i work for
at least a day by day j–1, then ∑ ∈ ∑ 0. Additionally, if monthly staff i works
on day j and does not work by day j–1, ∑ ∈ ∑ ′ 11 ′ 1 . More specifically, αit
represents the maximum value of the right hand side of constraints (2) during each month t  T
(See Figure 1). For this reason, (2) represents whether monthly staff i on month t is contracted
or no. Note also that (2) and (3) imply 0 1. Therefore, decision variables αit do not
require integrality conditions, and this contributes to reducing the computational time.

When (j=1) When (j≧2)
Day 1 αit Day 1 Day 2 Day 3 Day 4 Day 5 ・・・ αit
Patern 1 Work 1 Patern 1 Work Work Work Rest Work ・・・
Patern 2 Rest 0
 j 1  1
 
 y ijk 
kW 
y ij ' k



1 0 -1 -3 -2 ・・・
 j '1

Patern 2 Rest Rest Rest Work Work ・・・




j 1



 1
 y ijk 
kW 
 j '1
y ij 'k 
 0 0 0 1 0 ・・・
Patern 3 Rest Rest Rest Rest Rest ・・・
 j 1 
0
 
 y ijk 
kW 
y ij ' k


 0 0 0 0 0 ・・・
 j '1

Figure 1 - Description of the change process of constraints (2)

Constraints (4) and (12) indicate that staff i (4: i  I , 12: i  I ) selects only one shift k on 1 2

day j  J . Constraints (5) and (13) indicate that staff i (5: i  I , 13: i  I ) sets the upper and 1 2

lower bounds on the number of shift k  K assigned during each month t  T . Constraints (6)
indicate that the upper and lower bounds on the number of staff group member ∈ assigned
for meal m  M on day j  J . Constraints (7) and (14) indicate that staff i (7: i  I 1 , 14: i  I 2 )
sets the upper and lower bounds on the number of total working hours during each month t  T .
Constraints (8) and (15) indicate that the consecutive work days of staff i (8: i  I 1 , 15: i  I 2 )
must be the period between p and p . Constraints (9) and (15) ensure that the shift patterns of
(Rest, BL), (LD, Rest), and (LD, BL) are not used for any two consecutive days. Constraints
(10) and (17) indicate that the specific work shift k on day j  J is prohibited for staff i (10:
i  I1 , 17: iI 2 ). Constraints (11) and (18) indicate that staff i (11: i  I1 , 18: iI 2 ) must work
specific work shift k on day j  J . Equation (19) indicates that the total staff service ability
can meet customer demand for each meal time m  M on day j  J . Constraints (20) indicate the
bounds on the ratio r1 of monthly staff to regular staff.

2.3. The model introducing monthly and one-time staff (Model 2)

We indicate the changed and new Model 2 introducing monthly staff and one-time staff.

Minimize
 c  c  
iI1
1
i
2

iI 2 tT
it  c3  z
jJ mM
jm
(1a)

25
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

Subject to
(2)-(18)
  s x   s
iI1 kWm
1
i ijk
iI 2 kWm
2
i
y
ijk
 s 3 z jm  n jm ,j  J , m  M
(19a)
(1  r2 )  x
i I1 kWm
ijk  r2 (  y
iI 2 kWm
ijk  z jm ), j  J , m  M
(20a)
z jm  vm ,j  J ,m  M (21)

j J t
z jm  v'tm ,t  T , m  M
(22)

Expression (1a) is the new objective function. It minimizes the total employment costs for
regular employees and non-regular employees (monthly staff and one-time staff) for one year.
In the third term, ∑ ∈ ∑ ∈ , the total number of one-time staff utilized, is multiplied by the
unit cost c3 of assigning a one-time staff member once in order to represent the total cost for
one-time staff.
Constraints (19a) ensure that customer demand is satisfied by all regular and non-regular
employees. Constraints (20a) indicate the feasible ratio of non-regular employment (monthly
staff and one-time staff) to regular employees (full-time staff and part-time staff). Constraints
(21) set the maximum number of one-time staff that can work for meal time mM on day j  J .
Constraints (22) set the maximum number of one-time staff that can work during each month
t  T for meal time m  M .

3. ADAPTATION EXAMPLE AND RESULT

We applied the scheduling models (Model 1 and Model 2) to restaurant’s past data (January-
December, 2013) in a luxury resort hotel that had participated in our interview surveys. This
hotel is located in Hakone. It has 5 restaurants and 3 banquet rooms. This paper focuses on a
main French restaurant’s full course meal with high quality service provided by full-time and
part-time staff.
Our models are solved by IBM ILOG CPLEX 12.6.0.0. (CPLEX, 2015). All experiments
are done by a computer with 8.00GB RAM and Intel(R)Core(TM)i7-2600CPU@3.40GHz
running windows 7 Professional. After considering the scope of the topic and calculation time,
we split a year’s worth of shifts into four three-month sections for analysis. Tables 4-6 in
Appendix provide further information on the number of variables and constraints, calculations
times, and other details about the optimizations problems in this verification experiment.
Table 2 below gives an overview of the input parameters for this experiment. The
parameters were set using the actual data at the restaurants that agreed to participate in the
experiment. Where actual data were difficult to use, temporary values were set based on
consultation with the restaurant manager of this hotel.
The models do not consider the employees who work at fixed times on fixed days of the
week. This is because fixed work schedules cannot be applied to the hotel and restaurant
service industry, where the number of people required on any given day varies widely from
around 10 to 45 employees. These working conditions are similar across the entire service
industry. By incorporating restrictions on working hours and ensuring a certain number of
days off, new problems should not arise at worksites when the model is applied (Yoshida,
2002; Kubo and Uno, 2009).

26
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

In order to recreate employees working conditions at this hotel, we designated one fixed
[Rest shift] a week for each person. Based on a previous shift preference survey, we also
designated a [Rest shift] according to employee preferences.
The following four points were taken into consideration so that the model resulted in
favorable working conditions for employees: (a) Introducing a new system to ensure two days
off per week. (Most service industry jobs are shift-based, and having two days off a week is
not guaranteed), (b) Applying fixed shift constraints to guarantee that the employees obtain a
certain day of the week off each week, (c) Prohibiting shift arrangements that are particularly
hard on employees, such as [LD(late)]-[BL(early)], [BL]-[Rest], [Rest]-[BL], [BLD]-[BLD]-
[BLD](long time work), (d) Limiting the shifts to which part-time staff or staff members with
children can be assigned.

Table 2 - Overview of input parameters for this experiment

Index Parameters Outline
Veteran 10 staff Part-time 5 staff
Staff (I) Mid-career 10 staff Monthly 0 satff～∞satff
Junior 10～32 staff One-time 0 satff～∞satff
[Breakfast and Lunch (BL)], [Luch and Dinner (LD)],
Shift (K)
[Breakfast and Dinner (BD)], [Breakfast, Lunch and Dinner (BLD)], [Rest]
Day(J) January - December, 2013
Veteran ¥400,000/month Part-time ¥85,000/month
1 3
staff cost (c ～c ) Mid-career ¥350,000/month Monthly ¥300,000/month
Junior ¥250,000/month One-time ¥6,500/1meal(time)
Customer demend (njm) The past measured value of this hotel restaurant during January - December, 2013
1
Regular staff's ability to serve customer (s i) Veteran 8 customers / meal Part-time
2
Monthly's ability to serve customer (s i) Mid-career 7 customers / meal Monthly 5 customers / meal
3
One-time's ability to serve customer (s ) Junior 6 customers / meal One-time
The number of shift k ∈K (lower / upper) [BL]=(3/10), [LD]=(3/10), [BD]=(0/5), [BLD]=(3/10), [Rest]=(10/10)
The total working hours (Regulae emloyees) The lower hours 178h(Overtime 10h) The upper hours 198h (Overtime 30h)
The total working hours (Monthly staff) The lower hours 168h(Overtime 0h) The upper hours 178h (Overtime 10h)
The proportion of monthly staff (r1) The limit proportion of monthly staff (r1) = 0.3
The proportion of non-regular (r2) The limit proportion of non-regular (r2) = 0.3
The forbidden shift sequence patterns (k 1 ,k 2 ) ⊂K [LD]-[BL], [BL]-[Rest], [Rest]-[BL]
The number of consecutive work days Regulae emloyees =3,     =5 Monthly staff =0,     =5

The number of one-time staff for meal (v m ) [Breakfast]=2, [Lunch time]=5, [Dinner time]=3
The total number of one-time each month(v' tm ) [Breakfast]=10/month, [Lunch time]=30/month, [Dinner time]=20/month

In order to recreate the experimental conditions used for existing models that consider only
full-time and part-time staff in this experiment, we changed (19) to (19b) and ran a
preliminary experiment that changed the number of regular employees. (19b) makes it
necessary to satisfy customer demand using only regular employees, allowing us to find the
number of employees needed when non-regular employees are not utilized.

s x 1  n jm , j  J , m  M (19b)
i ijk
iI1 kWm

In setting the number of regular employees, we considered the difficulty of applying actual
tasks and instead fixed the number of veteran staff (10 staff), mid-career staff (10 staff) and
part-time staff (5 staff) while making the number of junior full-time staff adjustable.
The preliminary experiment found that, with the experimental conditions for this problem
(creating shifts only using full-time staff, xijk), more than 57 employees (10 veteran, 10 mid-
career, 5 part-time and 32 junior) would be needed at the time the shifts were made. This was

27
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

due to the fact that the full-time staff is hired to meet the number of regular employees needed
in November when there is peak customer demand.
The experiment created shifts using three different regular staff patterns: 35 regular
employees (10 veteran, 10 mid-career, 10 junior and 5 part-time), 40 regular employees (10
veteran, 10 mid-career, 15 junior and 5 part-time), and 45 regular employees (10 veteran, 10
mid-career, 20 junior and 5 part-time).
Figure 2 shows the total annual employment costs and cost reduction rates versus the
existing model. These cost calculations are based on the employee cost data provided in Table
2.
Cost unit:
1 million
200

180
Employment cost

16.7% 18.6% 15.1%

160
18.1%
20.6%
23.1%
140

120

100
35 Reguler staff 40 Reguler staff 45 Reguler staff
Extsting Model Model 1 Model 2
Figure 2 - Total annual employment cost and cost reduction rates

Figure 2 indicates that even if the number of regular employee changes, Model 2 makes it
possible to reduce the total annual employment costs to a greater degree than Model 1. As a
result, when we view the total employment cost over the course of the year, we find that
compared to the existing model, Model 1 makes it possible to achieve a 18.6% cost reduction,
while Model 2 achieves a 23.1% cost reduction (Case 2: 40 regular employees). It also reveals
that setting the number of regular employees to 40 results in the lowest employment costs
under both Model 1 and Model 2. This is both due to the fact that junior full-time staff is
slightly less expensive than non-regular staff (monthly staff) and due to the fact that non-
regular employees are sent form a temp agency “Haizenkai”, which requires a service charge
to a temp agency.
Table 3 shows the number of working staff members (regular and non-regular employees)
who work each month. The experimental results in Table 3 show that applying Model 1,
which introduces monthly staff, makes it possible to contract monthly staff to match customer
demand each month, thereby eliminating the need to hire a set amount of fixed staff (full-time
and monthly staff) to work throughout the year. As a result, compared to the existing model of
57 regular employees, 35 regular staff members are necessary. Model 1 makes it possible to
reduce the number of fixed staff (full-time and monthly staff) by an average of 11.3 staff per
month. Model 2, which introduces one-time staff, makes it possible to reduce excess
personnel on a daily basis when making the shifts, enabling the restaurant to cut back on the
number of fixed staff (full-time and monthly staff) by an average of 14.8 per month.

28
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

Table 3 - Experiment result (the number of working staff)

Existing Case 1 (Regular staff: 35 staff) Case 2 (Regular staff: 40 staff) Case 3 (Regular staff: 45 staff)
Month Regular Regular Model 1 Model 2 Regular Model 1 Model 2 Regular Model 1 Model 2
staff staff Monthly Monthly One-time staff Monthly Monthly One-time staff Monthly Monthly One-time
January 57 35 10 8 7 40 6 0 28 45 2 0 3
Febrary 57 35 15 13 2 40 10 5 6 45 5 0 6
March 57 35 5 0 5 40 2 0 27 45 0 0 0
April 57 35 7 6 34 40 3 0 0 45 0 0 0
May 57 35 10 8 3 40 6 0 0 45 2 0 3
June 57 35 14 13 1 40 9 2 2 45 4 0 6
July 57 35 6 2 23 40 2 0 0 45 0 0 0
August 57 35 8 7 4 40 3 3 0 45 0 0 0
September 57 35 7 2 45 40 2 0 5 45 0 0 0
October 57 35 14 11 14 40 9 3 38 45 4 0 22
November 57 35 21 20 1 40 16 13 26 45 11 9 46
Desember 57 35 11 8 5 40 8 3 7 45 3 0 4
Total 684 420 128 98 144 480 76 29 139 540 31 9 90

Figure 3 shows the monthly total cost of regular employees and non-regular employees for
each model (Case 2: 40 Regular employment).

17
Employment Cost (Unit: million)

16
Existing
15

14
Model 1
13

12
Model 2
11

10
Jan. Feb. Mar. Apr. May Jun. Jul. Aug. Sep. Oct. Nov. Dec.

Existing Model Model 1 Model 2

Figure 3 - The monthly total cost changing (Case 2: 40 Regular employment)

The cost calculation shows a higher cost in November, when the maximum number of
monthly staff is used, than the existing model that uses only full-time staff. This is because
the monthly staff's ability to serve customers is lower than junior full-time staff’s. And the
cost of monthly staff is higher than that of junior full-time staff, resulting in a temporary cost
increase.
If we focus on the cost reduction for Model 2 compared to Model 1, we see that it is higher
in months like January, March, September, and December. These four months have large
fluctuations in customer demand. In general, resort hotels experience higher customer traffic
during long holidays such as spring, summer and winter holidays. On the other hand, once the
long holidays are over, the hotels go into a temporary off-season where customer demand is
low. This makes the Model 2 proposed in this paper effective in situations where customer
demand is highly uneven. On the other hand, in the periods where there is little fluctuation in
customer demand due to a steady high rate of operation (such as in May and over summer
vacation), there is little difference between Model 1 and Model 2.
Finally, as a specific example of reducing excess staff, Figure 4 shows the shift
composition of September lunch times with 35 regular employees.

29
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

The left side of Figure 4 (Model 1) shows several days where the number of monthly staff
allocated greatly exceeds customer demand. Because monthly staff is hired to work two meals
([breakfast and lunch] or [lunch and dinner], for example), it generates a large number of
excess staff at lunch when monthly staff is hired to meet customer demand.
The right side of Figure 4 introduces one-time staff using Model 2. This makes it possible
to greatly reduce the number of excess employees caused by monthly staff working the lunch
shift. This was primarily achieved by introducing one-time staff able to work a single meal
shift in the place of one-time staff, eliminating the wasted employees. Scheduling Model 2
allows for fluctuations in the number of days in the scheduling term t, as well as fluctuations
at different times within a single day.

Model 1 September (Lunch) Model 2 September (Lunch)

(Customer) (Customer)

250 250

200 200

150 150

100 100

50 50

0 0
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
(day) (day)
Veteran Mid‐career Junior Part‐time Veteran Mid‐career Junior Part‐time
Monthly One‐time Customer demend Monthly One‐time Customer demend

Figure 4 - The shift composition of September lunch times (Case 1: 35 regular employment)

The above experiment shows that the introduction of monthly staff contracted for a fixed
period of time and one-time staff makes it possible to create a shift schedule that reduces
employment costs over the existing model.
Monthly changes in Model 1 and Model 2 also tell us that our models are more effective in
situations where customer demand is highly uneven. This means that the models work well
for resorts or facilities in tourist areas that are heavily impacted by seasonal changes and
events. They are more effective for the large hotels that experience changing customer
demand over the course of the day due to both hotel guests and walk-in customers dining at
their restaurants. On the other hand, the urban restaurants that expect stable customer demand
have a greater chance of reducing their total costs by increasing the number of full-time staff,
and hiring inexpensive part-time staff or junior full-time staff.

4. CONCLUSION
This study expanded upon the existing shift scheduling models for hotel restaurants that only
use full-time and part-time staff. It proposed new shift scheduling models that also take into
account monthly staff contracted for a specific period of time as well as one-time staff. The
models were then applied to a restaurant at a resort hotel to create an employee schedule that
matched fluctuations in customer demand. This demonstrated the models’ effectiveness.
We also ran an experiment by changing the number of junior full-time staff in the models.
This is something that hotel restaurants might use, for example, to estimate the number of
new graduates to hire each year. Past real-world data were used in this study to indicate
customer demand level. In the future research, in real-world applications, the accuracy of
customer demand forecast will be an important issue. For this reason, we need to investigate

30
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

the method for forecasting customer volume in order to better adapt the model to real business
practices.

REFERENCES
Aickelin, U. and White, P. (2004), “Building better nurse scheduling algorithms,” Annals of Operations
Research, Vol. 128, No.1-4, pp. 159-177.
Alberto, C., Michele, M. and Paolo, T. (2003), “Models and algorithms for a staff scheduling problem,”
Mathematical Programming, Vol. 98, No. 1-3, pp. 445-476.
Arabeyre, J. P., Fearnley, J., Steiger, F. C. and Teather, W. (1969), “The airline crew scheduling problem: A
survey,” Transportation Science, Vol. 3, No. 2, pp. 140-163.
Bechtold, S. E. (1988), “Implicit optimal and heuristic labor staffing in a multi-objective; Multi-location
environment.” Decision Sciences, Vol. 19, No. 2, pp. 353-373.
Bodin, L. D., Golden, B. L., Assad, A. and Ball, M. O. (1983), “Routing and scheduling of vehicles and crews:
The state of the art,” Computers and Operations Research, Vol.10, pp. 163-211.
Cathy, A. E. (2009), “Key issues of concern in the lodging industry: What worries managers,” The Cornell
Hospitality Report, Vol. 9, No. 4, pp. 6-14.
CPLEX (2015), “IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimizer,” Home page, http://www-01.ibm.com/software/commerce/
optimization/cplex-optimizer/, accessed on September 1, 2015.
Dantzig, G. B. (1954), “A comment on Edie’s traffic delays at toll booths,” Operations Research, Vol. 2, No. 3,
pp. 339-41.
Ernst, A. T., Jiang, H., Krishnamoorhty, M. and Sier, D. (2004), “Staff scheduling and rostering: A review of
application, methods and models,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 53, No. 1, pp. 3-27.
Fan, P. and Yanfeng, O. (2012), “Track maintenance production team scheduling in railroad networks,”
Transportation Research Part B: Methodological, Vol. 46, No. 10, pp. 1474-1488.
Fred, G. and Claude, M. (1986), “The general employee scheduling problem, An integration of MS and AI,”
Computers & Operations Research, Vol. 13, No. 5, pp. 563-573.
Fujita, K. and Amasaka, K. (2015), “Creation of total shift scheduling model in restaurant service,” International
Journal of Technical Research and Applications, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp.188-192.
Gamache, M. and Soumis, F. (1998), “A method for optimally solving the rostering problem,” in Yu, G. (Ed.),
Operations Research in the Airline Industry, Springer, US, pp. 124-157.
Goodale, J. C., Verma, R. and Pullman, M. E. (2003), “A market utility-based model for capacity scheduling in
mass services.” Production and Operations Management, Vol. 12, No. 2, pp.165-85.
Hung, L. M. and Chen, C. C. (2013), “A study of customer care and satisfaction towards hotel service quality,”
International Journal of Electronic Customer Relationship Management, No. 7, No. 3-4, pp. 161–172.
Ikegami, A. and Shigeno, M. (2011), “Staff scheduling for providing quality services: Mathematical approach to
the service innovation,” The Institute of Electronics, Information and Communication Engineers
Transactions on Communications, Vol. 94, No. 9, pp.760-766.
Jens, O. B. and Günther, M. E. (2011), “Long term staff scheduling of physicians with different experience
levels in hospitals using column generation,” Health Care Management Science, Vol. 14, No. 2, pp. 189-202.
Jorne, V. B., Jeroen, B., Philippe, D. B., Erik, D. and Liesje, D. B. (2013), “Personnel scheduling: A literature
review,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 226, No. 3, pp. 367-385.
Keihin Haizen (2015), Home page (Haizenkai), http://www.keihin-haizen.com/index.html, accessed on
September 1, 2015.
Keith, E. G. (1979), “Operator scheduling,” The Institute of Industrial Engineers Transactions, Vol. 11, No. 1,
pp. 37-41.
Kubo, T. and Uno, T. (2009), “Excel based staff scheduling system for reducing the workload of modification of
users,” Forum on Information Technology Proceedings, Vol. 8, No. 1, pp. 17-21 (In Japanese).
Kyuwan, C., Johye, H. and Myoungju, P. (2009), “Scheduling restaurant workers to minimize labor cost and
meet service standards,” Cornell Hospitality Quarterly, Vol. 50, No. 2, pp. 155-167.
Mabert, V. A. and Raedels, A. (1977), “The detail scheduling of a part-time work force: A case study of teller
staffing,” Decision Sciences, Vol. 8, pp. 109-120.
Marta, R., José, F. O. and Maria, A. C. (2012). “Quantitative approaches on staff scheduling and rostering in
hospitality management: An overview,” American Journal of Operations Research, Vol. 2, pp. 137-145.
Mehran, H. and Ashok, S. P. (2011), “An integer linear programming-based heuristic for scheduling
heterogeneous part-time service employees,” European Journal of Operational Research, Vol. 209, pp. 37-
50.

31
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

Mehrotra, A. (1997), GSM System Engineering, Artech House, Inc., Norwood, MA, USA.
Melanie, L. D., Medeiros, D. J. and David, E. (2009), “Accommodating individual preferences in nurse
scheduling via auctions and optimization,” Health Care Management Science, Vol. 12, No. 3, pp. 228-242.
Ministry of Health, Labor and Welfare. (2014), “Trends in industrial classification by turnover rate of new
university graduates,” http://www.mhlw.go.jp/topics/2010/01/tp0127-2/dl/24-19.pdf, accessed on September
1, 2015.
Musashino Staff Co.,LTD (2015), Home page (Haizenkai), http://www.musashinostaff.co.jp/, accessed on
September 1, 2015.
Okihara, D., Nakamura, M. and Amasaka, K. (2014), “Establishment of a staff allocation method reflecting
customer information,” International Organization of Scientific Research Journal of Business and
Management, Vol. 16, No, 11, pp. 21-28.
Rosmalina, H. and Erhan K. (2014). “A hybrid constructive heuristic and simulated annealing for railway crew
scheduling,” Computers & Industrial Engineering, Vol. 70, pp. 11-19.
Thompson, G. M. (1998a), “Labor scheduling, part 1: Forecasting demand,” The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant
Administration Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 5, pp. 22-31.
Thompson, G. M. (1998b), “Labor scheduling, part 2,” The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 39, No. 6, pp. 26-37.
Thompson, G. M. (1999a), “Labor scheduling, part 3: Developing a workforce schedule,” The Cornell Hotel and
Restaurant Administration Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 1, pp. 86-96.
Thompson, G. M. (1999b), “Labor scheduling, part 4,” The Cornell Hotel and Restaurant Administration
Quarterly, Vol. 40, No. 3, pp. 85-96.
Yoshida, M. (2002), A study on working shifts at a hotel, Nara Prefectural University Research Quarterly, Vol.
12, No.3・4, pp. 155-164 (In Japanese).
Zahn, L. A., and Sturman, M. C. (2008), “Forty hours doesn't work for everyone: Examining employee
preferences for work hours,” Cornell Hospitality Reports, Vol. 8, No. 18, pp. 6-15.

32
Fujita, Murakami and Amasaka: A Shift Scheduling Model Introducing Non-regular Employees for
Hotel Restaurants

APPENDIX

Table 4 - Further information in adaptation example (Case 1: 35 regular staff)

Variables Linear constraints Time
Model Month
Binary Integer Equal (fixed) Nonzeros (Seconds)
Jan.-Mar. 20,445 72 4,756 390,579 757
Apr.-June 21,150 72 5,075 406,636 1,345
Model 1
July-Sept. 25,650 72 5,905 527,596 2,148
Cct.-Dec. 25,650 72 5,899 527,590 3,113
Jan.-Mar. 20,445 312 5,322 404,336 868
Apr.-June 21,150 312 5,641 420,849 1,324
Model 2
July-Sept. 21,150 312 5,571 420,779 3,753
Oct.-Dec. 21,150 312 5,565 420,773 4,533

Table 5 - Further information in adaptation example (Case 2: 40 regular staff)

Variables Linear constraints Time
Model Month
Binary Integer Equal (fixed) Nonzeros (Seconds)
Jan.-Mar. 22,620 66 5,191 424,864 420
Apr.-June 23,400 66 5,525 442,151 571
Model 1
July-Sept. 27,900 66 6,355 563,111 1,181
Cct.-Dec. 27,900 66 6,349 563,105 1,496
Jan.-Mar. 22,620 306 5,772 440,361 663
Apr.-June 23,400 306 6,106 458,164 1,308
Model 2
July-Sept. 27,900 306 6,036 458,094 2,260
Oct.-Dec. 27,900 306 3,060 458,088 3,270

Table 6 - Further information in adaptation example (Case 3: 45 regular staff)

Variables Linear constraints Time
Model Month
Binary Integer Equal (fixed) Nonzeros (Seconds)
Jan.-Mar. 24,795 54 5,626 459,149 80
Apr.-June 25,650 54 5,975 477,666 156
Model 1
July-Sept. 30,150 54 6,805 598,626 612
Cct.-Dec. 30,150 54 6,799 598,620 1,134
Jan.-Mar. 24,795 294 6,222 476,386 485
Apr.-June 25,650 294 6,571 495,479 365
Model 2
July-Sept. 25,650 294 6,501 495,409 1,464
Oct.-Dec. 25,650 294 6,495 495,403 2,062

33