Labor & Employment Law Daily Wrap Up, REPORTS—AFL-CIO Tech Institute finds that electronic shelf labels come at a high cost to workers, (Sep 17, 2026)

By Brandi O. Brown, J.D.

Analysis of ESL manufacturers’ marketing materials, it explained, shows that universal adoption in U.S. grocery stores could cost workers as much as $6.9 billion in lost wages annually, and impact as many as 191,633 jobs.

Electronic shelf labels (ESLs), according to a recent report by the AFL-CIO Tech institute, spell trouble for U.S. grocery store employees. Review of ESL manufacturers’ own marketing materials, the institute explains, shows that universal adoption of ESLs in U.S. grocery stores could cost workers between $1.6 billion and $6.9 billion in lost wages annually, and impact between 44,223 and 191,633 jobs.

In the report, the institute argues that ESLs are not merely digital price tags, but instead constitute a labor-reduction technology that:

• automates shelf-label and inventory-related work;

• gives retailers a tool to lower payroll expenses;

• reduces employee hours and wages; and

• potentially eliminates tens of thousands of grocery jobs nationwide.

The institute also contends that these worker impacts would occur alongside consumer harms from dynamic and potentially surveillance-based pricing, making ESLs a threat to both workers and shoppers.

Higher pricing. As explained by the report, “ESL makers market their products as a win for everyone: more accurate prices, less food waste, and freed-up workers who can spend more time helping customers.” However, the reality, as shown by the evidence, is far different, the institute contends. More “accurate” instead becomes more expensive, as ESLs make it easier for retailers to rapidly increase prices for individual goods hundreds or even thousands of times per day. ESLs also can connect to the same algorithmic pricing software that lets online retailers engage in surveillance pricing: charging different customers different prices for the same products.

Fewer jobs and hours. At the same time, the report notes that ESL manufacturers sell their products to retailers as a way to cut labor costs, not redeploy workers. In fact, it notes, “the marketing to grocery stores makes clear—these are automating technologies, intended to reduce workers’ hours, leading to smaller paychecks.” For example, one ESL company markets its products by claiming that one UK business was on track to cut £1,000,000 in workers’ wages and benefits in the first year of ESL use. “If retailers choose to automate inventory management and product labeling as a way to cut worker hours,” the report notes, “this will lead to job loss and/or smaller paychecks for hardworking retail employees.”

And there is no evidence supporting the claim that when ESLs are brought into stores workers perform more customer-facing tasks. Indeed, the report notes, the experience with self-checkout kiosks provides evidence of the opposite—many retailers chose to cut staff after introducing them. Based on those past actions, the institute posits that one could expect similar staff reduction actions after the mass implementation of ESLs.

The AFL-CIO Tech Institute analyzed two ESL makers’ marketing claims to calculate the impact of ESL adoption on workers’ hours, wages, and jobs. Universal adoption of ESLs in U.S. grocery stores, according to projections provided by those two makers, could cut between 71 and 307 million hours from grocery workers’ schedules annually, which is between $1.6 and $6.9 billion in lost wages annually.

UFCW leadership responds. Responding to the report, UFCW International Vice President Ademola Oyefeso said: “Grocery giants like to claim that electronic shelf labels will free up workers to serve customers directly, but this report shows this is not the case. Using studies and marketing material from the manufacturers pushing the technology, we know ESLs could actually cost workers and their families billions of dollars in lost income.”

“Banning this technology should be a top priority for lawmakers at every level,” Oyefeso added, “like New Jersey has done with a moratorium on ESLs and a ban on predatory pricing practices outright. More states should follow suit to protect both shoppers and workers.”

UFCW noted that earlier this year it launched the “Affordable Groceries and Good Jobs Campaign” to ban surveillance pricing and ESLs that enable the predatory practice in grocery stores. In the U.S. Senate and House, Democrats introduced the Stop Price Gouging in Grocery Stores Act and a companion bill. States have also proposed their own legislation, as noted by Oyefeso, with New Jersey leading the way by signing the Fair Price Protection Act into law in July. Twelve other states have introduced the UFCW’s model legislation.

American voters united against it. Additionally, the union notes that polling has shown that 65 percent of American voters think ESLs and 68 percent think surveillance pricing will cause grocery prices to increase. Sixty-seven percent of voters favor banning this technology and practices in grocery stores, with support cutting across party lines. Seventy-two percent of respondents, moreover, indicated a lack of faith in grocery stores to use the technology responsibly.

News: LaborNews IndustryNewsTrends Reports EconomicNews