Key takeaways
- 63 percent of superintendents rated the labor market bad or very bad in the GCSAA survey figure we could verify.
- That share was 19 percent in 2012, so the rating rose sharply over the decade.
- The survey year is disputed across our sources, so check the GCSAA report before you quote it.
- No newer labor-market rating turned up in our research, so do not assume the market has improved.
- Build the crew calendar from your own vacancy hours, overtime and timecards.
What the 63 percent labor rating actually measures
In a Golf Course Superintendents Association of America labor survey, 63 percent of superintendents rated the labor market bad or very bad. In 2012 the share giving that answer was 19 percent. The 63 percent figure is the most recent labor-market rating we could verify, and it is the number to plan around, not a sign that hiring has eased.
The year needs care. Our research turned up two summaries that disagree. One says the 2022 GCSAA survey reported the 63 percent figure and that the 2019 survey gave the same result. The other, a 2019 Tee to Green article reproduced in an archive, attributes the 63 percent to a survey conducted in 2018. We could not open the GCSAA report or the article in full, so the year is not confirmed. The GCSAA operations surveys page lists a 2022 and a 2019 Capital Budget and Labor Survey, and that page is the place to check which edition carries the figure.
Both summaries point the same direction. Hiring and keeping staff had become harder, and far more superintendents rated the market bad than did so in 2012.
Why a market rating is a weak planning input
A market rating is a judgment, not a headcount. It records how superintendents felt about hiring when they answered the question. It does not tell you how many seats are empty at your course this month, or how many hours your current roster loses to a vacancy.
Those are the inputs a crew calendar needs. Pull them from your own records before you accept or reject any headline, including ours.
- Hours lost in each of the last two seasons to a vacant mower, greens or irrigation seat
- Overtime paid on mowing days, split by the crew member who worked it
- Tee-sheet holds or delayed starts traced to short staffing
- Days when one operator covered more than one unit
Build the crew calendar from the work, not the headcount
Start with the weeks when the work piles up. Spring opening, peak play, the overseeding window and fall leaf drop each pull on the same people. A roster that looks adequate in January can be short by May.
Lay the calendar out week by week. Mark every week where two or more crew tasks need the same skilled person, then decide in advance which task yields. Deciding under pressure, on a short-handed Friday, usually means the fairways get cut while the bunkers wait.
Assign the lowest-skill tasks to general help first, and reserve trained operators for equipment and turf decisions. Write that rule down so a shift lead can apply it without calling you.
Where a single resignation stalls the schedule
A small crew carries single points of failure. One operator who runs the main mower, knows the irrigation settings and handles the spray program can stall the whole schedule the week they leave. The gap is rarely the wage line. It is the missing second person.
Cross-training closes that gap, but it costs hours. A new operator needs supervised runs before solo runs, and the trainer loses time on the course. Count those training hours into the calendar as real labor, not as overhead you can absorb.
Name a backup for each critical seat, and rehearse the handoff in the slow weeks rather than during peak play.
Where automation fits the calendar
Some clubs are testing autonomous mowers to take repetitive passes off the calendar, so trained crew can spend their hours on greens, bunkers and the detail work that needs judgment. Automation does not remove the need for a supervising person, and it does not settle the labor question on its own.
Service Robot Co. is an OEM-neutral integrator. We match robots to the work across manufacturers, then deploy, train and service them under RoboCare, our service plan, through regional service engineers. Customers get robot lease options through financing, with one fixed lease payment quoted after a site assessment. If your calendar has a repetitive gap, that assessment is where the numbers start.
Do not assume the market has improved
The most useful thing the verified figures can say is what they do not show. They do not show a decline from 63 percent, and we found no newer GCSAA labor-market rating in this research.
Assuming recovery is the costly error. It pushes hiring into the spring crunch with no backup in place, and a budget built on that assumption tends to break in the same few weeks each year.
How to read the next labor survey
When the next edition appears, read the question wording first, then the sample. A rating of bad or very bad measures something different from a count of open positions, and the two can move in opposite directions.
Keep your own record in the same shape each year. That lets you compare your seasons with each other rather than a headline with your seasons, and it lets you say with evidence whether hiring at your course improved.
Frequently asked questions
Want a robot working for you?
Tell us the job and the site. We will recommend the robot, quote the lease, and keep it serviced.
