Charge RosterStart by defining what “fair” means at your workplace
A common mistake is to jump straight to a rule such as “two hours per person” or “first come, first served”. Those rules only make sense after the workplace decides what kind of fairness it is trying to achieve.
Three common models are:
| Fairness model | What it tries to protect | Where it works well | Main risk |
|---|---|---|---|
| Equal opportunity | Everyone gets the same chance to obtain charging time | Mixed groups where needs are broadly similar | Faster or earlier users may still capture the best periods |
| Equal allowance | Everyone receives a similar amount of charging access | Stable groups with predictable demand | Some employees may receive time they do not actually need |
| Need-based priority | Access goes first to drivers with a stronger workplace charging need | Fleets, essential travel, limited home charging or operational roles | Priority can feel arbitrary unless criteria are explicit |
A workplace can also combine these models. For example, everyone may have equal access to normal booking periods while a clearly defined exception process covers company vehicles or an operational need.
The important part is that employees can understand the rule without negotiating it case by case.
Eligibility and priority are separate decisions
First decide who may use the chargers. Employees, company vehicles, visitors and contractors may all have different access arrangements.
Then decide whether any eligible group receives priority. Being allowed to charge does not automatically mean being first in every conflict.
If priority exists, document:
- which situations qualify;
- who decides whether the priority applies;
- whether it is permanent or occasional;
- what happens to an existing reservation when an exception is made.
Avoid informal rules such as “ask Facilities if it is urgent”. They are difficult to apply consistently and make fairness depend on who is most comfortable escalating.
First-come-first-served is fair only under certain conditions
First-come-first-served is attractive because it is simple. When chargers are usually free, simplicity may be more valuable than a formal process.
It becomes less fair when arrival time repeatedly determines access. Employees with earlier shifts, shorter commutes or more flexible mornings may capture the same popular periods every day even when other employees depend more heavily on workplace charging.
That does not mean first-come-first-served is always wrong. It means the workplace should recognise when demand has outgrown the rule.
A useful trigger is repeated conflict or repeated unserved demand rather than one busy day.
Reservations improve predictability, but the rules around them matter
A reservation system can give employees a known start and end time. That helps when drivers want to plan charging before travelling to work rather than wait for a charger to become free.
Reservations are not automatically fair. A system can still be dominated by a few users if:
- the booking window opens far in advance and the same people always book first;
- users can reserve an entire day when they only need part of it;
- recurring bookings lock out occasional users;
- there is no penalty or social expectation around unused reservations;
- employees can hold several future bookings at the same time.
Fair booking rules usually need only a few controls:
- how far ahead a reservation can be made;
- maximum charging-turn duration;
- how many future reservations one person can hold, if a limit is needed;
- cancellation expectations;
- what happens when the charging turn ends.
Keep these rules as light as demand allows. A workplace where chargers are rarely constrained does not need the same controls as a site with daily competition.
A queue and a reservation solve different fairness problems
A queue says who gets the next charger.
A reservation says when a particular driver has charging access.
Queues can be fair when employees are already on site and can respond when a charger becomes free. ChargePoint's workplace waitlist is one well-established example: drivers join a queue when all stations are busy, are offered access in order and receive a limited period to take the charging spot.
See ChargePoint's waitlist explanation
Reservations are usually more useful when employees need predictability before arrival or have meetings and other constraints that make an unknown queue position inconvenient.
A workplace can use both, but complexity should solve a real problem rather than become a goal itself.
Prevent a small number of drivers from dominating the best periods
The fairness problem often appears in the most desirable periods rather than across the full day.
Useful controls include:
Shorter booking window
If every prime morning period can be reserved weeks in advance, a few highly organised users may capture them repeatedly. A shorter window gives changing schedules and occasional users a better chance to participate.
Maximum duration
A vehicle should not reserve a full workday by default if the driver normally needs only part of that time to charge.
Limit concurrent future bookings only if necessary
A cap on future reservations can prevent one employee from holding several desirable periods. Do not introduce a cap if ordinary demand does not require it.
Return unused time
Employees should cancel a booking they no longer need. A cancelled reservation is not merely an administrative detail; it is charging capacity returned to the shared pool.
Review patterns, not personalities
If the same users repeatedly obtain the best periods, examine the booking rules before turning the issue into a conflict between individual employees.
Fair use is not the same as etiquette
Etiquette describes driver behaviour: move the vehicle when required, cancel unused time, do not unplug another vehicle without permission and report faults appropriately.
Fair allocation is the workplace's responsibility: who can access charging, how desirable time is distributed and what happens when there is not enough capacity.
Keeping those two ideas separate is useful. Employees should not have to solve an allocation problem through politeness alone.
What about employees who cannot charge at home?
A driver without reliable home charging may depend more on workplace charging than a colleague who can easily charge overnight.
Whether that should create priority is an organisational policy choice rather than a universal rule. If the workplace wants to account for charging need, define the criteria explicitly and avoid requiring employees to repeatedly justify themselves in public.
Other possible priority factors include:
- company or pool vehicles needed for work;
- unusually long business travel that day;
- accessibility or mobility-related parking arrangements;
- a temporary operational need approved by a responsible role.
Fairness improves when exceptions are designed before conflict appears.
Do not confuse equal charging time with equal benefit
Two employees can use the same charger for two hours and receive very different amounts of energy because vehicles, chargers and starting state of charge differ.
For a scheduling-only policy, trying to equalise exact kilowatt-hours can introduce unnecessary complexity. The workplace may instead choose to allocate access to charging time fairly and leave electrical metering or billing to the charger/CPMS where those functions are required.
This is another reason to be explicit about which problem the workplace is solving.
A practical fairness checklist
Before publishing workplace charging rules, check whether employees can answer these questions:
- Who is eligible to use each site or charger?
- Is access first-come, reserved, queued or mixed?
- How far ahead can someone reserve a charging period?
- Is there a maximum duration?
- Can one person hold multiple future bookings?
- What should happen when a reservation is no longer needed?
- When must the vehicle or charging space become available again?
- Are any priority cases defined?
- Who decides exceptions?
- What can a driver do when no suitable time is available?
- How will the workplace know whether unmet demand is becoming persistent?
If the answers require a manager to improvise each time, the policy is not yet predictable enough.
Where Charge Roster fits
Charge Roster gives eligible employees the same shared view of scheduled charger availability and the same booking rules. Workplaces define bookable hours, reservation durations and access around the chargers they already have.
The goal is not to decide what “fair” means for every organisation. The workplace sets that policy. Charge Roster provides a consistent scheduling layer so employees do not have to negotiate access through messages, physical checks or informal turns.