Laws surrounding Witnessing your float/till being cashed up

getmore4less

I think one person checking cash that other people are liable for is not acceptable if deductions can be made.

Change the people(random) or double checking optionaly blind.

Flyboy152

kingfisherblue wrote: »

Another thing to consider about deductions - I think the company can only make the deductions if it dsoes not take the employee below minimum wage. If I'm wrong, maybe another poster can correct me.

I think you are spot on there Kingfisherblue.

Flyboy152

SarEl wrote: »

I am afraid I have to agree with Jarndyce. Bottom line - no right to a witness to cash up. So where do you go from there? Absolute certainty is the only place - you do not accuse managers of stealing unless you can prove it. Which means careful escalation to more senior managers

Then the managers shouldn't accuse the employees of stealing, unless they can prove it.

paddyrg

I always maintain if a person is judged by the outcome of a job, that person should have the power over the job, and cash handling is a case of that. If the place runs on separate tills (a good idea) then whoever is responsible for that till should (good practice, not law) count the money in and out, and prepare their own float for the next day. The supervisor can accept the takings and float and 'X' the till then, if the numbers are the same (takings and till 'X' figure) then a cursory check of the take is in order, if more than a few quid then a full check.

But I don't believe a person should be accountable if they don't have the authority to make sure things are right, it is hugely disempowering.