Can employee be sacked for being a few minutes late?

sniggings

SandC wrote: »

You are the one who brought up some establishments having time sheets 'by law' which is the only reason I said it would be of paramount importance. Not even sure there is a 'law' for any workplace to have timesheets to be honest.

Maybe argue on the facts you do know then, instead of using mine, when your not even sure they are correct.

sniggings

liney wrote: »

Yes CCTV can be used to monitor staff - http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?itemId=1074461555&type=RESOURCES

This instance would be covered by:

*ensure compliance with the law or an internal employment policy, eg on email and internet usage

**confirm any fraudulent, criminal or otherwise illegal or undesirable conduct by your staff that you suspect

Staff must be informed they will be monitored, but the company does have the right to do so.

the info on that site is confusing at best, it also states

• use information for any purpose other than that for which it was collected
• access the content of clearly marked personal emails except in exceptional circumstances
• routinely check workers' phone messages, emails, etc - you should only do so if you have made all reasonable efforts to inform users that you may intercept messages
• carry out continuous video or audio monitoring, other than usual CCTV security measures
• film or make sound recordings in private places - eg toilets or staff rooms
• search an employee, unless their contract of employment provides for this and they consent to it.

The person has to be told the reason why they are being recorded and it can not be continuous, CCTV can only be used for security.


Seems any recording has to be separate from CCTV and the staff told, in this case the OP said it was the CCTV he was using for evidence, not so sure the OP can use this evidence in this case, as the CCTV is continuous and were the staff told the CCTV was being used to monitor them and what the monitoring was looking for.


Seems to me the OP could be opening a whole can of worms here.

iltisman

Better dead than late.

Savvy_Sue

duchy wrote: »

Mike this is at least the second time you've come runing here for advice in managing employees. If your company has an HR department -you should be using it-if it doesn't (and maybe if it does) you should be asking your employers for HR training as you obviously need development in that area.

And if you're the boss then you should seriously consider finding some professional HR support, with their first task being to check you have all the policies and procedures you need in place, including a staff grievance and disciplinary policy.

sniggings wrote: »

Anyone know the rules on CCTV, I was under the impression that it could not be used to check on stuff sach as lateness etc?

I know when at my work place we had cameras fitted there were a lot of rules relating to them, or at least that is what the word around the office was. They could not be on all the time and could only be used for a limited range of reasons? generally watching the staff was not allowed.?

Interested to know if anyone knows.

I think they were probably rules agreed at that workplace rather than 'the rules'. You do need to say you are recording, and if you're keeping the recordings then you need procedures for viewing the tapes and a policy on how long you keep recordings. That's a very brief summary.

Pennywise2012

Like the others say, falsifying a timesheet is gross misconduct, being late is misconduct. You could take either tack, but if you choose GM, you need to be sure that he's the only one doing it - if it's absolutely endemic, and everyone fills their time sheets in using 'round number times' regardless of what time they showed up and left (it's late and I can't think of a better way to express that, but you know what I mean!) then you might find yourself on the back foot at a tribunal.

I know the others have complained, but he could just be unpopular, and they've chosen that as the thing to 'officially' complain about. (You know how it is when someone gets on your nerves - niggly things that you don't mind in others become massive bugbears) That might be something to look at - see if there's any underlying tension.

Also, it's not essential, but if you're planning on a hours-worked clampdown, I'd review your fag break policy, too, cos it sounds very vague. Unofficial-but-allowed cig breaks create a lot of resentment in non-smoking colleagues. He could also argue that he has a fag at 9am, and one at 4.25pm - if there's no set break structure in place, how can you argue with that?

sweaty_betty

I think the key to this is what is common and accepted practice.

In a previous job, we were told that it was likely that we might work a little extra one day and less the next, but as long as the week added up to 40 hours, this wasn't a problem. However we were told that we should always record 8 hour working days on our timesheet, even if we'd worked longer or shorter days. When we were re-organised and got a new line manager, we were hauled over the coals if our timesheets were 5 minutes wrong.

When I worked part time, I could take leave by the hour (if I needed to) so I would sometimes go home early, taking an hour of leave, if I had nothing to do that day. However, once I found that other people were thinking that I was swinging the lead and just going home early (without taking leave) I stopped doing that as it just wasn't worth the hassle from colleagues (even if it had been approved by the manager).

If I was the manager in this situation, I would get the facts together about this person's punctuality (how many specific occurrences etc) and have a word with them, tell them it had been noted, ask if there was anything wrong to cause this. I would then tell them (if no particular reasons behind it) that it wasn't on and either give or threaten with a formal warning if it were to happen again.

Following this, I would then communicate to the workforce that it had come to my attention that some people were being late and not filling out timesheets correctly. Then I would spell out exactly what is acceptable and what is not (including cigarette breaks) so that all people have been reminded of the rules and so there is no excuse for anyone bending them in future. That would also let people know that management had dealt with the issue.

liney

sniggings wrote: »

the info on that site is confusing at best, it also states

• use information for any purpose other than that for which it was collected
• access the content of clearly marked personal emails except in exceptional circumstances
• routinely check workers' phone messages, emails, etc - you should only do so if you have made all reasonable efforts to inform users that you may intercept messages
• carry out continuous video or audio monitoring, other than usual CCTV security measures
• film or make sound recordings in private places - eg toilets or staff rooms
• search an employee, unless their contract of employment provides for this and they consent to it.

The person has to be told the reason why they are being recorded and it can not be continuous, CCTV can only be used for security.


Seems any recording has to be separate from CCTV and the staff told, in this case the OP said it was the CCTV he was using for evidence, not so sure the OP can use this evidence in this case, as the CCTV is continuous and were the staff told the CCTV was being used to monitor them and what the monitoring was looking for.


Seems to me the OP could be opening a whole can of worms here.

I think that using CCTV to log commings and goings is well and truly within the realms of 'security.' How would you argue otherwise?

The CCTV in this case was used to confirm illegal activity, ie fraud, which I do not believe would come under 'constant monitoring' and would allowable.

The staff are aware there is CCTV, so know that their movements are recorded. However I agree that there needs to be a policy which implicitly states there may be spot checks to ensure that company policies are adhered to, for the avoidance of doubt.

sniggings

liney wrote: »

I think that using CCTV to log commings and goings is well and truly within the realms of 'security.' How would you argue otherwise?

The CCTV in this case was used to confirm illegal activity, ie fraud, which I do not believe would come under 'constant monitoring' and would allowable.

The staff are aware there is CCTV, so know that their movements are recorded. However I agree that there needs to be a policy which implicitly states there may be spot checks to ensure that company policies are adhered to, for the avoidance of doubt.

but he would not be using it for checking if merely he arrived but that he arrived late, there is a difference, and then using that info not for security but to discipline him.

You are getting the two mixed up, the recording of CCTV and recording for illegal activity and the staff need to be separate.

liney

sniggings wrote: »

but he would not be using it for checking if merely he arrived but that he arrived late, there is a difference, and then using that info not for security but to discipline him.

You are getting the two mixed up, the recording of CCTV and recording for illegal activity and the staff need to be separate.

The security aspect is to see the arrival and departure of staff. The info is then being used to confirm fraudulent activity ie the timesheet is was in fraudulently, in just the same way it would be used to confirm theft if MrX walked out of the building with a PC under his arm.

I'm abit confused about in what circumstance in a practical sense you believe an employer should be allowed to use their own CCTV. Should they not be allowed to 'notice' MrX and the stolen PC because it was 'only supposed to record commings and goings' ...? Do you think that a tribunal would accept that as a reasonable defence from MRX if he claimed he was treated unfairly?

Read this too: http://yourrights.org.uk/faqs/workplace-faqs/my-employer-is-using-cctv-to-monitor-me-at-work-is-this-legal.html

Uncertain

sniggings wrote: »

but he would not be using it for checking if merely he arrived but that he arrived late, there is a difference, and then using that info not for security but to discipline him.

You are getting the two mixed up, the recording of CCTV and recording for illegal activity and the staff need to be separate.

Oh dear, you are trying to be clever again and tying yourself in ridiculous knots!

We are not talking of a criminal trial where some crucial piece of illegally obtained evidence is kept from the jury on a technicality leading the the acquittal of a defendant who was actually guilty.

As has been explained so often, the employer only need a REASONABLE BELIEF. The fact that he may somehow have "misused" the CCTV doesn't stop it from giving him his reasonable belief. In any case the employer would no doubt say that he was reviewing the CCTV for a legitimate purpose when he happend to notice, accidentally, the employee's transgression.

For heavens sake get real!