Nonexempt Employees Not Using Timepunches

Dfox

In an effort to enhance our work environment for our employees, the director team think we should elliminate nonexempt employees from punching in and out at our time clocks.  Our software is directly connected to our payroll software, and it has always been used for attendance and disciplinary actions based on the schedule employees must work.  We have to keep accurate records, and this insures that we do.

How can I convince the director team to not remove the time clocks?

SubGrapHR

dfox-

 Without knowing what they intend to replace it with, I am unsure how to answer your question.  In my opinion, you somewhat answered your own question with the fact that these clocks are linked to payroll and have been used, what seems to be accurately in the past, for supporting documentation to disciplinary actions, etc.  I would present these as valid points going forward and do a benefit comparison with what they are looking to replace it with and go from there. 

HRforME

I agree that I would make sure he understands the link to payroll.  If not clocks, how will the information get into the payroll system? How accurate will it be? What inaccuracies could cause the employer money?  Overpaying because the manager/employee didn't notify payroll of vacation/PTO usage is just one of the many inaccuracies that can occur. 

Then there is employee "rounding".  Get here a little late, leave a little early. How much would that cost the company?

3rdly, I would calculate what a wage claim could possibly be if an employee keeps a "record" on their own and then the company can't prove their time worked.  This is a huge liability.  Also look at your state laws to see what they require.

Personally I would take it all back to the question of liability and cost/money that the company would lose.

4612155

We have a similar situation. Our Executive Assistant never clocks in and out for her personal lunch breaks. Our company policy states that she has to work 40 hours a week or use PTO time to make up for hours short of 40. We use Time Clock Manager for clocking in and out - so she clocks in when she gets here in the morning and clocks out when she leaves at the end of the day. Again, policy is that lunch is unpaid and all associates must clock in and out - so it APPEARS she works 40 hours a week, but when you take out the five 1-hr lunches she takes every week she is only working 35 hours per work. I have tried and tried to get this addressed, but I keep getting told she is a salary employee..........However, this doesn't mean squat because even our salaried employees have to work 40 hours per week. Major frustration........But I agree that you should point out the cost and how that move could be detrimental to the company. It's definitely not a great idea..........Also, look at your policy manual and see what it says regarding this matter. We make employees sign off on their time sheets, stating that their times are correct every single pay period so that we can avoid liability issues.

TXHRGuy

The Fair Labor Standards Act is quite clear that it is the employer's responsibility to record worked time.

It's all well and good to say that morale will be boosted by removing time clocks but what will your director say when, 6 months down the road, someone makes a wage claim and the company has no proper records to defend against such claim?

Time clocks exist for a reason.

If your director perceives a morale problem, I recommend looking into the line supervisors' treatment of subordinates and the compensation system. Just a hunch.