Attendance and when to draw the line?

SamanthaQ · October 2004

This probably is a novice question, but here it is anyway! We have an employee who has tardiness problems. She has been progressively disciplined up to point of suspension. Since the suspension she is late occaisonally but just by 1 minute (with no excuse/explanation). This has happened a few times since the suspension. My question is, is a minute too petty to count as a tardy? Her supervisor is pushing the issue and wants to know where the line should be drawn on what is considered tardy and what isn't. (Our next step with this employee is termination.)

Our policy says they must be at their workstation at their scheduled time to work and four absences in a 90 day period is considered excessive.

Any thoughts or advice would be appreciated!

dchr9203 · October 2004

Depends. Is this an Exempt professional employee or is it an non-exempt clerical or labor employee? AND/or does this person relieve another person from a different shift? One minute could be construed as "late" for the non-exempt who punches a time clock or relieves another employee. Otherwise, I would say its petty.

SamanthaQ · October 2004

This is a non-exempt position. She does accounting/clerical type work. She does not relieve any other employee.

deniseE · October 2004

The issue of tardiness has come up many times on the Forum..and for those of us that have no problem being where we need to be on-time, it's nearly impossible to understand how someone CANNOT be on-time.

I agree with the above post that if this person is relieving another ee, or has a real business need to be at her station at X time...then it's an issue, otherwise, a minute is just 60 seconds and our time pieces are just not that coordinated!

I am married to one of the "just can't be on-time" people. At first it was just irritating....and I tried setting the clocks ahead...saying we had to be there at 7 when it was really 7:30....threatening and finally leaving without him.....he's a bit better...but no matter where he needs to be...he's always at least 5 minutes late. always. Sometimes I'm just fascinated by the whole process.

Because we commute together, this was a real issue for me...what I finally did was change my start time so that I knew I would on-time, but didn't tell him. So he thinks he's getting me in within 15 minutes of the beginning of my shift, when I'm actually 15 minutes early.

Pixie · October 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-26-04 AT 09:06AM (CST)[/font][br][br]Whether it's simply 60 seconds or 60 minutes, IT IS LATE. Just because you have a person that is perpetually late does not make it okay to be late. Obviously the discipline worked, and the employee was able to get there on time for awhile. If she can get there on time fow awhile, then she can do it daily! I say she's pushing the envelope, she's playing a game with you, to see how far she can push you. Today it's 60 seconds, tomorrow 120, and so on.

I think that it is unfair to say that because the person doesn't relieve someone else, they can be a minute or 2 late. I say BULLCR**, if you go by that philosphy, then why bother having a policy that addresses the issue if it is not applied to ALL employees equally.

deniseE, not everyone has the luxury of changing their work schedule to accomodate the person they commute with. You are very fortunate to have an employer that is willing to work around your companions inability to be on time, and he is equally fortunate to have an employer that allows him to be consistantly late.

dchr9203 · October 2004

Unless the policy specifically defines hours of work and what constitutes "tardy" (one minute or 120), then its subjective. Under normal circumstances and without a history of tardiness, one minute would not be considered "late". In my opinion, the tardiness issue was excessive, was addressed and apparently corrected. Focusing on the employee occasionally getting to work (or her desk) at 8:01 as opposed to 8:00 would be petty, and there are bigger things to worry about in a day.

Crout · October 2004

Does this person punch a time clock? If not, how are you accounting for the one-minute lateness? Have you ever disciplined/terminated other employees for similar lateness issues in the past?

HRCalico · October 2004

It's a struggle everywhere, SamanthaQ, and it's just up to you and your management to decide how to handle. A word of caution, though - if one department is OK'd to come in five minutes late and another is smacked for one minute late, it causes some pretty big problems.

I had to discipline an employee recently for lates - he missed getting his bonus "by three minutes" according to him. Two days he punched in after the 11-minute grace period, so really he missed it by 27 minutes. I also pointed out that in four weeks, he only punched in on or before his start time three times.

I explained that our lives are full of choices (he's made some bad choices that have left him feeling like he doesn't have many choices left) and it's up to him how to handle it. I told him that lots of companies around here would dock him for punching in one minute late. I went on to give him a great motivational speech, but alas it was in one ear and out the other.

My prez here has a saying - do we want any given employee working for us, or would we rather he/she was working for our competition? If the latter, then let's make him/her available for the competition. I'm about to that point with this guy's attitude.

HR Diva · October 2004

One minute tardiness seems petty. It sounds more like the supervisor is looking for a reason to get rid of this employee.

Ethel · October 2004

One minute??? That does sound petty and as if the superv. is out to "get" this person. Forget about it!!! At our company, late is arrive at work 7 or more minutes.

SMace · October 2004

So you don't discipline someone if they are 6 minutes late, but you do if they are 7 minutes late. If one minute is petty then your policy is petty. You have to draw the line somewhere and adults should be able to accept it.

WT · October 2004

Just to muddy the waters a little, some employers have policy that being late a certain amount (for example, up to two minutes) does not constitute "being late". In this case, much depends on how others are treated. Is everyone expected to be on time? The reason this is so important is that you are making policy here whether you know it or not. The policy you are making is that a minute or so late is not an issue. If this employee gets by, that means that all the employees can do it. You can bet the farm that if you ever discipline anyone for a like offense in the future, this employee will be the example. The only question is whether you can use the example to your benefit or the employee will throw the example in your face as proof of disparity of treatment.

szemcumo · October 2004

Our policy is one minute late either in the morning or coming back from lunch is late. Three latenesses in 30 days constitutes and 3 day lay off without pay. A second occurrence of 3 lateness in 30 days will result in a 5 day lay off with no pay, third will result in either termination or the employee being placed on part-time status with no benefits. My employer feels that with the benefits they provide, let alone the weekly check, the least ees could do is be on time. One minute IS late.

twochr · October 2004

How much do you pay the clockwatcher who does nothing but track all these tardies? I'm sure glad I don't work for your company - sad but in today's world, the patriarchal society in business is not dead - even tho teamwork is stressed so highly. You cannot have a team when you have such a boss.

Our employees know that being on time is important, but we do not sit there and watch to see if they are one minute late. If their performance falters, then we speak to them, or if they are 'noticeably late' (lots more than one minute).

Does your employee who is one minute late ever work over one minute or leave one minute late for lunch or come back one minute early? Are you actually calculating people's work time down to the exact minute? Sorry, but I just think someoe has too much time on their hands.

I'm not really trying to be harsh about this, but we are all grownups and I really do think the one minute thing is ridiculous.

deniseE · October 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-26-04 AT 10:30AM (CST)[/font][br][br]Yes, I was fortunate to be able to adjust my start time...and I'm not saying that everyone has that ability...but sometimes, you just have to choose your battles in order to get the best performance from employees. My husband is frequently required to travel over weekends and during the evenings...in addition to his 40 hour office week---without additional compensation. I would hope that his employer would not get fired up about 5-15 minutes in the morning.

The way we look at it is that while we need our ee's to be on time (telephone workers, especially)...we also want them to stay as long as needed to finish something. Our work week is 37.5 and there is no OT before 40 hours....so frequently, ee's will end up giving us 2.5 hours of free time in a week.

If we take a hard line on the one minute late policy....I am certain that at the end of a shift, ee's will be equally hardlined about leaving "on-time".

Does the supervisor in question have other issues with this ee????

szemcumo · October 2004

Just as the original post asked "where do you draw the line" then if not one minute is 2 ok if not the someone whom clocks in 3 minutes late is only one minute by that counting. Yes we are all adults so should be accountable and be able to show up on time. EE's paychecks are on time why can't they be. And this is not my policy but the owners who give some great benefits to our ees especially for the rural area, people are lined up waiting for an opening here.

HRCalico · October 2004

That's exactly right - I call it the slippery slope. Bob is late by one minute, Joe is late by two, so that should be OK because it was for Bob, and pretty soon you're an hour late at the bottom of the pile at the bottom of the hill.

Nat'l Guard is also correct in that late people will always be late, regardless of their start time. Just like people who think they're underpaid will always think they're underpaid regardless of what raises they get.

National Guard · October 2004

My philosophy has always been; the problematic late ee will always be late. He/she just doesn't want to be there. You could change the start time from (for example) 7:30 to 8:00 but then he/she would probably get to work at 8:05. What you're looking for is a change in behavior not a change in policy or even consistent enforcement of the policy.

If you can't change the behavior-"cut the umbilical cord" as they say and term the ee.

Don D · October 2004

Obviously most or all of the responders do not work in a manufacturing environment. We don't pay anybody to sit on a stool and watch the clock. We have machines that do that. Late is late, tardy is tardy, leaving early is leaving early and we have policies to address those. Deviations from the policy and inconsistent application of the policy will lose your case in any venue where you find yourself on trial.

By the way, in a manufacturing environment, you will also find a multitude of non-exempt office occupations and those people abide by the same policies and procedures. Otherwise you have anarchy.

These policies by no means apply only to manufacturing. I've also worked in transportation (2500 employees), health care and state government and they applied there as well.

Whatever · October 2004

I agree with Don D.

I would add that the person who is chronically one minute late should leave for work one minute earlier.
You cannot run any business when people are allowed to get to work whenever they want.

Balloonman1 · October 2004

Interesting points. Lets be clear, good employees are not late on a regular basis. Late is late, kinda like a little bit pregnant you either are or you are not.
The only reason someone notices a person being a minute late, is because they have a history of attendance issues. We recently gave points (we have a no fault system) to two individual who were 3 minutes late. They both complained. To bad. If they were not already in an attendance bind we might have cut them some slack.
My $0.02 worth,
DJ The Balloonman

Don D · October 2004

Exactly! People who are always 5 minutes late have always amazed me....they can be so damned 'promptly late', hitting 5 minutes on the head exactly.

I maintain that if you can consistently be 5 minutes late then you can consistently be 5 minutes early. It's simple discipline and taking care of business and the opposite of lazy and irresponsible.

marc · October 2004

There are lots of industries that don't have this issue. I worked in a Real Estate Development Company that had this issue. Few of the staff seemed to make the 8:00 start time. And when they did get to work, they had to hang up their coat, go to the restroom, get their coffee, etc, etc. Lots of arguements about this from those who made it on time. The owner finally threw up his hands, made the start time 8:30 and the requirement that everyone should have their feet under their desks and ready to work at 8:30. Guess what, he just pushed the problem back 1/2 hour. Same issues, same people.

In our shop, we only loosely track tardiness. Different departments have definite different attitudes. Our approach is not to sweat the small stuff, unless the EE is not in good standing. We approach this from a work product standpoint. Lateness will show up in the work and that is where we are strict. Any missed appointments, meetings, deadlines, etc, and we discipline strictly.

Don D · October 2004

"Our approach is not to sweat the small stuff, unless the EE is not in good standing."

Interesting. I infer from your comment that if the employee is otherwise having disciplinary issues, then a strict standard of attendance and timeliness is applied. Hmmm. I know how that would be perceived/received in an unemployment or EEOC hearing.

marc · October 2004

The way it works here (over my strong objections by the way) is that these things get documented as they occur for EEs that have a chronic problem, however, we will not terminate for tardiness. That is an unwritten rule, but as you can imagine, over time it has become fairly well-known by all EEs. We have found that the chronic tardies have other performance issues that we consider more substantive. Those are the issues that can lead all the way to termination. As I said, I don't agree with the application of the policy.

We have four departments. A couple only have exempt EEs. The Directors of these departments have different contractual requirements and philosophical differences regarding tardiness. To avoid the issues of inconsistent management of the disciplinary process, we take the approach outlined above. I know it has flaws, and I am still slaving away in the background to develop policies that can make sense for each departments administration, but still be consistently administered. So far, no great solutions.

mushroomHR · October 2004

In our manufacturing environment being one minute late is being late and points are assessed. If we had 20 people a day being one minute late, that would be a lot of unproductive time. We can't tolerate that. When employees start complaining about getting attendance warnings for being a minute late, I tell them to leave home a minute early then they won't have to worry. And they act like it's my fault that they're getting their warnings.

dchr9203 · October 2004

I consider myself very lucky that I do not work in a micromanaged environment that is punitive for one minute late, and ungrateful for 60 minutes worked over. Being exempt, in management, and working in a non-manufacturing environment, I don't have to stress (neither do my direct reports, all exempt BTW) that if I hit a traffic snag on the way to work, or the waiter at the restaurant is slow in cashing out my ticket, thereby running a few minutes over the standard lunch hour, all things beyond my control and that don't happen on a normal day but only OCCASIONALLY, that I'll be penalized because I'm "tardy" by the strictest definition. My employer recognizes that it all balances out at the end of the day, payweek, year, whatever.

Don D · October 2004

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 10-26-04 AT 01:11PM (CST)[/font][br][br]dchr: The point is not worthy of argument since there are a variety of ways of looking at this issue based partly on industry. But, I would suggest that you probably have never worked in an environment that does have these sorts of strict work rules. If you had, you would know the basis for them and the effect that violating them has on productivity and bottom line. It has nothing to do with "micromanaging, petty, being subjective and punitive", as you characterized. It's all about standards, work efficiencies, expectations and keeping the doors open because of bottom line profits for investors and stockholders.

As Mushroom said, in the world of timeclocks and productivity, if I had 20 $14 an hour employees late one minute each day that would amount to throwing out the window (eg pissing away) over twelve-hundred dollars annually. And in a plant of 400, you could quadruple those numbers at least.

marc · October 2004

Lots of industries where it matters. My Dad owned and ran a retail shop for 60 some years. Your customers expect the doors to be open on time and often, when they have emergencies, they expect to be able to bang on the door and you will open early. If you are the EE designated to open the doors, you better be there to accomodate the customer. Retail is just one example, Don has listed others where being late means something to your bottom line or , in the example of government agencies, your service standards.

Being petty has nothing to do with it, meeting expectations of customers, investors, etc. is the prevailing factor in those cases.

That said, I too count myself fortunate to not having to significantly deal with that issue. It is a drag no matter which end of it you are on.

Whatever · October 2004

The issue is not the ee who is occasionally late. It is understood that s**t happens. The issue is the employee who is chronically late. And, there are always a few who are incapable of being on time. I'm basically in a manufacturing environment. If we have a machine that requires four people in the operation..the person who is a minute or two late is preventing three other people from doing their job, is costing in not only paid time but in lost production. In the office, when some one has to cover for an employee who is late, they become less productive ( i.e. the CEO, CFO, VP marketing like to have the secretary answer their phone). The point is that a person who is late affects the ability of others to do their job.

Finally, when anyone accepts employment, there are certain "contractual" obligations. One of these, to show up ready for work at the time agreed to.

twochr · October 2004

( i.e. the CEO, CFO, VP marketing like to have the secretary answer their phone). Probably because they are not on time either! Lead by example should be the rule here.

Attendance and when to draw the line?

Comments