Skip to main content
Skip to main navigation
Skip to talk navigation

Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Saved Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

Flip

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Chat with other users about all things related to working life on our Work forum.

Work

Yes it is all about trust!

25 replies

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 13:34

Recently the company I work for has introduced a new clocking-in system. It uses the employees finger-prints and a card holding the details associated with that finger print so the 'sensitive' data isn't held on the system (illogical anyway but that's a different argument).

We used to sign in on a sheet by the door. That was 'inaccurate' apparently.

We can't have a card alone because that could be used by other people to sign someone in incorrectly.

During all the presentations the word 'trust' was only ever mentioned once when an employee asked a question. Apparently it's not about that at all, it's about accuracy of data. Which is a heap of steaming poo! The only reason to need that much 'accuracy' is if you think your employees are cheating. And if that is the case a bit of honesty might be refreshing

It doesn't help that the sytem is hugely unreliable and most people are still struggling to get their finger prints recognised when they come in and leave work. Successfully wasting time when they could be working (or going home!)
Not to mention the fact that their is a H&S implication as when people can't sign in they won't be on the roll call in case of fire.

There was an issue with abuse of sick leave (in the factory and warehouses rather than the office) but this won't address that problem.

It has caused so much bad feeling.

OP posts:

Report

RedBlanket · 08/09/2011 13:42

We never has finger printing but we moved from a clocking in system which involved a piece of paper and a pen to an automated swipe card system. The people who took the piss before found a way round the new system and carried on taking the piss. It's a joke really.

trixymalixy · 08/09/2011 13:44

My company got rid of the clocking in system as people were abusing it and clocking people in when they weren't there, so I can't see what is so wrong with using their fingerprints to verify the person is actually there.

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 13:49

It makes sense if there is an issue of trust trixy - but the management insist that it's nothing to do with that.

OP posts:

flowery · 08/09/2011 13:57

I can see the problem if the system is causing logistical/technical problems and isn't doing its job, but other than that I can't see the problem I'm afraid - how is it worse to have a card swipe or signature-based signing in arrangement? If the company require proof that people are in/out then it's not really a trust thing to start with, so after that it's just a case of which method to use.

trixymalixy · 08/09/2011 14:02

I still don't see the problem. They've updated to a more modern system. They say there's no issue of trust so maybe there isn't. Lots of the laptops at my work use fingerprints for security. DS's nursery had fingerprint entry.

There are a few teething problems, but I'm sure they will be ironed out.

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 14:02

The difference is that they don't trust their employees without a database record to prove they came in and left when they were supposed to.

OP posts:

trixymalixy · 08/09/2011 14:09

Sorry still don't see the problem. What is the difference between a paper record and an electronic one?

You are seeing an issue where there isn't one.

annh · 08/09/2011 14:14

They trust you no more or less than they trusted you when there was a signing-in system, surely?

bunjies · 08/09/2011 14:15

I would be more worried about infection control, all those fingers...ugh .

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 14:49

Hmm..... but clearly they didn't trust us before either. This proves it.

Re infection control, we were chatting about that this morning and decided that unless you worry about all door handles, the kettle, drawer handles too, it really isn't an issue!

OP posts:

trixymalixy · 08/09/2011 15:06

Eh? Why does this prove it?

You signed in and out before, you still do, they have just upgraded the method of recording it.

There's always going to be someone who takes the piss, so why shouldn't they check everyone is working the hours they are supposed to?

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 15:15

OK, so you agree it's about catching out the pisstakers? Which is an issue of trust?

I can tick a box on a sheet of paper at 8.45. Or I can tick it at 9.15 - they aren't going to know. Once I generate a database record which wil be date and time-stamped, they will. Which is fine - if they think they have a problem with timekeeping. But they should be honest and admit that.

OP posts:

annh · 08/09/2011 15:31

Any system is a question of trust! This is no more or less so than when you signed in with a pen and paper. This is just a more modern, efficient way of doing things. You collectively sound as if you want to retain the right to be able to lie about when you arrive at work? If you are being honest on paper, why is being honest by putting your finger on a pad worse than signing a piece of paper?

laracroft2001 · 08/09/2011 15:32

i dont see why it should be an issue whether you clock in with paper or with your finger prints unless you are a pisstaker!

(i don't mean you personally i mean 'you' as in all of the employees in the business)

your paid to work certain hours so why shouldnt company have the right to see exactly what you work (again 'you' means employees)

flowery · 08/09/2011 15:33

Changing to an electronic system rather than a paper based system isn't about suddenly thinking they've got timekeeping issues, it's more likely to be about updating the system and making managing the information far far easier.

It's a change of method not starting to implement time recording where you previously were able to just show up.

I really can't imagine why anyone who comes into work on time when they're supposed to would think pressing a finger rather than signing a book is so outrageous tbh. I'm not suggesting you are late or falsify records, I'm just not following what the big issue is.

trixymalixy · 08/09/2011 15:38

Oh FGS. You've obviously decided to get yourself het up over what is a total non issue really.

They trust you, they don't trust you who knows and who cares, there's not a lot you can do about it. Strike? Work to rule? Just have a good old moan amongst yourselves? Carry on.

ExpensivePants · 08/09/2011 15:41

I'm not a fan of clocking in systems anyway. Shite as my work is, we've never been asked to fill out time sheets or such. But as these systems go, wouldn't worry me what method they used, just that they used it at all.

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 15:44

I guess I am being unreasonable then.

And what you are all saying about falsifying records proves to me that the main purpose of this is ferreting out liars.

And there is an issue with making rigid what was flexible (and worked well). I get in around 9am. I am meant to get in around 8.40 but the school run makes it impossible. However I stay late every day to make up for it. I also work one day (and sometimes more as neccesary) from home. Most of the dept I work for are in and out of the office all day - carrying out their duties all around the site. We all also work at weekends and evenings (remotely) on a flexible basis - it's the nature of the job - and we have an informal TOIL system that is checked by our line managers. In order to accomodate this the line managers in our dept will have to be constantly tidying up exceptions, or we will all have to change the way we work. If I have to change the way I work it will be impossible for me to continue in my post.

OP posts:

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 15:45

"Oh FGS. You've obviously decided to get yourself het up over what is a total non issue really"

Yeah thanks trixy. Most helpful.

OP posts:

TooImmature2BDumbledore · 08/09/2011 15:54

I agree with the OP on this one. Clocking systems are about making sure employees are turning up on time and doing the right number of hours. We have one partially because of the flexi system - it is supposed to be easier to keep track of the hours we've worked if they're recorded for us, and yes, most people don't have a problem using it. However, it is something that you use because you don't trust your employees to keep track of their time on their own - there's no dressing that up.

Besides, no system is foolproof - many people clock out at lunchtime, clock back in after the minimum 30 minutes, and then continue with their lunchbreak despite being technically back on the clock. Having a super-duper fingerprint system isn't going to prevent abuse.

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 15:58

Precisely dumbledore - there is no other purpose and to pretend otherwise is disingenuous.

OP posts:

flowery · 08/09/2011 16:49

But dumbeldore they were already using a clocking in system. They've just changed from a paper one to an electronic fingerprint based one.

Don’t want to miss threads like this?

Weekly

Sign up to our weekly round up and get all the best threads sent straight to your inbox!

Email address

Log in to update your newsletter preferences.

You've subscribed!

Ellypoo · 08/09/2011 18:01

Also, there are H&S reasons for using any type of signing in/out, clocking in/out, fingerprint based system: if there is a fire or any type of emergency, people need to know who is in & who is not in the office - this isn't down to trust, just purely saving firepeople from entering a building unnecessarily because they thought someone was still in there.
In terms of the informal flexi-time and working from home is concerned, I wouldn't have thought that this new system would make any difference - if you stay late because you get in late, what is the problem? Presumably your employers are well aware of this, and don't have a problem with it now, so why should they as a result of having this new system in place?
Also, it really does just sound like an upgrade of the old system, which should help to reduce admin time spent collating/analysing the records.

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 18:30

It is a big change from the old system.

Old system - you ticked your name of a list when you came in and when you went out. At the end ot the week the managers took it and made some sort of record of it. There was no way of knowing when anyone came in or went out - just that they had done at some point on that day (assuming they had ticked the box and not someone else). It's main purpose was for roll call in case of fire.

New system - you register your physical presence and it is noted with time of arrival. And departure. It is linked directly and instantly with the T&A system and will generate an exception report daily for managers to action and we have been told that there will be 'action taken' for persistent breaches.

The 2 are entirely different.

And no, our flexible working is entirely a dept-led thing - althiough the departmental managers are aware most of the senior directors may well not be. Our old dept manager is on long-term sick leave and there is a good chance that in his absence, the whole ethos will change. There is a new HR director who is busy polishing his new bristles .

OP posts:

Ormirian · 08/09/2011 18:33

Anyway there is nothing can do about it.

But it has changed the relationship between employer and employee. And that is a shame.

OP posts:

Flip

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.