To refuse to provide bank statement to my work to prove I was in the office

[HanExplorer]

I’ve found myself in a very unusual situation and am standing firm so far despite pressure.

I work in a hybrid role with a requirement to attend our office twice a week, this is measured monthly based on card swipe data. On one of the days in May, I forgot my pass so was issued a temporary one to use that day.

Earlier this month my manager flagged I was showing a day short for office attendance in May and said I’d need to make up a further day in June. I looked at the dates they had on record and quickly realised the missing one was when I had the temporary pass so that obviously hadn’t registered on the system.

I explained this to my manager and she still maintained I’d need to attend an extra day to balance the totals on the system as there ‘wasn’t any record of me attending’.

I realised I’d spent money in the on site restaurant that day and there’d be a record on my bank showing the company name. I screenshotted this on my phone, cropped it so you could see the date and sent it to my manager.

She has checked with her manager and told me that I need to provide a copy of a bank statement which shows my name and the transaction - that would of course also show all my other activity!!

This has been dragging on and I’m standing firm so far, but I’ve had a call booked in with my manager and her manager for tomorrow and I’m wary of what they are going to say.

My office is over an hours train journey each way so not a case of driving 5 minutes down the road to work a further day - regardless, I don’t feel I should do out of principle.

I suspect the explanation is that the OP thinks rules dont apply to her.

Its a bit like someone aged 26, who gets ID'd when buying alcohol and, instead of just showing their ID, rants about jobsworths and the nanny state, declaring themselves to be 26 and that their word should suffice.

Except that being asked to show ID is more intrusive than what is currently being asked of the OP.

Great you've got the union involved OP. Too many companies get away with this ridiculous, toxic behaviour.

Those saying that OP is being difficult or a drama-llama, you are part of the toxic work culture we've had for the past four decades. Hopefully, once you all retire, things will start changing.

Tell them to fuck off and look for another job...I've never heard of such an over the top response...you said you were in work, if they trusted your word that would be the end of it.

Fuck giving redacted bank statements - you've supplied proof of on site purchase. They clearly don't believe you which is just appalling management.

Clearly the employer needs a bank statement with the name as well as the transaction

It would be very easy for you to screenshot your bank statement and blank out all the other transactions in a bitmap graphics program like photoshop or gimp, your DP is a dimwit if they think you providing a jpeg (for example) is not foolproof…

I appreciate I’m a techie but I guess something as trivial as this is beyond someone who works in cyber-security (not surprising)

I'd be looking for another job tbh. Your employers sound paranoid, its obvious that they think you're making it up. I couldn't work for people like this.

Since when is buying alcohol in a shop in any way equivalent to an employer - employee relationship, the fundamental basis of which is the implied term of mutual trust and confidence?

Totally agree. No wonder so many employers get away with treating people like shit, when so many employees are just happy to be doormats.

I don’t get the issue with screenshotting your bank statement. You can use redact in adobe acrobat

Bloody hell id be looking for another job. Your managers are arseholes.

Haha humble pie…even if you ‘win’ you’ve lost because you are now the batshit employee that nobody is going to do any favours for, and nobody is going to trust.

i hope you weren’t pinning your hopes on a promotion any time soon 🫣

@HanExplorer For the sake of the hassle why not just to in an extra day to be sure?

No they don’t. What a ridiculous thing to say

Not sure if mentioned but can't IT work it out via IP address log on?

This is dumb OP. I'm with you. Their problem to resolve this petty shit, not yours.

We're going to be eating humble pie?! My god. I would suggest you make room for a mighty big serve of pie in the future, and meanwhile enjoy your Pyrrhic victory. Being this stubborn and petty will not lead to a good outcome for you.

@ThatsNotMyTeen

I entirely disagree that "mutual trust and confidence" is the fundamental basis of any employer-emploee relationship.

The fundamental basis of an E-e relationship is one of contract, with each party having certain obligations and responsibilities to the other and (if they want to avoid adverse consequences), fulfilling them.

Of course, there usually is a degree or trust which can increase over time, but there are always some areas where, no matter the level of trust, an Employer will not take the word of even a very trusted employee (expenses claims, claims of additional hours worked, doctor's notes for absences, etc)

In my experience the bigger the business, the more likely it is that policies & procedures need to be followed, because the inter-personal relationship isn't there between the decision makers and the ground level staff.

The policy re logging days spent in-office comes from "the top level", says OP. Her immediate manager (the OP concedes) has to follow the policy. Given that the OP's immediate manager had to run the matter up the chain to their own manager (who themselves doesn't seem to be at the top level), I think its fair to assume that there are a few degrees of separation between the person who sets the policies and procedures from the OP (so there's almost certainly no relationship between them whatsoever).

The OP's manager, and her manager's manager, are just trying to do their job, and I don't think its fair to expect them to cover up for the OP.

And what they're asking for is extremely trivial. The OP sent them details of the transaction, unprompted. They already know her name. All they want is for two pieces of information (that the OP has already provided) to both be reflected on the same, formal document so they can stick it in their records (pending any future audit) and declare it job done.

Who hadn’t forgotten their pass, can’t believe people are having a go about that? My boss did this week, he’s quite senior and NOBODY out of the close to 1000 people at my company would blink, we expect staff to be human, and we expect the c suite and board to treat staff like they’re human. Which they do, very much so.
the company have avenues to demonstrate her attendance, they are choosing not to, they also have discretion to trust her as a one off, they are choosing not to. If I were in the op I’d say I’m feeling treated like a criminal by you lot when I have done nothing wrong, and you cannot be arsed proving it yourself so are putting me through this interrogation process. You should be aware that right now, if sea level is zero, my loyalty to this company is at the ocean floor, that’s what happens when management treat employees like petty criminals just waiting for their moment.

SURELY - whether the original pass was available or not, a substitute was processed, and supplied and used all day.

To get the SUBSTITUTE pass all security passes were checked - so they KNOW she was in there.

We run IT firms and administer cyber-security - surely this is how everyone works!

User access and IT access vary. The mail server logs information with the header, IT can look on the mail server for the IP.

I'm not all that techy, but I believe the issue the PP is explaining is that where VPNs are used for remote working (and it does seem to have been the norm for quite some time), then every email you send will show as coming from the office, even if you were at home.

Company VPNs are not intended to, and do not, provide a user with anonymity from the employer. Think about it logically for a second, why would that ever have been a requirement, letting an employee disguise what they do from the company they do it for? Internal IT actually have to be able to access IP addresses to manage and monitor security effectively; and also to troubleshoot general issues, log audit trails and track performance of various systems. VPN shows IP internally. Email still has headers in mail servers, with IP addresses. Most companies' policies will disallow personal VPN use due to security (monitoring/ tracking) risks. Yes, audit trails do identify specific users and their location. The "not all that techy" don't have the same access as internal IT.

It confuses me why admitted "not all that techy" would want to dive in with this type of "issue... explaining"? Interested to see what you guys come up with next though, will someone claim IP addresses don't exist any more because it's all URLs?

Yes if you send them the redacted pdf it's not foolproof, but if you send them the image (jpeg/png) or physical printout of the redacted statement there is physically no way they will be able to find out what's underneath.

Are you on drugs? Just print the fucking bank statement and black one it!!! Really easy without making a massive drama.

I’m going to guess you’re very close to retirement op..,, why not do yourself and indeed everyone a favour in your workplace, and use this as the perfect opportunity to retire early?!

I can't believe you went down the Union route. You'd have come out of this a lot better if you'd provided the evidence and THEN got the Union involved when you'd proved that you were squeaky clean.