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.

The temporary pass point has been asked and answered so many times now.

There’s nothing to suggest that they don’t know who is in the building at the time they’re in the building.

It’s entirely possible they keep the record of who used a temporary pass for 4 or 6 weeks, so there’s no sign of OP this far on. That’s not an unreasonable policy.

It’s entirely possible that OP isn’t on the record because OP wasn’t there.

It’s entirely possible that OP was logged in as Janet Smith instead of Jane Smith so isn’t showing up on a search of the logs but wouldn’t have been allowed to burn in a fire (the firefighter isn’t going to go “are you Janet? No? We’re here for Janet, you stay and burn Jane”.

It’s entirely possible human error on the security screening didn’t save the log.

This has come up again and again and again. It’s been answered again and again and again.

If a log was taken but has been lost or whatever, that's still not OP's problem.

If the company has a policy that says you have to have evidence that you were in the office, then the evidence for that should be kept by the company long enough for them to verify it if they provide the ability for staff to be on site on a temp id.

Still a company failing. Still the company saying they don't trust their employees.

Why is it such an issue to show a bank statement? I have to produce original documents each time my DBS check is renewed and one of the documents I provide is my bank statement. I just redact any information I don’t want to share. I really don’t care if someone else knows that I spent £32.50 in M&S and I don’t see it as an intrusion into my privacy. If I don’t provide the necessary proof then I can’t get my check done, and can’t work.

God I'd be looking for a new job. I dont mind going into the office if it is needed, but the idea of going in for the sake of some arbitrary quota is just ridiculous, and I cant believe how many people on this thread are happy to just knuckle under and sit in an empty office to make up days.

The idea then that you need to prove it, because no one noticed whether you were there or not just seems crackers.

Or, of course, the employer is certain OP wasn't there, can't find any evidence to support the fact that she was there and is therefore asking her to prove it.

The company policy is for OP to use her swipe pass. She didn’t. She is asking for an exception to the policy - she’s not entitled to one.

It’s not reasonable to fail to keep temporary pass details for long enough to verify attendance for pay and hours worked if you’re allowing employees to use them. What you’re saying is that if you are issued a temporary pass it’s fine for the employer not to keep a record of it beyond a certain date and it’s tough if the employee can’t prove they were onsite for pay purposes ? And what of the work OP actually did that day ? Are they paying her for that or expecting her to just work for nothing that day because she can’t prove she was in the office doing it and not working from home ?

And the firefighter point is ridiculous. It’s not a question of firefighters asking people names. There are evacuation procedures in place and head counts to make sure everyone has left the building. If they’re not aware OP is in the building, then they won’t be surprised she doesn’t appear on the head count.

If company policy is that employees need evidence that they were in the office at prescribed times, then it’s on the company to make sure that evidence appears and stays on their systems for long enough for them to verify for their records. Otherwise what is the point of providing temporary passes ? And what happens if an employee can’t verify they were in the office ? Are they not paid for the day’s work because they are deemed not to be in the right place when they carried it out ? The failure for OP’s whereabouts to be verified is on the employer, not OP.

They’re paying her because she gets paid regardless… not sure why you’re bringing that up. It’s not relevant. There’s no question on whether or not OP should be paid regardless of where she worked. This literally has zero relevance. At all.

You seem to have really twisted what happened to suit your argument rather than looking at what happened and then forming your opinion.

Completely different and completely wrong. Her manager will have no reason to know such personal details as her address and bank account information, unless she is part of the HR or finance team. These should be protected on a 'need to know' basis. Hence, a screen grab should be sufficient.

Now the company will know these details, but her manager probably shouldn't have access to this level of PID.

Asked and answered. RTFT

OP, how did your meeting go?

But OP can redact everything apart from her name (which her manager already knows) and the transaction details which she wants them to take as proof.

No privacy issues at all.

If the OP was in the office, despite all the normal records/checks showing she wasn't there, then she could easily prove it in 5 minutes with no confidential data being shared at all. She's refusing to do so. This makes one question whether she was there at all. Because there is no reason whatsoever why she should not show her manager a document containing nothing other than her name and the transaction which she wishes to rely on as proof of attendance, which is all that is being asked of her.

OP hasn’t verified whether they’re paying her for that day’s work, or whether they just want her to work an extra day in the office. If they know she actually worked it, and it’s just a case of not being able to verify where she was actually working from, then it’s really petty to expect her to attend for an extra day.

The fact that they issue temporary passes would seem to suggest otherwise.

This shite literally puts people off employing other people. What an absolute storm in a tea cup

But she must be, as the company policy must include being issued a temporary pass, as she obtained one. The company has no way of tracking temp passes; that's on them.

What if she didn't buy lunch at the cafe? How would they verify who is in the offices if they have no way of tracking passes or give piss poor excuses to not review the CCTV.

If they have a policy in place that covers temporary passes and they destroy records after four weeks, but this contradicts another policy within the company, such as checking pass swipes three months later for attendance, that's on the company for not aligning its policies.

I'd start to think more about why this manager is going out of her way to obtain information she doesn't need to resolve this issue.

Going on your previsous argumet of her not giving away more information than she needs to by removing or redacting details, why not redact her name also, as the manager already knows that. The manger sounds like she's stepping very close to a formal complaint from this employee,

People forget their id badges from time to time. Any decent company would have a log of who has used temporary passes.

If she shouldn't be using a temporary pass then she shouldn't have been given one at all.

If you don't like people disagreeing with you, maybe you should just leave the FT.

Dear god, what hellscape is this? I’d job hunt immediately

She can, and she could do it in a few mins, however, having already provided a screenshot, informed about temp pass, given her manager the option of reviewing CCTV and being palmed off with an utter lie about why she can't do that, I too would also start to question why i was being asked to go above and beyond, the burden of proof, of none attendace, falls on the company.

If you were presenting, the first thing you'd supply would be CCTV, followed by no card swipes as supporting evidence.

After all of this it would be hilarious if the OP turned up saying, yeah, I didn't go in, I got my days mixed up 😂

Crazy idea, why don't you just make up the extra day? Is going into the office 1 additional day really that bad?

How does asking you to read the fact that your point has been answered a dozen times already mean I don’t like being disagreed with? 😂😂

The fact that it was answered several times showed I’m fine with that. I just don’t like needlessly repeating myself because you haven’t read the thread.

Google how long CCTV footage is usually retained for. It’s very unusual for it not to be overwritten within a few weeks. There probably isn’t any footage to review at this point.

I’ve spoken with my Union rep and the matter is closed. For those who are interested:

-The hybrid policy was jointly signed off by the Union and nowhere in this did it state employees should be asked to provide personal information such as bank statements to prove attendance. My manager and their own manager have gone ‘rogue’ in asking for this.

-The policy confirms the adherence to the required office days is to be measured via pass swipe data. The company have a blind spot here with temporary passes which the Union will demand is addressed urgently.

-The rep pointed out my exemplary record of 100% adherence to this policy historically, and that a common sense approach should have been applied - they even cited that this would have been a PR disaster had it got out.

I won’t be too smug - apologies to the anti WFH brigade who will no doubt be disappointed by this victory for common sense. You know what, you could always search for roles which are hybrid/WFH - you might get even more time to post nonsense on MN 😉

Anyway, 3 hours to go and then I can crack open a bottle of wine to toast my fan club on here!