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 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.

Yeah you broke the policy. You didn’t bring your pass.

You attitude and approach stinks. I would expect your manager not to go out of their way to promote you or look favourably towards you at year end. You may say they aren’t allowed but there can always be a reason if there needs to be.

Celebrate your smugness on this win with an own goal on your career at that company going forward.

Everyone is acting oddly here. Your work sounds bizarre. You sound bizarre. This whole situation could have been solved by now if you just send them what they need.

super curious where you shop that’s top secret but this is easily sorted by a screen shot and some black boxes over the rest of the transactions.

What a weird attitude. No self-respecting person would want a promotion in a company so anal that it refused to apply common sense to a situation. In any event, it sounds like the temporary pass was swiped to get about once issued, so should have been counted, so the fault is with the company for its pathetic security, enabling anyone who steals a temporary pass to use it incognito. Who wants to work for a company with such lax security systems and jobsworths for managers?

Surely the manage a record of the temporary passes, but providing a redacted statement should be sufficient. However I would be looking for a new job if they were being this petty.

This ☝️

Are you sure they’re not just making that up?! I’ve never heard of that before, certainly isn’t a requirement for my (much smaller) companies insurance.

After all the drama, you not giving them redacted statement and NOT BRINGING IN THE EYE WITNESS WHO APPARENTLY WITNESSED YOU ON A CALL IN THE OFFICE

sorry for shouting, I believe there’s a lot more to this story and they see you as a liability and liar at work

Well done OP. The amount of bootlickers that think we should all be complying with whatever petty, ludicrous request that a power hungry manager makes is ridiculous. I’ve had to get the union involved at my work before (twice in 25 years of working there and I won both cases). There’s a big difference between being a problem employee, and picking your battles when you’re dealing with crap management.

I love the outcome of this so much 🤣🤣🤣.
It did need someone to kick up a stink about it because it was so ridiculous that it was obviously incorrect!

You’ve saved others having to go through the same hassle!

Awesome. Well done you and your union rep.
Hope you enjoyed that wine!

Hassle?? All OP had to do was to show a bank statement, they could have blacked out anything they didn't want seen (although why is beyond me). It was a very simple request which has turned into a huge drama. Sorry, but I roll my eyes at people like OP, and have sympathy for anyone who employs them.

I don't think her work sounds bizarre.

If its a large organization with 100s of employees, many of whom are hybrid workers without a fixed schedule of in-office days, and there's a minimum requirement of in-office days per month, then you need some sort of system.

Even if it there was no minimum in-office requirement, Employers need to know who is on-site, on any given day. With a large organization, security passes are a lot more efficient for everyone instead of employees having to manually let their employer know if they're coming in, and have someone manually prepare a daily log.

It may vary by business type, but I also don't think that it's "bizarre" for an Employer to have a minimum requirement of in-office days per month and, if they have that requirement, monitor it in someway. Again, security pass log are likely the easiest and least intrusive way to do that.

It looks like the policy, that security pass logs would be used for monitoring, was negotiated with the union.

The OP's immediate manager was, initially, implementing the policy to the letter (which I think is understandable for a low-level manager, whose job is to implement policy, and even more so with a policy that the union had a hand in forming).

It was the OP who, without being asked, voluntarily sent them a screenshot of transaction as "proof".

From there, it seems like the jnr manager was not sure if they could accept it (or at least, wasnt confident in doing so without approval from his manager), so sent the screenshot to his manager, to see if they could accept it despite the policy.

Middle manager, seemingly, says "This could work, but the screenshot only shows that someone made an on-site purchase. Ask OP to send a bank statement, so there's a record it's in her own name".

Up to that point, I don't see any issue whatsoever, and I also think its a very reasonable request in the circumstances. OP can redact everything else, she's just being asked to give her Employer two peices of information she has already given them.

I'm not entirely clear what has happened since then - it isn't obvious to me that they've been demanding anything or just explaining that if the OP doesn't want to (or cant) prove she was there, she needs to make up the day.

I agree that the OP has acted bizarrely, though. If she hadn't already given them the transaction details it would make more sense.

Probably a good thing she's in a union because her manager and manager's manager probably now think she's most likely dishonest and, if not dishonest, extremely irrational and awkward. Still, a good time to job hunt....

Is there CCTV in your building? Did you log in to any systems on the day in question?

So far as we know, the outcome is (or will be) that the OP has to make up the day.

How did you get that?!

BoldGreenDreamer

Up to that point, I don't see any issue whatsoever, and I also think its a very reasonable request in the circumstances.

Erm maybe OP's manager could have trusted that OP was telling the truth and therefore no.proof was necessary?? My.manager wouldn't need me to prove I'd been in the office of i said I had, because she trusts me and knows I wouldn't lie, unless OP has a history of lying/not going into the office when she is mean to them when she said she'd used a temp card that should have been the end of it

Do you have Google Maps? If so you may have trip history proving where you were

Read the update.

This is one of the most batshit threads l’ve ever seen on MN.

Cause they haven’t bothered to read the update.

Obviously victimisation of people, especially those in a protected category, is unacceptable. But most managers should be able to tell the difference between Bob, with a track record of being under hours and poor performance, and OP with 100% attendance and an achievement award.

They should still be treated the same. I imagine there will now be a crack down on issuing temporary passes to permanent staff and a policy of no pass, no entry to the premises.

Sounds like a good result but if you fancy being annoying- perhaps mention to your union there’s a safety issue here- your temporary pass use meant you weren’t on the work system as in the building. In the event of a fire evacuation, would you be listed anywhere as someone who needed to be accounted for?

We have a work pass that logs us in and out with a fob, and the importance of tapping your fob when you go out is reiterated as it links to fire registers, in the event of an evacuation- this is a bit of a common system for companies where different staff work different days and in different parts of the building, so you always have live data of who needs to be accounted for.

Temporary passes are a bit of a problem if no one makes a list of who has been issued with one on each day, marking when they arrived and when they left. You wouldn’t be looked for if there was a fire.

Jeez this is madness. Over one day?! What a controlling nightmare of a workplace. No trust whatsoever. They are wasting time and money checking if you were in the office when all they should care about is if you're delivering the work required to a good standard. And I bet the senior execs and CEO come and go with no tracking of this kind. You are not being unreasonable.

It's sad so many people think you shouldn't resist this. Probably because we're all so terrified of losing our jobs if we don't comply with everything the company demands of us. Not an unjustified fear with the cost of living as it is, just very sad they think they own our asses and we feel like we have to let them.

Absolutely. I'm I'm favour of office time if productive, but if it's to tick a box that says present, completely futile and redundant..