In case anyone still isn’t convinced of the dangers of relying on handwritten time cards:
Not too long ago, a business in Iowa discovered one of their employees had been overstating the time on his time card for the previous five years, costing the company over $100,000 in overpaid wages.
“Well, at least we have insurance,” thought the company owner. In fact, the company had paid extra for optional coverage that would protect them from losses resulting from dishonest acts on the part of employees who intended to “obtain financial benefit (other than salaries … or other employee benefits earned in the normal course of employment).”
So the company filed a claim with their insurance company, requesting reimbursement. I’m pretty sure they weren’t prepared for what happened next.
To (what I assume was) their surprise, the insurance comany rejected the claim. The insurance company pointed out the losses were in the form of wages — which fell under the general category of “salaries… or other employee benefits earned in the normal course of employment” — and were, therefore, specifically excluded under the policy. The business argued the employee had not “earned” those wages, so the exclusion should not apply.
In due course, the whole mess ended up in court.
Sadly for the business, the court agreed with the insurance company, and ruled they were entitled to deny the claim.
If only the company had invested a small amount in a biometric time tracking solution, such as our ATR360 Biometric Punch Clock, our timeQplus Biometric fingerprint system or our timeQplus FaceVerify facial recognition system. Biometric clocks require employees to be physically present when clocking in and out. They prevent one employee for clocking in or out on another’s behalf (“buddy punching”) because they verify each worker’s identity before recording the punch. And employees can’t “inflate” their time as some do with handwritten time cards or timesheets, because the biometric clock accurately records the precise time they clock in or out.
Paying a few hundred dollars for a biometric solution would have allowed the company to avoid more than $100,000 in losses. That sure sounds like a good deal to me!