Balancing Fairness in Office Timing Policies: Should Late Stayers Be Penalized?

Balancing Office Timing Policies

Our company has office timings from 9:30 AM to 6:30 PM, with a 5-minute grace period for late arrivals. If someone is more than 15 minutes late, half a day's salary is deducted.

From the company's perspective, this policy may seem fair. However, what about those employees who multitask, stay back late almost daily for an hour to finish their work, and then go home? Even their salary is deducted if they are late.

I want to strike a balance between management policies and fairness to employees who work hard for us. If I exempt a senior staff member from salary deductions for being late while sticking to the routine policy for mid-level and junior staff, other staff members may perceive the company as being biased. I am considering having different policies for senior and junior staff regarding office timings. Can a company implement different rules for seniors based on their performance?

Regards, Vaishali

Assessing Workload and Absenteeism

First, find out whether there is enough workload to make employees stay late, or if they are staying late because they arrive late, or due to absenteeism. Also, determine the rate of absenteeism. Assess the workload to see whether it is evenly distributed among all employees or if only some are burdened while others are idling away their time.

Understanding Workflow Patterns

Secondly, find out the nature of the workflow. Determine if more work flows post-lunch and if there is less workflow during the pre-lunch session. If so, explore the possibility of changing timings to 10:30 a.m. to 7:30 p.m. Starting early may not be productive when there is not enough work during the pre-lunch session. Conduct some exercises to understand why employees have to stay back late.

Regards, B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Advisor
Navi Mumbai

Thank you for the reply below. The staff I am talking about is sincere, loyal, and mostly on time, except for situations like missing the train or similar issues. The workflow is always high since we are an export house that operates 24x7, 365 days, so there is no particular time of the day when the workflow peaks.

Also, the work is distributed well among all staff, but as they say, all fingers of the hand are not equal, and not all staff are proactive and efficient in their work. This results in the workload falling on the handful of staff who are heading departments.

I am working on streamlining work accountability for all equally. Meanwhile, for the staff who are taking the additional burden, doing all the work, and having to stay back late due to this, I don't want their salary to be deducted for genuine reasons if they are late.

However, rules are rules applicable to all staff equally. Hence, I want to know if, as per some HR norms, we can have a different rule for senior staff regarding office timing, etc.

Regards, Vaishali

As per my understanding, there is no need to have multiple policies that complicate things. It may hurt my ego that I am not considered senior staff even though I have completed several years of service, while an employee with less service is considered senior. Instead, just add the following points to the existing policy.

If an employee is found violating the in-time by more than 45 minutes for more than 5 days in a month and does not complete the stipulated 9 hours of daily work on those days, only then should the company deduct half a day's salary. This should resolve the issue, as I personally feel that being 45 minutes late is not acceptable.

After reviewing a bit about the history and culture of your organization, I believe convincing the team heads will be quite difficult for you as an HR.

All the best. Hope this helps!

If you deduct wages for coming late from the salaries of those who are taking extra load and sitting late in order to compensate for those who are less efficient, it will send a wrong message and will be demotivating. If they fall under the workman category, it is normal to pay them overtime. In such a case, you can stick to the rule of allowing 15 minutes late on 5 occasions, since they are compensated, and it is permissible under the law as well.

B. Saikumar
HR & Labour Law Advisor
Navi Mumbai

Considerations for Salary Deductions in the Manufacturing Sector

You need to refer to the Payment of Wages Act for any deduction of salary. As mentioned, it is a case of not following rules, and they have to pay a fine for it (outcome of your rule). Any deduction of salary in terms of a fine will amount to a legal complication if raised by someone.

In the case of management cadre employees, I think your policy does not have any problem. Rather than deducting half a day's salary, start deducting their leave, provided it is not approved by their immediate supervisor. Moreover, in the case of workmen, you can also deduct half a day's leave.

After analysis, you can start paying some amount to an employee who is stretching beyond the limit.

Regards

Seeking Advice on Different Rules for Senior Staff

Thank you for the replies. We are a manufacturing and export company, and the staff I am referring to is from the export office. They are the heads of their departments, such as the SM head and Account Senior Executive, and they have each spent around 10 years with us.

In our industry, the work culture often requires us to stay late for various tasks, and overtime (OT) is provided when there are urgent matters that need to be completed on the same day. Anyone who stays late is entitled to OT as per our OT policy.

My concern is about maintaining equality among all employees. We currently deduct the salary of anyone who arrives late after being given 5 chances in a month. However, I am hesitant to apply this rule to our long-serving senior staff members who have been with us for many years, diligently working without watching the clock and not receiving OT for routine tasks. I believe exceptions should be made for them in cases of emergencies.

I want to implement this in accordance with norms and laws. Therefore, I am seeking advice on whether there are any legal provisions that allow for different rules for senior staff. This way, if any other staff members raise concerns about two sets of rules, I can provide a proper explanation.

Regards, Vaishali

You have narrated a problem and a real practical condition, similar to almost any other workplace. Senior persons are sitting late, coming late, so should HR try to save salary deduction or not? Let me share my experience with you and other gentlemen reading this post.

Ignoring late reporting time of any class, relating to discipline, is not ethically correct. It is difficult to justify cause and effects, impossible to formulate time limits of reporting late class-wise, position-wise, and finally their output criterion. We, therefore, decided like so many others to adhere to discipline by maintaining punctuality and no deviations of any kind whatsoever.

Secondly, you cannot bring in conflicting two sets of practices from this angle. Top management is supposed to be more mature, spending more time with accountability to all written and unwritten assignments. You have described that on completion of urgent assignments, everybody gets OT, which is noted as a fair practice your management has, but it is not the case at most places. The moment you save salary deduction for an individual, categorically senior most, discipline will get washed away from the shop floor. For you, anything good, senior persons are supposed to transfer credit to their teammates, and anything bad, seniors should own. It's a good practice, keep it up!

Regards,
RDS Yadav

You have informed that the employees involved in late sitting are not juniors or of the workmen cadre. They are Heads of Departments. Now you fear a breach of the rule or discrimination if you allow those sincere late-sitting seniors to go without a deduction of salaries for coming late either on the sixth occasion or beyond 15 minutes. This rule applies only in normal working conditions where all employees report on time and leave on time. However, for some employees, this working condition is not applicable as they sit late due to administrative needs but not of their own accord.

In those cases, you can make a deviation by allowing them to come late without deducting their salaries or paying overtime. Such a deviation is permissible in the interests of the organization. The Board or CMD, who has the rule-making authority, can create a rule of exception applicable to all those who compulsorily sit late due to administrative circumstances. Therefore, this cannot be applied universally to all employees. You cannot treat equally an employee who leaves on time and one who sits late and slogs, as the conditions applicable to them are different. Alternatively, as NASHBRAMHALL suggested, you can implement a flexi-time policy. This is only a matter of policy, and policies are made to advance smooth functioning without causing harm.

Regards, B. Saikumar

HR & Labour Law Advisor

Navi Mumbai

The persons referred to in the post are seniors. Their salary will be high, so they are out of the POW Act.

Justice and equality will not go together.

In my previous company, we allowed senior executives to come late, go early, and sit late. Every month, their short hours and excess hours are compared, and any shortfall as a pattern was deducted from their salary. We noticed some individuals sitting late only to generate excess hours. They were monitored by the Managing Director and either warned or it was reflected in their appraisals.

Dear All,

Thanks for the replies. I have got my answer regarding what needs to be done. There is no set rule or law for this, but we can have flexibility in our rules for seniors as needed.

Vaishali

Dear Vaishali,

You have hit the nail on the head, as the saying goes. When I was on a management course, a staff member quoted a saying: "Rules are there to be bent like a cane and not to be broken like a twig." A twig, once broken, cannot be made whole, while a cane, when released after bending, bounces back to its original shape.