Will SEC escape RIFs due to large number of exits?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they could not look at our badge swipe records unless the person is on a Performance Improvement plan. Does anyone know if this has changed?

They regularly pull this data and can for any reason, at any time and without notification to you.

DP. It’s my understanding that in the past there was a relatively high threshold to look at badge data, although I’m not sure whether it had to involve a PIP like PP said. (I’m also not sure this was a formal policy/requirement or just the practice.)

But since RTO (and by this I mean coming back twice a pay period, not the full-time return we have now or soon depending on position) they have been looking at it more regularly to ensure people were actually coming in twice a pay period.

I think it is very likely they will look at this data to ensure RTO compliance. Whether that includes looking at whether you did 8 or 8.5 from first to last swipe I don’t know. But if you regularly only had 8 hours, I could verily easily see that causing an issue.

How would looking at “first swipe to last swipe” help? I could go in for 5 minutes, immediately leave, then come back 9 hours later and do the same thing?

What EXACTLY are they looking for in swipe data? Whatever that is, why not simply require employees to attest to it on their TIMECARDS?

Or are they deliberately trying to create ambiguity and confusion so that they can accuse anyone of a “violation” of “something” at will?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This thread is very surprising and you should hope someone from DOGE isn’t seeing it. Get your head of the sand to see what is going on in government all around you and stop posting about your 1/2 hour lunch. You’re proving DOGE’s point and about to ruin things for everyone else.

It’s pretty clear to anyone who actually works at the SEC that most of the posters in this thread are trolling and/or don’t actually work here.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not SEC, but another office with lots of lawyers, and we are having the same 8 hours versus 8.5 hours argument. We collectively hate ourselves for this.

I am SEC and someone asked this at an all group meeting discussing RTO.

We were explicitly told that you could NOT take your lunch at the end of the day, so you had to there 8.5 hours.

That extra half hour can really make a difference when people are trying to figure out much more complicated school logistics with RTO, but there was no ambiguity in their response.

Whether anyone would really enforce this, who knows.

The passive voice says it all. Told by whom? Where is it written? Did they reference anything authoritative? Or were they just talking out of their butt (like many on this thread)?

OGC leadership. So, no, I don’t think they were talking out of their asses.

Again, did they cite anything for this?

the source documents are all linked in the intranet in the various timesheet/schedule options. i'm not logging in over the weekend to find it for you. however, the only circumstances where you do not need to take a 30 minute unpaid lunch mid-day is if you are working for 6 hours or less.

and no, the on-site gym is not returning.

That’s nice, but nobody here has addressed the main issue: Time cards ask you to verify that you’ve worked 8 hours. Period. If you’ve worked 8 hours (ie, you were in the office for 8 hrs), your time card is accurate. End of story.

Whether you’ve somehow violated some obscure, vague, ambiguous HR policy that’s on the intranet is another issue entirely. It’s certainly not timecard fraud.

If they really cared about this, they could easily require staff to attest that they were IN THE OFFICE FOR 8.5 HOURS on their time cards. I know several agencies that do just that. It’s not hard.

They can’t have it both ways: Say that must do X with respect to working hours, but then NOT have you attest to whether you’ve indeed done X on your time card.

Passive voice or not…

When you get approval of your schedule (different software than the timesheet program), this schedule must fit within the various options. Assuming an 8 hour day:

You must have an approved schedule covering 8.5 hours that includes core hours 10-2. You have a 30 minute break for lunch, this can be spent in or out of the office, no one cares.

The agency will pull turnstile badge data, they have been doing this for years. Between your arrival to badge in (start) and your final departure badging out, you must have 8.5 total hours, start to finish, in this example.

Timesheet still says 8 hours worked a day but if you are only in for 8 and not 8.5 total (start to finish according to the turnstile data) you are not working your approved schedule. The agency has in the past accused and fired workers for not working a full 8 hours based on turnstile badging data.

So you can get technical about it but given that you must take lunch during the day, if you do not have the full 8.5 start to finish, you risk being accused of stealing time. It’s not just the timesheet that you have to certify to, it’s also that you are working your approved schedule on a regular basis, whatever that may be.

Nonsense. Nobody attests to their “approved schedule.” They attest to their time card only. And nobody in history has been accused of “schedule fraud.”

Based on your logic, an employee who goes to lunch across the street is “stealing time” because they’re not in the office for 8.5 hours. Also based on your logic, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead worked 845 - 5:15 could also be fired for “approved schedule fraud.”

Be consistent. Do you have to be in the office for your 1/2 lunch or not? Cite a written authority that says one way or the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they could not look at our badge swipe records unless the person is on a Performance Improvement plan. Does anyone know if this has changed?

They regularly pull this data and can for any reason, at any time and without notification to you.

How do you know?

How do you NOT know? This isn’t a secret.

So how do you know? Tell us.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not SEC, but another office with lots of lawyers, and we are having the same 8 hours versus 8.5 hours argument. We collectively hate ourselves for this.

I am SEC and someone asked this at an all group meeting discussing RTO.

We were explicitly told that you could NOT take your lunch at the end of the day, so you had to there 8.5 hours.

That extra half hour can really make a difference when people are trying to figure out much more complicated school logistics with RTO, but there was no ambiguity in their response.

Whether anyone would really enforce this, who knows.

The passive voice says it all. Told by whom? Where is it written? Did they reference anything authoritative? Or were they just talking out of their butt (like many on this thread)?

OGC leadership. So, no, I don’t think they were talking out of their asses.

Again, did they cite anything for this?

the source documents are all linked in the intranet in the various timesheet/schedule options. i'm not logging in over the weekend to find it for you. however, the only circumstances where you do not need to take a 30 minute unpaid lunch mid-day is if you are working for 6 hours or less.

and no, the on-site gym is not returning.

That’s nice, but nobody here has addressed the main issue: Time cards ask you to verify that you’ve worked 8 hours. Period. If you’ve worked 8 hours (ie, you were in the office for 8 hrs), your time card is accurate. End of story.

Whether you’ve somehow violated some obscure, vague, ambiguous HR policy that’s on the intranet is another issue entirely. It’s certainly not timecard fraud.

If they really cared about this, they could easily require staff to attest that they were IN THE OFFICE FOR 8.5 HOURS on their time cards. I know several agencies that do just that. It’s not hard.

They can’t have it both ways: Say that must do X with respect to working hours, but then NOT have you attest to whether you’ve indeed done X on your time card.

Passive voice or not…

When you get approval of your schedule (different software than the timesheet program), this schedule must fit within the various options. Assuming an 8 hour day:

You must have an approved schedule covering 8.5 hours that includes core hours 10-2. You have a 30 minute break for lunch, this can be spent in or out of the office, no one cares.

The agency will pull turnstile badge data, they have been doing this for years. Between your arrival to badge in (start) and your final departure badging out, you must have 8.5 total hours, start to finish, in this example.

Timesheet still says 8 hours worked a day but if you are only in for 8 and not 8.5 total (start to finish according to the turnstile data) you are not working your approved schedule. The agency has in the past accused and fired workers for not working a full 8 hours based on turnstile badging data.

So you can get technical about it but given that you must take lunch during the day, if you do not have the full 8.5 start to finish, you risk being accused of stealing time. It’s not just the timesheet that you have to certify to, it’s also that you are working your approved schedule on a regular basis, whatever that may be.

Nonsense. Nobody attests to their “approved schedule.” They attest to their time card only. And nobody in history has been accused of “schedule fraud.”

Based on your logic, an employee who goes to lunch across the street is “stealing time” because they’re not in the office for 8.5 hours. Also based on your logic, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead worked 845 - 5:15 could also be fired for “approved schedule fraud.”

Be consistent. Do you have to be in the office for your 1/2 lunch or not? Cite a written authority that says one way or the other.

As has been said, you don’t have to be physically in the office for 8.5 hours. Feel free to leave for 30 minutes to go across the street for lunch.

Deviations from approved schedules are fine as long as your supervisor approves it. If they don’t, yes, you can actually be fired. Usually this requires participation from a jerk manager reporting you. But I have, in fact, seen the agency go after people for this. Welcome to the government.

You must work an approved schedules. You ask for a schedule, your supervisor approves it, it must comply with the available schedules. An 8 hour schedule working through lunch is not available and would not be approved.

This isn’t that complicated. So hopefully you get it. If not, please feel free to ask your supervisor or HR. Or FAFO. I personally don’t care, just trying to help you out.

[Anonymous]

yes!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they could not look at our badge swipe records unless the person is on a Performance Improvement plan. Does anyone know if this has changed?

They regularly pull this data and can for any reason, at any time and without notification to you.

DP. It’s my understanding that in the past there was a relatively high threshold to look at badge data, although I’m not sure whether it had to involve a PIP like PP said. (I’m also not sure this was a formal policy/requirement or just the practice.)

But since RTO (and by this I mean coming back twice a pay period, not the full-time return we have now or soon depending on position) they have been looking at it more regularly to ensure people were actually coming in twice a pay period.

I think it is very likely they will look at this data to ensure RTO compliance. Whether that includes looking at whether you did 8 or 8.5 from first to last swipe I don’t know. But if you regularly only had 8 hours, I could verily easily see that causing an issue.

How would looking at “first swipe to last swipe” help? I could go in for 5 minutes, immediately leave, then come back 9 hours later and do the same thing?

What EXACTLY are they looking for in swipe data? Whatever that is, why not simply require employees to attest to it on their TIMECARDS?

Or are they deliberately trying to create ambiguity and confusion so that they can accuse anyone of a “violation” of “something” at will?

You know what you proposed above wouldn’t work. The idea is that you have to be in the office for 8 hours, but that there has to be at least 8.5 hours from your first swipe in until your last swipe out.

There really is no ambiguity. It is very clear you can’t creat an 8 hour work day by taking your lunch at the very end of the day. You not liking the policy does not render it ambiguous or confusing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not SEC, but another office with lots of lawyers, and we are having the same 8 hours versus 8.5 hours argument. We collectively hate ourselves for this.

I am SEC and someone asked this at an all group meeting discussing RTO.

We were explicitly told that you could NOT take your lunch at the end of the day, so you had to there 8.5 hours.

That extra half hour can really make a difference when people are trying to figure out much more complicated school logistics with RTO, but there was no ambiguity in their response.

Whether anyone would really enforce this, who knows.

The passive voice says it all. Told by whom? Where is it written? Did they reference anything authoritative? Or were they just talking out of their butt (like many on this thread)?

OGC leadership. So, no, I don’t think they were talking out of their asses.

Again, did they cite anything for this?

the source documents are all linked in the intranet in the various timesheet/schedule options. i'm not logging in over the weekend to find it for you. however, the only circumstances where you do not need to take a 30 minute unpaid lunch mid-day is if you are working for 6 hours or less.

and no, the on-site gym is not returning.

That’s nice, but nobody here has addressed the main issue: Time cards ask you to verify that you’ve worked 8 hours. Period. If you’ve worked 8 hours (ie, you were in the office for 8 hrs), your time card is accurate. End of story.

Whether you’ve somehow violated some obscure, vague, ambiguous HR policy that’s on the intranet is another issue entirely. It’s certainly not timecard fraud.

If they really cared about this, they could easily require staff to attest that they were IN THE OFFICE FOR 8.5 HOURS on their time cards. I know several agencies that do just that. It’s not hard.

They can’t have it both ways: Say that must do X with respect to working hours, but then NOT have you attest to whether you’ve indeed done X on your time card.

Passive voice or not…

When you get approval of your schedule (different software than the timesheet program), this schedule must fit within the various options. Assuming an 8 hour day:

You must have an approved schedule covering 8.5 hours that includes core hours 10-2. You have a 30 minute break for lunch, this can be spent in or out of the office, no one cares.

The agency will pull turnstile badge data, they have been doing this for years. Between your arrival to badge in (start) and your final departure badging out, you must have 8.5 total hours, start to finish, in this example.

Timesheet still says 8 hours worked a day but if you are only in for 8 and not 8.5 total (start to finish according to the turnstile data) you are not working your approved schedule. The agency has in the past accused and fired workers for not working a full 8 hours based on turnstile badging data.

So you can get technical about it but given that you must take lunch during the day, if you do not have the full 8.5 start to finish, you risk being accused of stealing time. It’s not just the timesheet that you have to certify to, it’s also that you are working your approved schedule on a regular basis, whatever that may be.

Nonsense. Nobody attests to their “approved schedule.” They attest to their time card only. And nobody in history has been accused of “schedule fraud.”

Based on your logic, an employee who goes to lunch across the street is “stealing time” because they’re not in the office for 8.5 hours. Also based on your logic, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead worked 845 - 5:15 could also be fired for “approved schedule fraud.”

Be consistent. Do you have to be in the office for your 1/2 lunch or not? Cite a written authority that says one way or the other.

As has been said, you don’t have to be physically in the office for 8.5 hours. Feel free to leave for 30 minutes to go across the street for lunch.

Deviations from approved schedules are fine as long as your supervisor approves it. If they don’t, yes, you can actually be fired. Usually this requires participation from a jerk manager reporting you. But I have, in fact, seen the agency go after people for this. Welcome to the government.

You must work an approved schedules. You ask for a schedule, your supervisor approves it, it must comply with the available schedules. An 8 hour schedule working through lunch is not available and would not be approved.

This isn’t that complicated. So hopefully you get it. If not, please feel free to ask your supervisor or HR. Or FAFO. I personally don’t care, just trying to help you out.

Looks like we agree. Employees may go outside the office for lunch. Including at 2:30, after they’re worked 8 hours. Glad we’re in agreement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not SEC, but another office with lots of lawyers, and we are having the same 8 hours versus 8.5 hours argument. We collectively hate ourselves for this.

I am SEC and someone asked this at an all group meeting discussing RTO.

We were explicitly told that you could NOT take your lunch at the end of the day, so you had to there 8.5 hours.

That extra half hour can really make a difference when people are trying to figure out much more complicated school logistics with RTO, but there was no ambiguity in their response.

Whether anyone would really enforce this, who knows.

The passive voice says it all. Told by whom? Where is it written? Did they reference anything authoritative? Or were they just talking out of their butt (like many on this thread)?

OGC leadership. So, no, I don’t think they were talking out of their asses.

Again, did they cite anything for this?

the source documents are all linked in the intranet in the various timesheet/schedule options. i'm not logging in over the weekend to find it for you. however, the only circumstances where you do not need to take a 30 minute unpaid lunch mid-day is if you are working for 6 hours or less.

and no, the on-site gym is not returning.

That’s nice, but nobody here has addressed the main issue: Time cards ask you to verify that you’ve worked 8 hours. Period. If you’ve worked 8 hours (ie, you were in the office for 8 hrs), your time card is accurate. End of story.

Whether you’ve somehow violated some obscure, vague, ambiguous HR policy that’s on the intranet is another issue entirely. It’s certainly not timecard fraud.

If they really cared about this, they could easily require staff to attest that they were IN THE OFFICE FOR 8.5 HOURS on their time cards. I know several agencies that do just that. It’s not hard.

They can’t have it both ways: Say that must do X with respect to working hours, but then NOT have you attest to whether you’ve indeed done X on your time card.

Passive voice or not…

When you get approval of your schedule (different software than the timesheet program), this schedule must fit within the various options. Assuming an 8 hour day:

You must have an approved schedule covering 8.5 hours that includes core hours 10-2. You have a 30 minute break for lunch, this can be spent in or out of the office, no one cares.

The agency will pull turnstile badge data, they have been doing this for years. Between your arrival to badge in (start) and your final departure badging out, you must have 8.5 total hours, start to finish, in this example.

Timesheet still says 8 hours worked a day but if you are only in for 8 and not 8.5 total (start to finish according to the turnstile data) you are not working your approved schedule. The agency has in the past accused and fired workers for not working a full 8 hours based on turnstile badging data.

So you can get technical about it but given that you must take lunch during the day, if you do not have the full 8.5 start to finish, you risk being accused of stealing time. It’s not just the timesheet that you have to certify to, it’s also that you are working your approved schedule on a regular basis, whatever that may be.

Nonsense. Nobody attests to their “approved schedule.” They attest to their time card only. And nobody in history has been accused of “schedule fraud.”

Based on your logic, an employee who goes to lunch across the street is “stealing time” because they’re not in the office for 8.5 hours. Also based on your logic, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead worked 845 - 5:15 could also be fired for “approved schedule fraud.”

Be consistent. Do you have to be in the office for your 1/2 lunch or not? Cite a written authority that says one way or the other.

As has been said, you don’t have to be physically in the office for 8.5 hours. Feel free to leave for 30 minutes to go across the street for lunch.

Deviations from approved schedules are fine as long as your supervisor approves it. If they don’t, yes, you can actually be fired. Usually this requires participation from a jerk manager reporting you. But I have, in fact, seen the agency go after people for this. Welcome to the government.

You must work an approved schedules. You ask for a schedule, your supervisor approves it, it must comply with the available schedules. An 8 hour schedule working through lunch is not available and would not be approved.

This isn’t that complicated. So hopefully you get it. If not, please feel free to ask your supervisor or HR. Or FAFO. I personally don’t care, just trying to help you out.

Looks like we agree. Employees may go outside the office for lunch. Including at 2:30, after they’re worked 8 hours. Glad we’re in agreement.

Wow. Something tells me you are not the finest the SEC has to offer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not SEC, but another office with lots of lawyers, and we are having the same 8 hours versus 8.5 hours argument. We collectively hate ourselves for this.

I am SEC and someone asked this at an all group meeting discussing RTO.

We were explicitly told that you could NOT take your lunch at the end of the day, so you had to there 8.5 hours.

That extra half hour can really make a difference when people are trying to figure out much more complicated school logistics with RTO, but there was no ambiguity in their response.

Whether anyone would really enforce this, who knows.

The passive voice says it all. Told by whom? Where is it written? Did they reference anything authoritative? Or were they just talking out of their butt (like many on this thread)?

OGC leadership. So, no, I don’t think they were talking out of their asses.

Again, did they cite anything for this?

the source documents are all linked in the intranet in the various timesheet/schedule options. i'm not logging in over the weekend to find it for you. however, the only circumstances where you do not need to take a 30 minute unpaid lunch mid-day is if you are working for 6 hours or less.

and no, the on-site gym is not returning.

That’s nice, but nobody here has addressed the main issue: Time cards ask you to verify that you’ve worked 8 hours. Period. If you’ve worked 8 hours (ie, you were in the office for 8 hrs), your time card is accurate. End of story.

Whether you’ve somehow violated some obscure, vague, ambiguous HR policy that’s on the intranet is another issue entirely. It’s certainly not timecard fraud.

If they really cared about this, they could easily require staff to attest that they were IN THE OFFICE FOR 8.5 HOURS on their time cards. I know several agencies that do just that. It’s not hard.

They can’t have it both ways: Say that must do X with respect to working hours, but then NOT have you attest to whether you’ve indeed done X on your time card.

Passive voice or not…

When you get approval of your schedule (different software than the timesheet program), this schedule must fit within the various options. Assuming an 8 hour day:

You must have an approved schedule covering 8.5 hours that includes core hours 10-2. You have a 30 minute break for lunch, this can be spent in or out of the office, no one cares.

The agency will pull turnstile badge data, they have been doing this for years. Between your arrival to badge in (start) and your final departure badging out, you must have 8.5 total hours, start to finish, in this example.

Timesheet still says 8 hours worked a day but if you are only in for 8 and not 8.5 total (start to finish according to the turnstile data) you are not working your approved schedule. The agency has in the past accused and fired workers for not working a full 8 hours based on turnstile badging data.

So you can get technical about it but given that you must take lunch during the day, if you do not have the full 8.5 start to finish, you risk being accused of stealing time. It’s not just the timesheet that you have to certify to, it’s also that you are working your approved schedule on a regular basis, whatever that may be.

Nonsense. Nobody attests to their “approved schedule.” They attest to their time card only. And nobody in history has been accused of “schedule fraud.”

Based on your logic, an employee who goes to lunch across the street is “stealing time” because they’re not in the office for 8.5 hours. Also based on your logic, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead worked 845 - 5:15 could also be fired for “approved schedule fraud.”

Be consistent. Do you have to be in the office for your 1/2 lunch or not? Cite a written authority that says one way or the other.

As has been said, you don’t have to be physically in the office for 8.5 hours. Feel free to leave for 30 minutes to go across the street for lunch.

Deviations from approved schedules are fine as long as your supervisor approves it. If they don’t, yes, you can actually be fired. Usually this requires participation from a jerk manager reporting you. But I have, in fact, seen the agency go after people for this. Welcome to the government.

You must work an approved schedules. You ask for a schedule, your supervisor approves it, it must comply with the available schedules. An 8 hour schedule working through lunch is not available and would not be approved.

This isn’t that complicated. So hopefully you get it. If not, please feel free to ask your supervisor or HR. Or FAFO. I personally don’t care, just trying to help you out.

Looks like we agree. Employees may go outside the office for lunch. Including at 2:30, after they’re worked 8 hours. Glad we’re in agreement.

Sure, they can. As long as they come back for at least 30 minutes after.

[Anonymous]

I ask this seriously: what will keep you busy with regulations and enforcement being scrapped and deal-making at a halt with an erratic market? I have the utmost respect for the SEC and think you all worked extremely hard with Gensler at the helm (despite this weird obsessing over 30 minute lunch breaks) but what now?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they could not look at our badge swipe records unless the person is on a Performance Improvement plan. Does anyone know if this has changed?

They regularly pull this data and can for any reason, at any time and without notification to you.

DP. It’s my understanding that in the past there was a relatively high threshold to look at badge data, although I’m not sure whether it had to involve a PIP like PP said. (I’m also not sure this was a formal policy/requirement or just the practice.)

But since RTO (and by this I mean coming back twice a pay period, not the full-time return we have now or soon depending on position) they have been looking at it more regularly to ensure people were actually coming in twice a pay period.

I think it is very likely they will look at this data to ensure RTO compliance. Whether that includes looking at whether you did 8 or 8.5 from first to last swipe I don’t know. But if you regularly only had 8 hours, I could verily easily see that causing an issue.

How would looking at “first swipe to last swipe” help? I could go in for 5 minutes, immediately leave, then come back 9 hours later and do the same thing?

What EXACTLY are they looking for in swipe data? Whatever that is, why not simply require employees to attest to it on their TIMECARDS?

Or are they deliberately trying to create ambiguity and confusion so that they can accuse anyone of a “violation” of “something” at will?

You know what you proposed above wouldn’t work. The idea is that you have to be in the office for 8 hours, but that there has to be at least 8.5 hours from your first swipe in until your last swipe out.

There really is no ambiguity. It is very clear you can’t creat an 8 hour work day by taking your lunch at the very end of the day. You not liking the policy does not render it ambiguous or confusing.

Very clear from what? Not the timecard.

I wonder why the timecard attestation doesn’t simply reflect this supposed “requirement” (as it does at other agencies that actually do have such a requirement). Laziness? Stupidity? A bug in the software?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm not SEC, but another office with lots of lawyers, and we are having the same 8 hours versus 8.5 hours argument. We collectively hate ourselves for this.

I am SEC and someone asked this at an all group meeting discussing RTO.

We were explicitly told that you could NOT take your lunch at the end of the day, so you had to there 8.5 hours.

That extra half hour can really make a difference when people are trying to figure out much more complicated school logistics with RTO, but there was no ambiguity in their response.

Whether anyone would really enforce this, who knows.

The passive voice says it all. Told by whom? Where is it written? Did they reference anything authoritative? Or were they just talking out of their butt (like many on this thread)?

OGC leadership. So, no, I don’t think they were talking out of their asses.

Again, did they cite anything for this?

the source documents are all linked in the intranet in the various timesheet/schedule options. i'm not logging in over the weekend to find it for you. however, the only circumstances where you do not need to take a 30 minute unpaid lunch mid-day is if you are working for 6 hours or less.

and no, the on-site gym is not returning.

That’s nice, but nobody here has addressed the main issue: Time cards ask you to verify that you’ve worked 8 hours. Period. If you’ve worked 8 hours (ie, you were in the office for 8 hrs), your time card is accurate. End of story.

Whether you’ve somehow violated some obscure, vague, ambiguous HR policy that’s on the intranet is another issue entirely. It’s certainly not timecard fraud.

If they really cared about this, they could easily require staff to attest that they were IN THE OFFICE FOR 8.5 HOURS on their time cards. I know several agencies that do just that. It’s not hard.

They can’t have it both ways: Say that must do X with respect to working hours, but then NOT have you attest to whether you’ve indeed done X on your time card.

Passive voice or not…

When you get approval of your schedule (different software than the timesheet program), this schedule must fit within the various options. Assuming an 8 hour day:

You must have an approved schedule covering 8.5 hours that includes core hours 10-2. You have a 30 minute break for lunch, this can be spent in or out of the office, no one cares.

The agency will pull turnstile badge data, they have been doing this for years. Between your arrival to badge in (start) and your final departure badging out, you must have 8.5 total hours, start to finish, in this example.

Timesheet still says 8 hours worked a day but if you are only in for 8 and not 8.5 total (start to finish according to the turnstile data) you are not working your approved schedule. The agency has in the past accused and fired workers for not working a full 8 hours based on turnstile badging data.

So you can get technical about it but given that you must take lunch during the day, if you do not have the full 8.5 start to finish, you risk being accused of stealing time. It’s not just the timesheet that you have to certify to, it’s also that you are working your approved schedule on a regular basis, whatever that may be.

Nonsense. Nobody attests to their “approved schedule.” They attest to their time card only. And nobody in history has been accused of “schedule fraud.”

Based on your logic, an employee who goes to lunch across the street is “stealing time” because they’re not in the office for 8.5 hours. Also based on your logic, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead worked 845 - 5:15 could also be fired for “approved schedule fraud.”

Be consistent. Do you have to be in the office for your 1/2 lunch or not? Cite a written authority that says one way or the other.

As has been said, you don’t have to be physically in the office for 8.5 hours. Feel free to leave for 30 minutes to go across the street for lunch.

Deviations from approved schedules are fine as long as your supervisor approves it. If they don’t, yes, you can actually be fired. Usually this requires participation from a jerk manager reporting you. But I have, in fact, seen the agency go after people for this. Welcome to the government.

You must work an approved schedules. You ask for a schedule, your supervisor approves it, it must comply with the available schedules. An 8 hour schedule working through lunch is not available and would not be approved.

This isn’t that complicated. So hopefully you get it. If not, please feel free to ask your supervisor or HR. Or FAFO. I personally don’t care, just trying to help you out.

Looks like we agree. Employees may go outside the office for lunch. Including at 2:30, after they’re worked 8 hours. Glad we’re in agreement.

Sure, they can. As long as they come back for at least 30 minutes after.

So I have to work 8.5 hrs now? You’re just making it up as you go along…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I ask this seriously: what will keep you busy with regulations and enforcement being scrapped and deal-making at a halt with an erratic market? I have the utmost respect for the SEC and think you all worked extremely hard with Gensler at the helm (despite this weird obsessing over 30 minute lunch breaks) but what now?

I ask this seriously: what will keep the police and FAA busy if a neighborhood is safe and there are no plane crashes to investigate. Maybe we should lay them all off. I wonder what will keep my primary care doctor busy if I’m perfectly healthy?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I thought they could not look at our badge swipe records unless the person is on a Performance Improvement plan. Does anyone know if this has changed?

They regularly pull this data and can for any reason, at any time and without notification to you.

DP. It’s my understanding that in the past there was a relatively high threshold to look at badge data, although I’m not sure whether it had to involve a PIP like PP said. (I’m also not sure this was a formal policy/requirement or just the practice.)

But since RTO (and by this I mean coming back twice a pay period, not the full-time return we have now or soon depending on position) they have been looking at it more regularly to ensure people were actually coming in twice a pay period.

I think it is very likely they will look at this data to ensure RTO compliance. Whether that includes looking at whether you did 8 or 8.5 from first to last swipe I don’t know. But if you regularly only had 8 hours, I could verily easily see that causing an issue.

How would looking at “first swipe to last swipe” help? I could go in for 5 minutes, immediately leave, then come back 9 hours later and do the same thing?

What EXACTLY are they looking for in swipe data? Whatever that is, why not simply require employees to attest to it on their TIMECARDS?

Or are they deliberately trying to create ambiguity and confusion so that they can accuse anyone of a “violation” of “something” at will?

You know what you proposed above wouldn’t work. The idea is that you have to be in the office for 8 hours, but that there has to be at least 8.5 hours from your first swipe in until your last swipe out.

There really is no ambiguity. It is very clear you can’t creat an 8 hour work day by taking your lunch at the very end of the day. You not liking the policy does not render it ambiguous or confusing.

Very clear from what? Not the timecard.

I wonder why the timecard attestation doesn’t simply reflect this supposed “requirement” (as it does at other agencies that actually do have such a requirement). Laziness? Stupidity? A bug in the software?

Who cares?