Will SEC escape RIFs due to large number of exits?

[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:

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…

No one is this dense. Definitely a troll.

[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.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Not saying it’s right but it’s pretty clear that rulemaking and enforcement will essentially stop so I’m asking a real question - what work will need to be done? Personally I think it’s awful and will set up the next financial crisis but since this is the trajectory the executive branch has put us on how will there be any actual work to do?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Not saying it’s right but it’s pretty clear that rulemaking and enforcement will essentially stop so I’m asking a real question - what work will need to be done? Personally I think it’s awful and will set up the next financial crisis but since this is the trajectory the executive branch has put us on how will there be any actual work to do?

Enforcement won’t stop. And repealing or modifying rules requires more rulemaking. Then come the lawsuits for repealing the rules and so on.

Work doesn’t stop, it just pivots to something else. Always has swung back and forth depending on the priorities of the day.

[Anonymous]

I’m surprised at this level of debate about the mandatory unpaid lunch that cannot be used at the end of the day. I’ve worked at three agencies (1 Union and 2 not) and they’ve all had the same work schedule policy: mandatory 30 minute unpaid lunch that you cannot take at the end or beginning of the day.

It’s not exactly time card fraud to violate this but it’s definitely against the rules. I looked it up once and it’s not in statute - agencies have discretion- but most do it this way.

[Anonymous]

I would like to know if UNIONIZED employees can have their badge swipes reviewed without notification to them. If anyone knows this for sure, please respond. Yes I will also ask my union steward next month when we go back. But just curious if anyone knows.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would like to know if UNIONIZED employees can have their badge swipes reviewed without notification to them. If anyone knows this for sure, please respond. Yes I will also ask my union steward next month when we go back. But just curious if anyone knows.

The CBA is publicly available online. It’d be easy enough for you to check if there is anything that covers that.

[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.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

Different agency, but we were told that fixed schedules are as described here, very strict. If you are supposed to work 9-5 (or 5:30), and instead work 8-4 (or 4:30), then you have to take an hour annual leave to cover until end of TOD.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would like to know if UNIONIZED employees can have their badge swipes reviewed without notification to them. If anyone knows this for sure, please respond. Yes I will also ask my union steward next month when we go back. But just curious if anyone knows.

Just stop because this thread is giving the SEC a bad name. The union doesn’t matter (see RTO) and the SEC isn’t immune from everything happening at other agencies (see EO). The new playbook is: fork, DOGE goes in and does some cutting, VERA offered, new Chair sworn in, extensive RIFs.

[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.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

Different agency, but we were told that fixed schedules are as described here, very strict. If you are supposed to work 9-5 (or 5:30), and instead work 8-4 (or 4:30), then you have to take an hour annual leave to cover until end of TOD.

I would guess that the vast majority have some variety of Flex Time with arrival and departure bands.

[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.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

Different agency, but we were told that fixed schedules are as described here, very strict. If you are supposed to work 9-5 (or 5:30), and instead work 8-4 (or 4:30), then you have to take an hour annual leave to cover until end of TOD.

But don’t you know the SEC is extra super special and not like any other agency because of the rockstar union guy?

[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.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

Shifting from 9-5:30 to 8:45-5:15 a slightly different issue than then working 9-5 to go home and take your “lunch” from 5-5:30.

I’ve never heard of anyone having issues shifting your schedule around and I’d hope that would still be the case now, as long as you had the required time in the office. I would think supervisors would still have flexibility on this account, even if they have much less flexibility to approve telework.

[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.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

Different agency, but we were told that fixed schedules are as described here, very strict. If you are supposed to work 9-5 (or 5:30), and instead work 8-4 (or 4:30), then you have to take an hour annual leave to cover until end of TOD.

Is this a new thing with RTO, or has that always been the case?

Because this has definitely never been the case at the SEC, and I haven’t seen anything suggesting it will be the case now — at least yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would like to know if UNIONIZED employees can have their badge swipes reviewed without notification to them. If anyone knows this for sure, please respond. Yes I will also ask my union steward next month when we go back. But just curious if anyone knows.

Just stop because this thread is giving the SEC a bad name. The union doesn’t matter (see RTO) and the SEC isn’t immune from everything happening at other agencies (see EO). The new playbook is: fork, DOGE goes in and does some cutting, VERA offered, new Chair sworn in, extensive RIFs.

I disagree about the union. But agreed on the rest. Just do your job. You’ll either keep it or you won’t. No one really knows how all this dust will settle.

[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.

if someone is not on an approved flex schedule then yes, an employee with an approved schedule of 9-530 who instead regularly worked 845 - 5:15 without an approved schedule change could be disciplined for not working their scheduled hours. fixed schedules do not allow for credit hours or varying arrival and leave times. does the SEC currently discipline folks who do this? not that i've personally seen. the only person in my management chain that would have done this retired during covid. but if you are trying to force someone out, it's an easy place to direct the microscope because your formal schedule is a signed agreement between you and your supervisor.

anyway, i really hope you don't work at the SEC because you're a complete incompetent mess.

Different agency, but we were told that fixed schedules are as described here, very strict. If you are supposed to work 9-5 (or 5:30), and instead work 8-4 (or 4:30), then you have to take an hour annual leave to cover until end of TOD.

Is this a new thing with RTO, or has that always been the case?

Because this has definitely never been the case at the SEC, and I haven’t seen anything suggesting it will be the case now — at least yet.

Yes. This has always been the case.