I did not know that we have this kind of policy. Reminds me a child care not a place of business for adults. I wonder if this will be used as another mechanism to push people out since this subject is very objective to say the least and hard to track/ prove otherwise.
34 replies (most recent on top)
@8Tsdz+1bmw0oqe If this "terrifies" you then you for sure should look elsewhere, and consider 'retiring' from corporate life... this is pretty standard for large corporations.
Terrifying, I am interviewing with wells fargo this week. I have worked at many fortune 50 companies and have never seen or experienced such paternalistic or degrading language and policies. Very outdated.
@2q
Yes, if you are nonexempt, that would be counted as an "occurrence". If you are otherwise showing up on time and not calling out unscheduled on a regular basis, it won't matter since it's only 1.
There are some people who know every nuance of the policy and push what they can get away with right up to the edge (I.e they are late or absent unscheduled on a regular basis). For someone like that, this type of out-of-their-control incident might tip them over into disciplinary action since they're playing that game. I say this not out of any malice but because I had someone who knew just how far she could go in exploiting the progressive nature of the disciplinary actions and she gamed the h*ll out of the system for over three years.
If you are late to the job due to an unexpected accident on the highway "parking lot", will that count as willful tardiness? It is out of control, the millions of people on the highways, stop and go, crawling along, then the unexpected accident that makes you sit in the highway traffic sometimes for hours.
I had an interview for a Wells Fargo contract job, many years ago now. I was supposed to meet them at 8 AM., and it was a VERY long drive from my home near Charlotte, NC during rush hour times. The interview was in the city of Charlotte. I left very early in an attempt to be on time for the interview.
While on the drive to the city of Charlotte someone had an accident on the highway and that made me late for the 8 AM interview. They did hire me for the job anyway. Out of my control, someone blocked the highway to the city of Charlotte due to their car accident.
They did increase the number of incidents as well as the length of time. You now need 7 unexcused absences (each unexcused absence can last 3 days) to be considered for termination. Pretty sure i’ll never have to worry about this.
For those that say they didn't see it... it was in "Team Link" email that goes out to everyone.
The net of it is, that if you are a nonexempt employee, there is a scale of how many unscheduled absences and tardies result in different levels of warning and ultimately termination. Current policy is that the absences and/or tardies are counted over prior six months. New policy will be the same number for each level of warning/termination, but accumulated over 12 months. In other words, it is a stricter policy because your "occurrences" accumulate over a 12 month period instead of 6 months.
The key here is "unscheduled". If you are non-exempt and tell your manager you're going to be late because of dr appt , etc. then that is not counted as an occurrence.
If you are an exempt worker you technically don't have a fixed start time, but there are departmental and managerial expectations of when people should be available. If you don't show up for scheduled meetings, call out a lot with no prior notice, etc and your work product and/or work relationships are problematic then it becomes a performance issue. So if you are exempt you're not subject to the punctuality/attendance policy per se, but if you have a pattern of lateness and absence that erodes your delivery of work, you can get performance-based warnings.
The reason we have these policies is for these entitled folks that don't want to work. HR is dealing with nightmare situation where users claim their internet is broken, their PC won't power on, yada yada yada. There are numerous folks that are MILKING the system and are getting paid to do nothing. Most times they are out galivanting around and not even at home. I know from a technical support perspective. "Oh, i'm not home" and it is in the middle of the day.
@1kyq That's bizarre, but so is WF policy.
When I used to work on-site in SF I would once, or twice a month show up about 1 hour late on Mondays since I couldn't return my weekend rental car before 8am and it would cost me about $30 to park it for the day unless I could find street parking in a non-permit area. After about 4-5 instances of that (I always let my coworkers know I would be late, and it wasn't like I was missing work) I got a call from my manager that if it happens again it would be a performance issue.
That was 100% based on hearsay since my manager was in LA. Go figure.
it can and has been used for exempt employees all the time
Used to be based out of CIC in Charlotte where I ran a 3-shift, 24 hours a day operation. First shift 6 am - 2 pm, second shift 2 - 10 pm, third shift 10 pm - 6 am. Had a guy who was always late, which caused issue with the prior shift person in handing over their work. In order for me to document his tardiness, HR stated that I have to witness the tardiness first hand, can’t rely on hearsay or tech logging, etc.
So my tired a$s had to get up at 5:00 am, just so I can document the guy coming in after 6 am. One day, he sees me on Harris Blvd., waiting at a stop light, around 6:15 am. He jack rabbit the stop light once it turned green, raced through the winding entrance within CIC, only to get stuck at the entrance gate. So I passed him, got into the building before he did, and documented that one instance.
It’s amazing how difficult it is to document legitimate performance issues as a manager sometimes.
Good grief. There are countless good reasons for starting / ending work at specific times. I won't suggest that people unable to imagine such scenarios should be "fired on the spot", but let's just say that the imagination is challenged. Mature adults get to work on time because it's important for the business, respectful of coworkers, and respectful of self. Mature adults never EVER worry about an attendance policy, because they realize it only impacts people that are exceptionally undedicated, lazy, and/or don't care about their mission or coworkers enough to be professionals. It's all well and good to talk about respect and maturity, but if you've ever managed people you know that there are plenty of ICs that are severely lacking in both. The policy exists to formalize the process of terminating them and you really have to be trying to get fired under it. For all the attendance issues I've seen over the years, I've never seen someone that was actually terminated under it. So you're losing your mind over a nothing burger.
Give me some start and stop hours and that's no problem. I won't be around outside those hours... Forget supporting India hours and meetings.
I've never been told a start time. Somedays I don't start until 10am. If I am working until 3am, and anyone expects me to be online again at 7am, they can f--k off.
- Not everyone got the memo, I do not believe it was an enterprise communication. Our team did not receive it.
- Over half the commenters on this site are not employee’s and just troll threads to get reactions or stoke the flames.
Imagine being a customer and no one is there to answer the phone, or a banker comes in an hour after your appointment, or a trader missed a $50mm trade. We are a business with a customer facing role. Many roles have set times apparently you don’t.
@nff I haven't read it since I took an exempt role. My manager is intelligent to understand that so long as my work gets done it doesn't really matter if I'm here. Just that I can be reached if they need me.
Has anyone actually read the memo on this thread? It's adjusting an existing policy - making it 12 months rolling period from six months. It's no big deal. We've been working under this forever. If you stopped to read the employee handbook, you'll see it should mostly impacts non-exempt employees.
Please, everyone, just take a breath.
Has anyone actually read the memo on this thread? It's adjusting an existing policy - making it 12 months rolling period from six months. It's no big deal. We've been working under this forever. If you stopped to read the employee handbook, you'll see it should mostly impacts non-exempt employees.
Please, everyone, just take a breath.
A little over 10 years ago, not terribly long after the merger was in our rearview mirror, there was some friction on the two sides about start and end times. Colleagues in NC were frustrated that the SF folks weren't in and ready to work at 8, and there was an enterprise announcement like "as you know, WF start time is at 8, and that has always been our expectation".
Total surprise in SF because our group wasn't hourly, and usually rolled in about 8:30 - 9. We all rarely ate lunch anywhere but our desks, so we put our time in. It kicked some dust up for a bit, but didn't really change anyone's behavior very much.
So, there is in fact a policy out there someplace -- just seems like it's rarely read or enforced.
If you're in a role with defined business hours and you're expected to be there to handle the volume of work for those time frames, an attendance policy makes sense. For example in a call center or branch.
However, for any other role where timing is arbitrary, a strict attendance policy is purely management being tedious. If I can get all my work done in 2 hours, why do I need to sit around for another 6 hours doing nothing?
Time clocks and such policies are purely for entry-level jobs: fast food restaurants, laborers, etc., designed to keep the masses under management’s control. It’s a completely worthless policy unless it is tied to servicing customers during the times a store/bank/restaurant is open. Other than that - it serves no meaningful productive intelligent purpose.
Wells Fargo is the one who needs to get with the times and show some maturity, respect and leadership. If WFC focused on minding the store and obeying financial industry regulations, rather than following ridiculous corporate policies, the bank wouldn’t need to be under a federal asset cap.
If I had managers that didn’t have the capacity/wisdom to decide between what’s important vs what’s not important, I would fire them on the spot. Having said that, emotionally intelligent leadership has to come from the top and we don’t have that right now. Thus we have a toxic corporation in turmoil.
If a time has never been defined, it's your responsibility to check with your manager to see what time they need you in by.
The problem is when there has never been a time defined.
@qrb+1bmw0oqe, agree. A time set is a time set. It shows responsibility. Some people just lack respect and responsibility. If you're supposed to be online at 8am, you should be online. If you're supposed to be in the office at that time, you should. There are exceptions, of course, but it's usually the same people making it a constant habit to be late. It's past 9am and they're dragging themselves in with breakfast every day.
You know you have a job and responsible for being on time. Make adjustments at home to compensate.
Post ID: @qrb+1bmw0oqe
I wholeheartedly disagree. The role of a good manager is to get the best out of each individual contributor. A mature and experienced manager is not going to frustrate and demean an excellent employee for arriving 10 minutes late.
I do empathize with our managers who are tasked with trying to keep their teams positive and productive through the current environment. But if you have people who are “minding the time clock”, but are otherwise not living up to their responsibilities-deal with what is important, not some trivial bs.
There are always a few who just can’t make it in to work when everyone else does. Over time, this creates resentment and demoralizes the punctual people.
Look at them.
All those complaining...you are not a manager who deals with these type of employees daily who actually need a POLICY to keep them on time and coming to work. This policy is well needed
Who cares what time someone comes and goes if they can get their work done responsibly during the time they are in the office? It’s just another petty power play and I pleasantly do not play along.
My department: male boss and mostly male employees. Work hours are from 7:00 to 4:00, lunch at the desk no break. The boys all dutifully come in at 7:00, go downstairs for coffee and talk sports and yuk it up for the first hour. I used to come in at 7:00 and was the only one answering the phones while they all goofed off. Now I come in at 8:00 and have better #s than all off them. If they lay me off for not succumbing to adult day-care rules -I will be just fine because I can leave with my pride and self-respect in tact.
The fact they have to have this policy showed that treating you like professionals didn’t work. Companies are reactive not proactive as they should be. I know millennials are grousing about being held to the same standard that existed in the professional world for years. We just didn’t need to be told to show up on time. We did that anyway. It’s the same reason we have to take those classes that day don’t post confidential info on social media or click on links in emails that should be common sense.
It is much needed. People use children as an excuse for not getting to work. While wfh, we heard every excuse why people can't be online all day while their children are at school.
We are all treated like 3-year olds instead of professionals. It's sad and un-motivating.
True, but there are also many passive-aggressive managers who hold expectations of exempt professionals despite never communicating those expectations. I once had a manager who expected me to start around 8 a.m. but never told me, and I had been online by 9 a.m. in my time zone, same time as most of our partners, for years.
More Corporate Big Brother.
there has been attendance and punctuality policy... forever. Any company with non-exempt staff has similar.
It's really sad that it's needed but as a manager who has had to deal with someone who couldn't find the wherewithal to show up consistently to work and on time (even with a grace period for start time) - it's needed. Otherwise the small number of people who can't act like responsible adults just create chaos for the rest of their colleagues with no consequences.