Policy on Shift Swapping

Policy on Shift Swapping
Shift swapping is a common practice in modern workplaces both in the public and private sectors. Organizations including federal agencies have established shift swapping policies through which employees engage in shift swap. This practice has positive impacts as it enhances employee retention and performance. Generally, shift swapping provides a framework for hourly workers to shift their working hours in order to response to pressing issues such as family responsibilities (Disselkamp, 2013). In addition to enhancing employee retention and performance, shift swapping also contributes to workplace flexibility. For this federal agency, shift swapping is a common practice for part- and full-time employees. However, some full-time employees have abused the policy, which has resulted in significant negative impacts such as the recent incident of a part-time employee who was injured at the workplace following shift swap. This report examines the timecard scandal and abuse of the agency’s shift swapping policy by workers, particularly full-time employees.
Problem Statement
The agency is facing a lawsuit from Matt Glynne, a part-time employee who was injured on the job after his claim for workman’s compensation was rejected. Glynne’s claim was denied because he was shift swapping when the injury occurred and therefore, not clocked in under his own name. Shift swapping is a common practice in the agency and occurs when an employee who is scheduled to work makes plans to have another person work on their shift. Shift swapping is carried out in exchange of an agreement to trade shifts or for compensation from the employee who was initially scheduled to work. While this practice is permitted because of its potential positive impacts on the working environment, it can become an issue because an employee is not clocking in under his own name and therefore, not compensated for hours they work. In addition, the employee’s benefits will not be calculated appropriately, which implies that the agency may be liable for infringement of the law.
Preliminary investigations into the issue has shown that the Unit supervisor was aware of the shift swap. Glynne had shift swapped with Jacob Walker who was initially scheduled to work on that shift. Since Glynne was not clocked in under his own name, he worked the shift under Walker’s timecard. These investigations have also shown that employees in the unit do not have a specific schedule as they are scheduled for 40 hours a week or 20 hours a week if full-time or part-time respectively. Based on the agency’s policies, employees are supposed to request time off prior to the preparation of the work schedule, which is carried out by the unit supervisor and posted two weeks in advance. Unit supervisors are not only aware of shift swap, but they also encourage it in order to avoid having gaps in their work crew. The investigations have revealed that full-time employees like shift swapping while part-time workers have mixed feelings about it. Full-time employees like shift swapping since they get benefits for work even if they pay another employee for shift swap. According to the Agency’s Chief Counsel Office and Unit supervisor Mike O’Neil, the agency should pay Glynne’s compensation claim because Unit supervisors had knowledge of the shift swapping.
Major Elements of the Scenario
The issue facing the agency reveals several components underlying shift swapping practices in the workplace. One of the major elements in the scenario is the current policy regarding shift swapping or assignments. Employees have seemingly taken advantage of existing policy on work shift assignments to engage in egregious abuse of shift swapping. According to Disselkamp (2013), when employees shift swap for pay, the advantages associated with the practice are not realized. Shift swapping benefits are only realized when employees trade off shifts for pay rather than for another shift. The agency’s current policy on work shift assignments has loopholes that condoned such practice. While employees are assigned work shifts two weeks in advance, these shifts are not set. In this case, employees work shifts continue to change every week as long as they will work for 40 hours a week for full-time employees and 20 hours a week for part-time employees. The failure to set specific work shift assignments in the current policy resulted in fluctuating or unstable work hours. According to Golden (2015), fluctuating/unstable work schedules have negative impacts on employees’ wellbeing and the overall work environment. Irregular work shifts or schedules are usually found to be linked with assorted adverse outcomes for employees and the working environment.
The policy supported the use of shift swapping as an alternative for rejected requests for time off. In this regard, the agency seemingly focused on ensuring someone shows up for work. This provided a loophole that was mostly exploited by full-time employees to engage in shift swapping. For example, while shift swapping is not common in the agency, it mostly occurs over the summer, during big games or around the holidays. This implies that employees were shift swapping for reasons they would otherwise be denied if they requested time off. The shift swapping was not limited to documented emergencies or approved diseases.
The second major element in this scenario is inaccurate timesheet records and increased overtime costs. As shown in the timesheet analysis, there were several discrepancies in timesheet for different work periods. The discrepancies are evident in the numbers of hours worked and overtime. For example, the analysis shows that 15 full-time employees obtained overtime pay and benefits but did not complete the full 80 hours. Additionally, there are indications that some employees obtained more overtime pay than they worked for. Some full-time employees exploited gaps in shift swapping policy to receive pay for work they did not complete. Given the gaps in the current shift swapping policy and inaccurate timesheets, the status of some part-time employees were changed. Full-time employees were shift swapping with part-time employees resulting in discrepancies in pay. Several part-time employees not only worked for more hours, but did not receive pay and benefits for their time. Restricting shift swapping to the same work category is one of the measures for minimizing and managing trading shifts in a workplace (Paychex, 2019). In this case, the agency’s problems could have been avoided if full-time employees were only allowed to shift swap with part-time employees and part-time employees with part-time employees.
Unit supervisors did not carefully monitor and assess work shifts and timesheets of employees. Lack of careful evaluation of these timesheets made full-time employees to continue exploiting existing gaps. On one hand, some full-time employees obtained overtime pay for work they did not complete and even worked for less hours than they were scheduled. On the other hand, some part-time employees worked for at least 40 hours a week and were therefore entitled to full-time benefits. However, these employees did not receive the benefits since they are part-time though they worked full-time.
Analysis
To identify the major elements in the scenario, document analysis was carried out. According to Bowen (2009), document analysis is a systematic procedure for reviewing or evaluating electronic or printed documents. This form of qualitative analysis is carried out to in order to gain understanding, elicit meaning and develop empirical knowledge. Documents that are subjected to such analysis incorporate text and images that have been recorded without the intervention of the researcher. In most cases, document analysis is utilized for organizational or institutional documents.
Even though document analysis is a form of qualitative analysis, analysis of the agency’s scenario involved examining qualitative and quantitative data. Qualitative data that was analyzed included Time Card Scandal Scenario, Control Over Work Hours and Alternative Work Schedules, Union Contract Hours of Work, and Union Contract Discipline. These organizational or institutional documents provided descriptions of the agency’s policies and practices. They helped to understand the various aspects relating to the scenario. On the other hand, quantitative data that was analyzed was obtained from Timesheet Analysis and Part-time Employee Records. Quantitative data was used to support qualitative data regarding the scenario as it provided more insights on the issue.
Interpretation of the qualitative and quantitative data was carried out through triangulation. Bowen (2009) states that document analysis entail triangulation, which entails combining different methodologies in a study of similar phenomenon. When conducting triangulation, multiple sources of evidence are utilized. During this process, the researcher seeks convergence and corroboration in the different sources of data. For this case, insights from qualitative and quantitative data were corroborated to gain understanding of the issue, its underlying causes, and determine potential solutions.
From the data analysis, it is evident that the major factors contributing to the current problems at the agency are current policy on shift assignments and shift swapping. Policy on shift assignments and shift swapping has contributed to irregular work schedules, inaccurate timesheets, and issues relating to worker compensation and benefits. The policy seemingly favors full-time employees who continue to exploit it for their own personal and financial gains. On the other hand, part-time employees are forced to contend with working long hours, irregular schedules, and less pay and benefits. Therefore, the agency needs to adopt new workplace policies that address shift assignments and shift swapping.
Final Recommendations
In light of the issues facing the agency, there are some recommendations that would help prevent future reoccurrence of such a problem. One of the recommendations is the establishment of a new shift swapping policy. Under the new policy, full-time employees should only shift swap with their full-time counterparts whereas part-time employees shift swap with others in the same job category. This would prevent full-time employees from exploiting this policy/practice while protecting part-time employees from working full-time. Additionally, shift swapping should be restricted to documented emergencies and approved illnesses. Secondly, Unit supervisors should be required to exercise careful monitoring of timesheets and timecards of all employees. This would help prevent discrepancies and inaccuracies that in turn contribute to huge financial losses for the agency. Third, the agency should consider adopting electronic timekeeping system where employees clock in through biometric scanning or passcode as part of control of work schedules and shifts. Finally, employees and Unit supervisors who are found guilty of practices that have contributed to financial losses on the part of the agency should be subjected to disciplinary action in line with the agency’s policies and relevant labor laws.
In conclusion, the agency is facing a lawsuit from a part-time employee whose workman’s’ compensation claim after being injured when working was denied. The claim was denied on the premise that the employee was shift swapping when he got injured and not clocked in under his own name. Document analysis of the scenario shows that the current shift assignment and shift swapping policy has contributed to the issue. Some full-time employees have capitalized on gaps in the policy to obtain benefits for work they did not complete. As a result, the agency needs to adopt a new policy relating to work shift assignments and swapping.
References
Bowen, G.A. (2009). Document Analysis as a Qualitative Research Method. Qualitative Research Journal, 9(2), 27-40. DOI: 10.3316/QRJ0902027
Disselkamp, L. (Ed.). (2013). Workforce Asset Management Book of Knowledge. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons.
Golden, L. (2015, April 9). Irregular Work Scheduling and Its Consequences. Retrieved May 20, 2020, from https://www.epi.org/publication/irregular-work-scheduling-and-its-consequences/
Paychex. (2019, November 13). How to Manage and Minimize Trading Shifts at Work. Retrieved May 12, 2020, from https://www.paychex.com/articles/payroll-taxes/how-to-manage-and-minimize-trading-shifts-at-work