'Damning' CCTV footage reveals time card deception

Cases

'Damning' CCTV footage reveals time card deception

A security worker who was sacked for falsifying time records has agreed CCTV footage of the incident was 'quite damning'.

A security worker who was sacked for falsifying time records has agreed CCTV footage of the incident was 'quite damning'.

Indeed, had he been shown the footage earlier, the worker told the Fair Work Commission "I doubt I'd be here".

Background


Mr R was employed as an armoured vehicle operator by Prosegur, a large multinational company.

He was dismissed for serious misconduct after he clocked on another employee for work and did not record a meal break.

Clocking-on incident


CCTV footage showed Mr R clocking on at work at 6.27am on 22 January. Three minutes later, the footage shows him inserting a second card in the time clock, which allegedly belonged to his colleague JB.

Mr R claimed he had been stressed about an alteration to his usual run, and that had caused him to make a 'stupid mistake'. He said he thought he had clocked on much earlier than 6.27am and had inserted his card again to register the correct shift start time.

He denied that he had knowingly used JB's card or that he had known JB was running late. JB did not clock himself on when he arrived at work.

Mr R also pointed out that he had 'confrontational history' with the person who raised the time card issue.

'Nicest toilets'


It was also alleged that Mr R took an unrecorded meal break with JB while attending a shopping centre for a delivery/collection. Despite filling out 'trace and track' data showing they were at a job from 9.20am to 10.08am, the men actually spent 26 minutes taking a toilet and drink break.

Mr R explained the pair had stopped at a loading dock away from their next job because they wanted to visit "the nicest toilets in the shopping centre". He argued he was entitled to go to the toilet or to get a drink during his shift, outside of a defined meal break, and he presumed there was no strict time limit on such activities. He likened it to a 'smoko' break.

He also pointed out that it was JB who recorded them as having started the shopping centre job at 9.20am.

The commission heard that Mr R had added an extra 30 minutes to his time card for that day on the basis he hadn't taken a lunch break.

Decision


Commissioner Hunt said the toilet/drink break had been 'excessive', but it would be unfair to dismiss Mr R on that issue alone.

However, she had "no hesitation" in concluding the time card incident was a deliberate act, and was a valid reason for dismissal.

She noted Mr R had 20 years' service and the agreement that covered him was clear that dishonesty or theft, or falsification of worksheets, could constitute serious misconduct.

Read the judgment


PR v Prosegur Australia Pty Ltd T/A Prosegur (U2019/2291) [2019] FWC 4629









 
Post details