Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Personnel Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Clark County magistrates address timekeeping changes after employee complaints about auto-lunch deduction and geofence
Summary
The fiscal court discussed a recent switch to an 8 a.m.–4 p.m. schedule, a geofence that limits clock-in/out to courthouse grounds, and an automatic one‑hour lunch deduction after employees raised concerns that auto-deductions and limited correction options misstate work hours.
Clark County magistrates discussed changes to employee scheduling and timekeeping after Treasurer Mary raised formal concerns that a new geofenced clock-in system and an automatic one-hour lunch deduction have produced inaccurate pay statements.
Janet, identified in the meeting as the county HR director, explained the county placed a geofence around the courthouse so employees must clock in and out on-site; officials also set standard work hours at 8 a.m. to 4 p.m. with an automatic one-hour lunch deduction. HR presented the change as an effort to standardize timekeeping and address audit and staffing issues after the court experienced varied schedules and inconsistent clocking practices.
Treasurer Mary told the court she had documented her hours and said the automatic lunch deduction has prevented her pay records from reflecting actual hours worked. "Not 1 time have I ever been late," Mary said, citing a six-month record she presented to the court. She asked for a mechanism to correct time records and for an opportunity to resolve the dispute without disciplinary escalation.
Magistrates and staff agreed to convene a meeting among HR, the judge and the affected employees to review the geofence, auto-deduction and correction procedures. Court members emphasized that exceptions to the 8–4 schedule could be handled if approved in writing by the judge and HR, and they asked HR to clarify how employees can correct time entries and how automatic deductions will be applied in practice.
The court recorded the discussion in open session and directed HR to work with the judge and the affected employees to seek a resolution and report back to the fiscal court.
