Dear Seniors,
I want to know whether for monitoring the hours worked in a factory, is it required to have the signature of the workman twice - in time as well as out time, or having just 1 signature at in time is sufficient. Is there any legal requirement which asks to take signature only once or twice? How prevalent is the practice of taking signature both at in time and out time?
From India, Bangalore
I want to know whether for monitoring the hours worked in a factory, is it required to have the signature of the workman twice - in time as well as out time, or having just 1 signature at in time is sufficient. Is there any legal requirement which asks to take signature only once or twice? How prevalent is the practice of taking signature both at in time and out time?
From India, Bangalore
It all depends on the company rules. When I was working in India, in a defense establishment, I had to sign in when entering work. However, in a factory, I had to clock in and out both times. In the UK, I had to clock in and out when working in an organization, where even managers had to clock in and out. However, in academia, I neither signed nor clocked in and out.
However, I think it's good practice to sign both in and out as there will be a record. For example, in an organization when there was a fire, people did not know who was in the building. In another case, the security locked the building for the night, and there was a person still in the building. It took quite a while to contact security to get out of the building.
Kindly see [BBC News - Should workers be forced to clock out to smoke?](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11665813) and [Making Hourly Employees Clock Out When They Leave The Building Minnesota](http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?t=282359)
I do not know the rules in India now.
From United Kingdom
1639However, I think it's good practice to sign both in and out as there will be a record. For example, in an organization when there was a fire, people did not know who was in the building. In another case, the security locked the building for the night, and there was a person still in the building. It took quite a while to contact security to get out of the building.
Kindly see [BBC News - Should workers be forced to clock out to smoke?](http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-11665813) and [Making Hourly Employees Clock Out When They Leave The Building Minnesota](http://www.laborlawtalk.com/showthread.php?t=282359)
I do not know the rules in India now.
From United Kingdom
Dear Nash,
Thanks for the inputs. It is good to know that it is considered a good practice and followed in certain parts. Information in the Indian context would be helpful, since I am based out of India.
Regards,
Kanishk
From India, Bangalore
Thanks for the inputs. It is good to know that it is considered a good practice and followed in certain parts. Information in the Indian context would be helpful, since I am based out of India.
Regards,
Kanishk
From India, Bangalore
Dear Kanishak,
No law as such prevents you from asking workmen to register their In and Out time. If you are a "Factory," the "Standing Order Act" is applicable to you. There is a provision to mention such operational level (day-to-day) practices/rules, Dos and Don'ts in the Standing Order. Entry, exit, attendance, leave rules, misconduct, punishment, disciplinary proceedings, etc., are prescribed in standing orders, and all workmen are to be governed by it. The Factory might have its own "certified standing orders," and in the absence of its own certified standing orders, "Model standing orders" are applicable.
Regards,
Shailesh Parikh
Vadodara, Gujarat
99 98 97 10 65
From India, Mumbai
No law as such prevents you from asking workmen to register their In and Out time. If you are a "Factory," the "Standing Order Act" is applicable to you. There is a provision to mention such operational level (day-to-day) practices/rules, Dos and Don'ts in the Standing Order. Entry, exit, attendance, leave rules, misconduct, punishment, disciplinary proceedings, etc., are prescribed in standing orders, and all workmen are to be governed by it. The Factory might have its own "certified standing orders," and in the absence of its own certified standing orders, "Model standing orders" are applicable.
Regards,
Shailesh Parikh
Vadodara, Gujarat
99 98 97 10 65
From India, Mumbai
Dear Kanishk,
As rightly said by my friends and members, it all depends on the Model Standing Orders you have certified for your company. Also, the punching/registering of in and out time of workers gives you the absenteeism report and the productivity provided by each worker at the end of the day. The attendance report of the workers will also help you to calculate per man-hours and per man output for the daily production report.
In short, the punching/registering of workers' attendance is mandatory and essential for generating various reports and also during the time of wage settlement.
From India, Mumbai
As rightly said by my friends and members, it all depends on the Model Standing Orders you have certified for your company. Also, the punching/registering of in and out time of workers gives you the absenteeism report and the productivity provided by each worker at the end of the day. The attendance report of the workers will also help you to calculate per man-hours and per man output for the daily production report.
In short, the punching/registering of workers' attendance is mandatory and essential for generating various reports and also during the time of wage settlement.
From India, Mumbai
Dear Mr. Kanishk,
To my knowledge, there is no statutory provision in the Factories Act to seek an employee's signature when they report to or leave the factory. The biometric attendance recording system is equivalent to an employee registering his signature. As you are aware, in a biometric attendance system, the employee needs to record his fingerprint on a device that captures his attendance. This will also ensure foolproof attendance monitoring. The erstwhile barcode recording system was not foolproof in the sense that yet another employee could also swipe the card on behalf of his colleague. The biometric attendance recording device can also be linked to payroll using software applications. A host of reports such as leave recording, late-coming reports, early-out reports, and late-sitting reports can be generated through this.
M.V. Kannan
From India, Madras
To my knowledge, there is no statutory provision in the Factories Act to seek an employee's signature when they report to or leave the factory. The biometric attendance recording system is equivalent to an employee registering his signature. As you are aware, in a biometric attendance system, the employee needs to record his fingerprint on a device that captures his attendance. This will also ensure foolproof attendance monitoring. The erstwhile barcode recording system was not foolproof in the sense that yet another employee could also swipe the card on behalf of his colleague. The biometric attendance recording device can also be linked to payroll using software applications. A host of reports such as leave recording, late-coming reports, early-out reports, and late-sitting reports can be generated through this.
M.V. Kannan
From India, Madras
Dear Shailesh, Ankit, Kannan,
Thank you for the response. As per the comments, model standing orders have the final say in specific matters. The biometric system faces problems in factories where the workers handle chemicals - their imprints are erased due to handling of chemicals. Usually, it is seen that for monitoring in and out time of contractual workers, a register is maintained in which time entry is made by the security guy, and the worker's signature/thumb imprint is taken. This, at times, leaves a scope of exit time being filled later on to show an 8/9-hour shift whereas exit time may be different. One of the ways to address this could be taking a signature both while going out and coming in. While this is not a foolproof method, it at least gives a scope that the worker acknowledges the time entered. My query is, does any act/model standing order require this to be done? Since this kind of monitoring is usually not liked and challenged, stating the law does not require it. I want to know if the practice of taking a signature both at in time and out time has a backing of any legal requirement.
From India, Bangalore
Thank you for the response. As per the comments, model standing orders have the final say in specific matters. The biometric system faces problems in factories where the workers handle chemicals - their imprints are erased due to handling of chemicals. Usually, it is seen that for monitoring in and out time of contractual workers, a register is maintained in which time entry is made by the security guy, and the worker's signature/thumb imprint is taken. This, at times, leaves a scope of exit time being filled later on to show an 8/9-hour shift whereas exit time may be different. One of the ways to address this could be taking a signature both while going out and coming in. While this is not a foolproof method, it at least gives a scope that the worker acknowledges the time entered. My query is, does any act/model standing order require this to be done? Since this kind of monitoring is usually not liked and challenged, stating the law does not require it. I want to know if the practice of taking a signature both at in time and out time has a backing of any legal requirement.
From India, Bangalore
Looking for something specific? - Join & Be Part Of Our Community and get connected with the right people who can help. Our AI-powered platform provides real-time fact-checking, peer-reviewed insights, and a vast historical knowledge base to support your search.