Government must work with mandatory fingerprint attendance system

THE fingerprint system uses biometric fingerprints. In simple terms, it’s a biometric time-tracking system designed for fairness and accountability in various professions.

- 

Introduction

Scanners can record their attendance at workplaces or institutions. Instead of just signing a register or calling out names, employees need to scan their fingerprints to verify their presence. The goal is to prevent proxy attendance (someone else signing in for you). This ensures accurate records of who is there and for how long.

It also boosts accountability, especially in public institutions where taxpayer money is involved. Additionally, it can help (i) reduce absenteeism, (ii) reduce false overtime claims, and (iii) reduce misuse of public funds. In short, it’s a biometric time-tracking system created for fairness and accountability across professions. This system is used in other countries, such as India, Malaysia, and New Zealand.

What the workers are opposing

The postal workers are protesting the implementation of a new mandatory fingerprint attendance system, especially for administrative and accounting staff. The unions argue that this system is unfairly penalising staff, especially when operational realities aren't considered. Their demand for withdrawal comes alongside other grievances like inadequate overtime pay, staff vacancies, transportation issues, and salary increments.

According to the Postmaster General, the fingerprint system was introduced to curb abuses, such as overtime claims without proper attendance logs. Audits revealed many employees drawing salaries and overtime without using fingerprint scanners. Instead, they were signing attendance books, which allowed manipulation. Given the above, the system aims to enforce accountability and prevent irregularities at locations like the Central Mail Exchange, which had significant misuse of attendance recordings.