Every minute counts

MT. PLEASANT — Henry County Human Resource Rep. Paul Greufe provided an update on claims of fraudulent time sheets to the Henry County Board of Supervisors at their Thursday, April 25 meeting.

  Buy Photo

Back in January, Supervisor Marc Lindeen brought up concerns about employees receiving days off not accounted for on time sheets as department heads expressed their dissatisfaction with the board’s decision to withhold pay raises for the 2024-2025 fiscal year.

After these allegations came to light, Greufe went to work to investigate the allegations which related to two unidentified county departments on a specific date in December 2023. Greufe’s initial investigative findings revealed discrepancies in time-worked documentation for two exempt employees and six non-exempt employees between the two departments.

“Now, it is important to know that exempt employees, by law, they’re paid a salary to do their job over the course of the year and their salary or their timecard does not change based on the number of hours worked,” Greufe commented. “For exempt employees, if their timecards aren’t accurate, it doesn’t impact their wage.”

This investigation consisted of a review of timecards from these two departments and a review of camera footage determining when employees entered and exited their general work areas on the specific date in December.

“It is important to note that the camera footage doesn’t actually show the employee working, but only shows when they arrived and when they left their general work areas,” Greufe stated. “In addition, any work performed outside of their general work area would not be documented.”

Greufe’s report to the board states that two of the three exempt employees investigated documented working 7.5 hours on the day in question. One of the two was on-site in their general work area for 7.12 hours and the other was on-site in their general work area for 4.92 hours. The third exempt employee documented on their timecard that they were absent the entire day and used accrued leave.

While discrepancies will not impact these employee wages, Greufe commented that accurate timecards would be preferred practice.

According to Greufe, non-exempt employee timecards do directly affect their pay.

All six non-exempt employees documented 7.5 hours worked on the day in question, however, none of the timecards matched this information. According to the review of camera footage, the employees were in their general work areas for the following amounts of time: 7.28 hours, 7.33 hours, 8.38 hours, 2.92 hours, and two did not report to work at all. Geufe commented that those working over the designated 7.5 hours may have simply arrived early, but the investigative tools during this phase could not determine that definitively.

After obtaining this data, Greufe continued his investigation with interviews of the department heads of these specific department heads.

“In talking to one department head, they admitted that the time was wrong, it was inaccurate, that they had directed their employees to document that they had worked a full day, but knowing that they really didn't,” Greufe informed the supervisors. “And so, one department had stated they directed their employees to document a full day of work, but knowingly allowed one employee to work fewer than three hours and allowed the other two employees not to report to work at all.”

“The other department had stated that they weren't aware that each day of the timecard needed to be accurate, as long as the final workweek total was accurate,” Greufe continued. “So their thought was, you know our concern primarily is making sure that the employees are working their total number of hours per week. As long as that's accurate. We're not as concerned as to the daily hours.”

According to Greufe, this department head also allows employees to work on a more flexible “hybrid” schedule. Given that answer, Greufe further investigated the whole pay period to see if in fact the total number of weekly hours were met.

“But what I’ll tell you is, given the limitations of that audit and the ability to allow employees to work remotely, it’s difficult to determine an outcome without further investigation,” Greufe stated.

Given the nature of the allegations, Greufe contacted Henry County Sheriff Rich McNamee who then contacted the Division of Criminal Investigation to decide how to proceed further. At this time, however, no one is being accused of fraud or taking part in any criminal activity.

“In my experience and understanding, this board wants to make sure that any kind of allegation like this is fully reviewed and taken to their logical conclusion no matter where they may lead,” Greufe stated.

According to Greufe, the big picture goal of the investigation moving forward is to determine what, if anything, happened and to make sure a situation like this does not happen again.

“If confirmed, these types of actions can lead to further allegations of IPERS fraud, tax fraud, workers’ compensation fraud, Social Security fraud, and the violation of Fair Labor Standards Act,” Greufe said. “Now, I have worked with employers who will take steps to determine if criminal charges are warranted as well. So, once we start going down this road, it gets pretty serious pretty quickly.”

Comments: AnnaMarie.Ward@southeastiowaunion.com