|
Minute 1 - Filling timesheet.
Minute 2 - Filling timesheet.
Minute 3 - Filling timesheet.
...
Minute N - Filling timesheet.
|
|
|
|
|
Yes. Just log the time spent logging in its own record.
When my former company issued a clena and sanitized desk policy I spent one hour in the morning and one hour in the evening cleaning my desk. When sheets hit the fan and there was need of all the working time available, I followed the letter of the law. Got so far as to dismount every single keyboard key and clean it one by one.
Policy went down the toilet quite quickly.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
den2k88 wrote: I spent one hour in the morning and one hour in the evening cleaning my desk
If you cleaned your desk before leaving every evening, what happened overnight that required you to clean it again first thing in the morning?
|
|
|
|
|
I followed the letter of the law.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
Gotcha. Do not discuss the logic of policies, or point out the lack thereof.
Been there, done that, learned that you have to pick your battles, and this is probably not one of them that's worth it.
Would anyone know any different if you didn't clean your desk in the morning?
|
|
|
|
|
In Norwegian courts, there is a basic principle saying that the law should be interpreted according to the intentions of the lawmaker. Most cases taken to High Court is on law interpretation, where this principle is followed. There, you cannot argue about the letter of the law, if it contradicts the lawmaker's intention.
If there is any grain of truth (I know that must be a rather small one...) in Hollywood movies depicting US courts, the letter has a much stronger position and the intention a correspondingly weaker position. Now I do not believe that Hollywood courts are like real life courts. Yet there may be a tiny little grain of truth to it.
|
|
|
|
|
In Italy it's a middle ground between them, because the interpretation power is held only by the legislator (aka the Parliament, or the local government body in case it's about a local regulament pertaining to them), and the magistrature, with limitation in this case: only our "Supreme Court" (Corte di Cassazione) may interpetate the law and their sentences are the only one which sets precedent. That's why Cassazione sentences are usually announced on many news outlet, because the last Cassazione sentence on one topic is pretty much the new definition of the law for that particular case - i.e. what constitutes defamation or mobbing, which insults can be liable of a lawsuit...
Usually if you respect the letter of the law in Italy it's enough, our laws are stupidly long and detailed to cover all the bases - they actually create all manners of loopholes, pitfalls, holes and contradictions.
GCS d--(d+) s-/++ a C++++ U+++ P- L+@ E-- W++ N+ o+ K- w+++ O? M-- V? PS+ PE- Y+ PGP t+ 5? X R+++ tv-- b+(+++) DI+++ D++ G e++ h--- r+++ y+++* Weapons extension: ma- k++ F+2 X
|
|
|
|
|
It's not about what you think is fair, it's about what the company needs to run its business.
If you're doing contract work and need to bill clients then you need fine grained reports so you can accurately bill.
If you're trying to debug processes and manage costs you need timesheets to understand where things are going off the rails and what bits to tackle first
If you're trying to keep an eye on employees to ensure they are actually working you need to have a good hard look at yourself and your operations.
We implement timesheets on very, very rare occasions in order to understand costs. Ultimately we need to know down to the 30 min mark, but we only need that for when someone is working on a specific client task. Someone may be doing a bunch of maintenance, or learning, or working on a new project, and that's fine. They then move on to a client specific task and for that we need the hours - but only for that.
So maybe you can negotiate a little better if you understand the need. Making it easier for employees (avoid garbage in / garbage out) and potentially improving the data for the manages could result in a win/win
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sometimes it helps to ask for the name and email address of the person who will analyze the information so that you can contact them in case you're unsure that you're giving them exactly what they require. There's a good chance that there is no such person, which makes management look as dumb as they really are for insisting that people waste their time on such nonsense. And if a name can't be provided, there's no point in providing the information, is there?
|
|
|
|
|
Woe is me! I've been on Codeproject for... 14 years (good grief) but admittedly only been posting messages for about 5 years I think. And yet the majority of my messages are marked for spam checking.
What is it with me? Is it the way I write?
I am a spam-likened message-leper! 
|
|
|
|
|
I'm pretty sure it just works that way until you have a certain number of points on the site.
|
|
|
|
|
Maybe a wee bit trollish? Maybe?
Perhaps don't be so prolific.
|
|
|
|
|
He posted a couple replies in the Insider News. They weren't trollish, so it seems to just be the safeguards Chris has in place for the instances where people have started posting crap after years of inactivity.
|
|
|
|
|
Except this message of yours, you mean.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah, except that one. 
But my another two message I posted afterwards were both spam-checked as I recall.
Ah, algorithms.
|
|
|
|
|
So...include the content of the message at the top of this thread as an extra paragraph to any new message you write...then watch the spam filter go all Nomad on itself...
|
|
|
|
|
|
I am not going to bother finding out why (I can guess). I am guilty of saying something inappropriate on occasion, but you are dealing with people that know what they are talking about (damn - that is now a subset of the users).
1. Stop and think before you respond.
2. Do not think you know more than they do.
* I have bin doing this for only about 30 years an still learning.
INTP
"Program testing can be used to show the presence of bugs, but never to show their absence." - Edsger Dijkstra
"I have never been lost, but I will admit to being confused for several weeks. " - Daniel Boone
|
|
|
|
|
Nah, humour aside for a moment that's not it. I think you might have guessed wrong.
For the avoidance of doubt, my messages aren't being deleted or complained about (well, as far as I know!). It's just that they are very often automatically marked for (manual?) spam checking. After they've been checked (by a human, I presume?) then they are passed as safe for viewing.
I was merely being mildly humorous in my OP.
|
|
|
|
|
John R. Shaw wrote: 2. Do not think you know more than they do.
That's OK for you, but since I absolutely 100% always not only know more but know better, I have to respond accordingly.
It's a burden I must bear - a sort of noblesse oblige.
| Ravings en masse^ |
|---|
| "The difference between genius and stupidity is that genius has its limits." - Albert Einstein | | "If you are searching for perfection in others, then you seek disappointment. If you seek perfection in yourself, then you will find failure." - Balboos HaGadol Mar 2010 |
|
|
|
|
|
From time to time the filters get angry with a user.
Blame the algorithm or the possible bad feeding when reporting spam.
You are not the first and I guess you won't be the last.
It is something temporary, things will get better soon.
M.D.V.
If something has a solution... Why do we have to worry about?. If it has no solution... For what reason do we have to worry about?
Help me to understand what I'm saying, and I'll explain it better to you
Rating helpful answers is nice, but saying thanks can be even nicer.
|
|
|
|
|
I reported this as spam just to get on the good side of the machine 
|
|
|
|
|
The spam filters adapt as the spam comes in. It's nothing personal, but each message of yours that is marked non-spam lessens the likelihood of future messages written in the same vein as being marked as spam.
The spam sniffer just needs to get your scent.
cheers
Chris Maunder
|
|
|
|
|
Chris Maunder wrote: The spam sniffer just needs to get your scent.
I'll stop wearing deodorant. Sorted.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
