EVS LIVES MATTER

Modernizing Call-Out Procedures: Efficient on Paper, Risky in Practice.

On paper, the new QR-based call-out system looks modern and efficient. It creates a time-stamped submission. It sends a confirmation receipt. It feeds directly into a live Excel attendance tracker. From a documentation standpoint, that sounds organized and accountable.Modernization is not the problem. The problem is what happens when modernization removes options instead of expanding them.

Limited Leave Categories Shape the Record

The current form limits employees to a short list of selectable reasons: Sick, FMLA (use sick), FMLA (use vacation), Bereavement, Jury Duty, Tardy, and Left Early. Previously recognized categories such as Leave of Absence (LOA), Medical LOA, Educational Leave, Union Business, Industrial Injury or Workers’ Compensation, and Leave Without Pay are not available as selectable options. When a form automatically feeds a live attendance tracker, the dropdown menu becomes the official narrative. If a category cannot be selected, it effectively disappears from the data. What cannot be selected cannot be tracked accurately. If policy, including PPSM 2.210, allows leave without pay or alternative leave arrangements, then suggesting that accruals are required in order to use certain leave categories may mislead / misinform employees about their options. Employees are entitled to accurate information about their leave rights.

Technology-Dependent Reporting with No Alternative Options

While employees can technically email a supervisor or attempt to call a shift phone, voicemail has been disabled and the QR form feeds the official tracker. The form has become the controlling system of record. Compliance now requires a personal smartphone, a functioning camera, internet access, Duo authentication, an active Microsoft account, correct login credentials, and no account lockout. If an employee cannot access the system because their phone is broken, their data plan is inactive, their account is suspended, or they simply do not own a smartphone, there is no equivalent backup reporting channel that guarantees entry into the official tracker. In healthcare operations, alternative options are standard practice. Removing voicemail and consolidating reporting into a single technology-dependent system increases operational risk.

Personal Device Requirement and Business Expense Concerns If this system is the required method of reporting an absence, and compliance requires use of a personal device and data plan, then the question becomes whether that constitutes a necessary business expense. California Labor Code section 2802 requires employers to reimburse employees for necessary expenditures incurred in direct consequence of performing their duties. If employees must maintain a smartphone, data access, authentication applications, and account functionality in order to avoid discipline, the employer has effectively made personal technology part of compliance. If this is truly a necessary business expenditure, should it be reimbursed, stipended, or employer-provided? Shifting cost and device dependency onto hourly employees without reimbursement raises legitimate concerns.

Privacy and Security Implications Requiring Microsoft login on personal devices creates additional exposure. Employees may be forced to log into accounts on borrowed devices, sync credentials onto phones they do not own, or grant permissions that integrate work systems into personal devices. California Constitution Article I, Section 1 establishes a right to privacy. When personal devices become intertwined with employer systems as a condition of policy compliance, privacy and data security concerns arise. If employees must log into another person’s device to report an absence, credential exposure and data persistence risks are created.

Accessibility and Accommodation Under the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. section 12101 and following, and California’s Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code section 12940, employers must provide reasonable accommodation. If an employee has limited technological literacy, limited English proficiency, visual impairment, or other barriers to smartphone-based authentication, eliminating alternative reporting methods can create access issues. A resilient system accounts for the lowest common denominator of access.

Bargaining and Policy Considerations For represented employees, changes to reporting procedures that affect attendance tracking, discipline exposure, and leave coding may implicate bargaining obligations under the Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act, Government Code section 3560 and following. When voicemail is disabled and a single technology-based system becomes mandatory without alternative methods, that is not merely a cosmetic update. It is a structural change in working conditions.

Modernization Should Expand Access, Not Restrict It- Technology is not the problem. Efficiency is not the problem. The risk arises when leave categories are narrowed, accrual requirements are implied where alternatives exist, personal devices become mandatory, voicemail and redundancy are removed, and access depends on flawless technology. A modern reporting system should include backup channels, accurate leave coding, and equal access for employees regardless of personal device ownership. If a system is mandatory, it should be accessible.If it requires personal property, it should be reimbursed or employer-provided. If it affects discipline, it should be bargained.

Legal and Policy References

California Labor Code section 2802,California Constitution Article I, Section 1, Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. section 12101 et seq., California Fair Employment and Housing Act, Government Code section 12940, Higher Education Employer-Employee Relations Act, Government Code section 3560 et seq., UC PPSM 2.210 – Absence from Work

##DontBelieveTheHype