No More Pseudo-Overtime

Pseudo-Overtime by Employee Monitor System

XYZ* (name changed to protect customer privacy) has been in business for over 60 years. The company’s headquarters and offices are located throughout the United States and employ more than 650 people. The business provides insurance for life, health, dental, accidents, and temporary disability. Reducing overtime costs was a top priority for the corporate finance department and a decision was made to introduce employee tracking software.


XYZ management realized that employee overtime claims were becoming excessive. In the event of a traffic accident, insurance agents are required to associate the location of the accident with overtime (regardless of the time of day), which seemed reasonable. XYZ employees were suspected of receiving fake checks for overtime, and monitoring software seemed like the best solution to save the company’s finances.

Decision-making process

The company’s management decided to implement an automated personnel monitoring mechanism. After comparing the licensing terms of most of the personnel monitoring software available in the market, one of the managers approached the company to learn more about the monitoring software. Management felt that the personnel monitoring software report was comprehensive and consistent with XYZ’s primary objectives.


XYZ purchased licenses for two servers to monitor employees in two departments, approximately 250 people in total. The number of monitoring software licenses requested corresponded to the number of Terminal/Citrix servers (if selected under the server license type). It took one month to monitor the surveyed population and two weeks to analyze the collected data.

The result of the introduction of the system was better than expected.

According to the reports, of the workers who requested overtime pay

  • 70% were using their computers during work hours for non-work-related purposes (social media, non-insurance-related websites).
  • 15% were in “idle” mode after logging in (possible distractions such as coffee breaks or talking with colleagues).
  • 5% claimed overtime for hours not worked.
  • The 10% of overtime claimed is reasonable and justified.

Results/implementation of the solution

Prior to the implementation of the employee tracking software, approximately 160 of the 250 employees were claiming overtime each month. A detailed analysis confirmed that 30 employees were entitled to overtime based on the monitoring software reports (which were not included in the downtime reports or identified as active social media users). This saved XYZ employees approximately $4,000 per month in phantom overtime pay.

About Author

Sarah Noah Liam is a 28-year-old Software Management person who enjoys programming, ems software, and employee work monitoring software. She has a post-graduate degree in Computer science. She was raised in a happy family home with two loving parents.


Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here