When a timesheet does not add up: investigating fairly before you act

Innocent causes first

Most timesheets that look padded turn out to be wrong for ordinary reasons. Before you speak to anyone, check whether one of these explains it:

• A forgotten clock-out or a timer left running, which shows as one long day with nothing in it.
• A swapped shift that was agreed between staff but never reached the roster.
• Travel between sites, which is work time when the job requires it, but is often logged against the wrong job.
• Rounding, where a rule in the system or a habit of writing "8:00 to 4:30" does not match the door records to the minute.
• The wrong day or week, such as hours keyed into next week's sheet, or work done from home in the evening.
• A correction made after the week was sent, for a good reason that nobody wrote down.

The change history is the quickest test. If the entry was changed after it was sent, when and from what tells you most of the story. Our article on approving and correcting timesheets sets out how corrections should be made and kept, which is also what you will be measured against if the record was never clear.

If an innocent cause fits, the outcome is a correction with the employee's knowledge, and perhaps a reminder of how hours should be recorded. Nothing else is needed.

A fair process: the section 103A test

If a concern survives that check, it becomes an allegation, and the process matters as much as the answer. Section 103A says a dismissal or other action is judged on whether what you did, and how you did it, was what a fair and reasonable employer could have done in all the circumstances at the time. The Employment Relations Authority or court must consider whether you:

1. sufficiently investigated the allegation, having regard to your resources;
2. raised your concerns with the employee before taking action;
3. gave them a reasonable opportunity to respond; and
4. genuinely considered their explanation.

Since 21 February 2026, it must also consider whether the employee obstructed any of those steps, and it must not find a dismissal unjustifiable solely because of process defects that did not result in the employee being treated unfairly. That is not a licence to cut corners: a defect that did treat them unfairly still counts.

Employment New Zealand's guidance on investigations turns this into practice. Tell the employee the details of the allegation, in writing, with the dates and hours in question. Give them all the documents you are relying on, and summaries of what any witnesses said, before the meeting. Tell them they can bring a support person or representative, at any stage. Take careful notes, ask them to confirm the notes, and do not reach a view before you have heard them. If dismissal is possible, say so in the letter, because section 4(1A)(c) requires access to the information and a chance to comment before a decision likely to end someone's employment.

Evidence: the hours record, its history and privacy limits

The strongest evidence is usually the hours record itself: what was entered, when it was marked sent, and every change after that, with the earlier figures. Set it beside records the business already keeps for its own purposes, such as job sheets, client sign-in books, delivery records or emails sent at a given time, and look for a pattern rather than a single day.

The Privacy Act 2020 limits how far that goes. Information privacy principle 10 says information obtained for one purpose may not be used for another unless an exception applies, such as a directly related purpose, so think before using, for example, security camera footage collected to protect property as a check on someone's hours, and take advice if you are unsure. Principle 4 requires information to be collected fairly and without unreasonable intrusion. The Privacy Commissioner says covert recording of employees is generally unfair and should be used only in limited circumstances, with legal advice. If you are thinking of covert monitoring because of a suspicion, take that advice before you start, not after. Our article on clock-in apps, GPS and biometrics covers location and scanner data.

Remember the employee has rights to the same records. Under section 130(2) of the Employment Relations Act, they can ask for their wages and time record from the last 6 years, and you must give it immediately. Principle 6 gives them access to other personal information you hold about them. Share what you rely on.

Outcomes: correction, warning or dismissal

The outcome should match what you find, and what the employee says:

• Correction only for an honest mistake, with the record fixed and the pay put right in either direction.
• A warning for careless recording that was not dishonest, with clear expectations for the future.
• Dismissal where you conclude, after a fair process, that hours were deliberately claimed for time not worked. Employment New Zealand lists theft or fraud and dishonesty as examples of potential serious misconduct, but the response must still be appropriate and reasonable in the circumstances, taking account of the employee's explanation, their record and how you have treated similar cases.

Since 21 February 2026, if the Authority or court finds that the employee's own action contributed to the situation and amounts to serious misconduct, it cannot award any remedy (section 123B). That raises the stakes on getting the finding right, because it rests on what you can show the employee did. Our article on personal grievances explains how a challenge works.

Getting money back is a separate step, and the usual rules apply. Section 4 of the Wages Protection Act 1983 requires wages to be paid in full, and section 5 allows a deduction only with the employee's written consent. Section 6, which allows recovery without consent for a period of unauthorised absence, needs notice usually by the next pay day and recovery within 2 months, so it rarely fits a discrepancy found weeks later. Agree repayment in writing, or, as Employment New Zealand suggests, consider mediation if you cannot. A deduction made without consent can be recovered from you for 6 years (section 11).

Prevention: clear expectations and records people keep themselves

Most disputes about hours start with an unclear rule. Write down what counts as work time, including travel between sites and work done away from the workplace, how breaks are recorded, any rounding rule, when timesheets are due and how a mistake is corrected. Then make the record easy to keep accurately: entered on the day, by the person who worked the hours, with any later change kept beside the original.

Team timesheets from jobtracker.co.nz is built that way. Each person logs their own hours, by day or with a timer, and chooses to share the hours they log for you; when they mark a week sent, any later change shows the earlier figures and when it changed. A manager cannot edit anyone's hours. Approvals are optional: turned on, an Approver, an Admin or the Owner approves each period or sends it back with a reason, and nobody approves their own time. It does not track location or take screenshots. It costs $6.99 a seat a month, GST included, for at least three seats.

Start every question about hours from the record