If esteemed clientco asked you to post-date timesheet...

[Old Greg]

... to the end of September, completing it today and recording the final week of the month with the days you plan to work as if they've been worked, what would you do?

All because guy who signs it can only do it at a certain day and he's not going to sign for days that haven't been worked yet on a document with today's date. Of course, if I put the wrong date down that's OK as he's in the clear, or something.

Anyway, every month, all the other contractors follow this except me and I get a little ticking off.

It just doesn't seem right to falsify a document like this. I'm happy to put today's date on it with a projection of days that I will work and then invoice when I have done so.

Am I being precious? Thoughts?

[northernladuk]

I would just stick it in and if there is any deviation either issue a credit note or agree to do a day without recording it next month. I wouldn't get too hung about this unless you think they are going stab you in the back and complain about you messing with dates somewhere down the line. Get evidence from the guy signing he is happy to do this maybe.

[Old Greg]

I would just stick it in and if there is any deviation either issue a credit note or agree to do a day without recording it next month. I wouldn't get too hung about this unless you think they are going stab you in the back and complain about you messing with dates somewhere down the line. Get evidence from the guy signing he is happy to do this maybe.

Am I not then party to a conspiracy?

[northernladuk]

Am I not then party to a conspiracy?

Question is, am I part of said conspiracy?

[Old Greg]

Question is, am I part of said conspiracy?

Not at all. There may be no conspiracy, hence my framing of the question.

[TheFaQQer]

... to the end of September, completing it today and recording the final week of the month with the days you plan to work as if they've been worked, what would you do?

No. I either sign it with today's date on it (and therefore the days are a projection of when I plan to work), or get it signed and dated at the end of the month.

The risk I see is that if you sign it now with a future date, and then you (or the approver) aren't there that day, you could end up in an argument of "it's not possible for that to be valid, because XYZ was sick that day, so he can't have signed it, so this must be a fraudulent timesheet" kind of thing.

[Project Monkey]

Am I not then party to a conspiracy?

If there's no intent to defraud, then there's no problem.

[Project Monkey]

No. I either sign it with today's date on it (and therefore the days are a projection of when I plan to work), or get it signed and dated at the end of the month.

The risk I see is that if you sign it now with a future date, and then you (or the approver) aren't there that day, you could end up in an argument of "it's not possible for that to be valid, because XYZ was sick that day, so he can't have signed it, so this must be a fraudulent timesheet" kind of thing.

Not so if the OP and the timesheet approver are open about why it's being post dated. That is, for the approvers convenience. In which case, there is no intent to defraud.

[Old Greg]

No. I either sign it with today's date on it (and therefore the days are a projection of when I plan to work), or get it signed and dated at the end of the month.

The risk I see is that if you sign it now with a future date, and then you (or the approver) aren't there that day, you could end up in an argument of "it's not possible for that to be valid, because XYZ was sick that day, so he can't have signed it, so this must be a fraudulent timesheet" kind of thing.

Not so if the OP and the timesheet approver are open about why it's being post dated. That is, for the approvers convenience. In which case, there is no intent to defraud.

I agree there is no intent to defraud but it is still falsifying a doc IMO - not sure what the implications are of that. If they want a projection, they should accept it as such with today's date on it. What they really want is a projection that looks like it isn't a projection.

[TheFaQQer]

Not so if the OP and the timesheet approver are open about why it's being post dated. That is, for the approvers convenience. In which case, there is no intent to defraud.

Approver leaves the company. New approver audits what has been approved in the past, and finds that OG's timesheet was approved on a day when the approver was on holiday. New approver asks what happened and why.

Onus is now on OG to explain to someone who was not party to the arrangement what happened and why, and hope that the new broom accepts that. It's significantly easier to not be in the situation in the first place, than having to retrospectively prove that there was no intention to defraud.