AUDIT PLAN

Bgilber

Sujets

• management

Informations

• Publié par: Naphug
• Nombre de lectures: 35
• Langue: English

Extrait

R

EVIEW

P

LAN

Sick Leave Usage

September 2006

R

EVIEW

P

URPOSE

The purpose of this review is to determine how agencies are using leave codes to report and track

protected leave, compare state agencies’ sick leave usage to the national average as well as to prior

data from agencies, and determine how sick leave is being managed by state agencies.

R

EVIEW

S

COPE

The review team will identify the percentage of wages paid for non-protected sick leave in comparison to

the total compensation for each Executive Branch agency (excluding Lottery, Treasury, and Secretary of

State).

Protected sick leave is leave taken under Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA), Oregon Family

Leave Act (OFLA), or Workers’ Compensation.

The review team will identify state agencies whose non-

protected sick leave usage rate is either above or below the 2% national average for state and local

government.

The review team will examine payroll records to ensure sick leave used by an employee

was coded appropriately and identify sick leave usage trends for each agency.

R

EFERENCES

Department of Labor (DOL) National Average of Sick Leave usage

.

HRSD State Policy 60.000.01 – Sick Leave with Pay

states, in relevant part, “Sick

leave with pay is an

accrued benefit that is granted to eligible employees to provide time off from work for personal and family

illness or injury…. An employee may use accrued sick leave with pay…for personal or a family member’s

illness…or any period of absence from employment qualifying as family or medical leave under HRSD

State Policy 60.000.15, Family Medical Leave.”

HRSD State Policy 60.000.15 – Family and Medical Leave

states, in relevant part, “an appointing

authority shall assure employees are aware of and are granted entitlements for taking family and medical

leave, in accordance with provisions of: Federal Family and Medical Act (FMLA)…Oregon Family Leave

Act (OFLA)….”

Oregon Accounting Manual Policy Number 45.07.00.PO

states, in relevant part, “This policy

establishes standards of accountability

and internal control

to ensure that all time records are

appropriately reviewed and approved by agency management.”

Collective Bargaining Agreements

– articles related to utilization of sick leave and protected leave.

R

EVIEW

E

LEMENTS AND

M

ETHODOLOGY

Overall Methodology – Data from the Oregon State Payroll System (OSPS) DataMart and the Position

and Personnel DataBase (PPDB) will be used to identify employees who have used non-protected sick

leave between July 1, 2005, and June 30, 2006.

To calculate an average for each agency, the review

team will look at what percentage of the total compensation is non-protected sick leave.

Total

compensation includes the base salary plus all OPE costs.

The review team will identify agencies that appear to have a non-protected sick leave percentage greater

than the national average of 2.0%.

The review team will review the agency that appears to have the

highest sick leave usage rate and from the remaining agencies select a random sample (20%).

HR Audit Program

Page 1 of 3

September 2006

The review team will identify agencies that appear to have a non-protected sick leave percentage lower

than the national average of 2.0%.

The review team will review the agency that appears to have the

lowest sick leave usage rate and from the remaining agencies select a random sample (20%).

1.

Element – identify if protected sick leave is being coded correctly on timesheets and compare to

prior agency data.

Element Risk Assessment* = 2 (Public Perception, Stewardship of Public Funds)

Methodology – The data will be reviewed to identify employees, in the selected agencies, that

used more than 24 hours of sick leave in a month.

The review team will contact the affected

agencies for more information to determine if the sick leave was coded correctly.

2.

Element – compare state’s unprotected sick leave usage to national average using current and

prior data.

Element Risk Assessment* = 2 (Public Perception, Stewardship of Public Funds)

Methodology – The data will be used to calculate the percentage of total compensation state

agencies paid for non-protected sick leave and compare that percentage to the national average

using current and prior data.

3.

Element – gather information on current agency sick leave policy and practices.

Element Risk Assessment* = 2 (Public Perception, Stewardship of Public Funds)

Methodology – Send survey to all agencies to find out how each agency administers sick leave.

Identify factors that may result in higher than average sick leave rates and identify best

management practices that may result in lower than average sick leave usage rates.

Compare to

prior agency survey responses.

S

YSTEM

D

ATA

S

OURCES

9

Report produced from data on the OSPS DataMart and PPDB.

For each agency, it will include the

following data fields:

−

Agency Number

−

Leave Type Code

−

RDC Code

−

County Code

−

Employee Name

−

Gross Pay Amount

−

Employee Identification Number

−

Pay Period Ending

−

Authorization Number

−

Pay Type Code

−

Position Number

−

Pay Type Description

−

Position Representation Code

−

Payroll Distribution Code

−

Position FLSA Eligible for Overtime

−

Leave Hours Lost

−

Employee Representation Code

−

Leave Hours Advanced

−

Employee FLSA Eligible for Overtime

−

Transaction Code

−

Employee Recognized Service Date

−

Age

−

Base Pay Rate

−

Gender

−

Part-time/Full-time Code

−

Ethnicity

−

Classified Code

HR Audit Program

Page 2 of 3

September 2006

*E

LEMENT

R

ISK

A

SSESSMENT

(ERA)

E

LEMENT

R

ISK

A

SSESSMENT

(ERA)

1

Potential for

significant

monetary impact resulting from penalties or legal action or loss of productivity.

There could also be the potential for a significant adverse impact on the health, welfare and/or safety of

those served, or the public’s perception of state government resulting from inappropriate expenditures

and/or poor stewardship of public funds.

Corrective actions assure compliance within

30 days

and

follow-up actions may include further analysis of the audit subject and/or agency human resource

management practice application.

2

Potential for

moderate

monetary impact resulting from penalties or legal action or loss of productivity.

There could also be the potential for a moderate adverse impact on the health, welfare and/or safety of

those served, or the public’s perception of state government resulting from inappropriate expenditures

and/or poor stewardship of public funds.

Corrective actions assure compliance within

90 days

and

follow-up actions may include further analysis of the audit subject and/or agency human resource

management practice application.

3

Potential for

relatively low

monetary impact resulting from penalties or legal action or loss of

productivity.

The practice does not constitute a best management practice and may cause minor

disruptions and inconveniences to others or the workflow.

Corrective actions are in the form of

recommendations for future practices

or for agency to receive training in the human resource

management area where deficiency is observed and may include further analysis of the audit subject

and/or agency human resource management practice application.

For more information on Element Risk Assessments, please go to the HR Audit Program webpage

at:

www.hr.das.state.or.us/hrsd/audit

.

You can view the Corrective Action Plan and Follow-up

Procedures Guidelines under “Program Documents.”

HR Audit Program

Page 3 of 3

September 2006