demo personaViewing as Mei Ling · payroll desk (1C) · she checks, she never retypes
7 to decide · 2 one-taps
What was planned vs what actually happened. Confirm it · fix it · or ask someone — never a blank form. Keys: J/K move · Enter confirm
Overtime beyond schedule — Devi Krishnan
UP-1
Planned
Scheduled shift 09:00–18:00 (8h), Sun 12 Jul
What happened
Clock events show 09:00–20:00 · 8h + 2h OT (EV-1092, stamp ENG-2214)
The difference
2h unauthorised OT · OT multiplier 1.5× ⚑ applies if confirmed
Clock-in 09:00 · gate cameraClock-out 20:00 · supervisor zoneSite confirmed by Ah Hock
Late-arriving evidence — meal claim after cutoff
UC-1
Planned
Evidence closes 15 Jul 18:00
What happened
RM 32 meal claim (photo receipt) landed 16 Jul 09:12
The difference
Past cutoff — cannot enter this run silently
Receipt photo · OCR total RM 32.00Retro-delta preview: +RM 32 next run
Suspect evidence — low-confidence clock photo
UC-4
Planned
Capture confidence ≥ 0.80 required
What happened
Ravi Chandran clock-in photo scored 0.41 (blurred, seal intact)
The difference
Below threshold — needs a human eye or corroboration
Photo preview · confidence 0.41Integrity seal: intactNo corroborating gate event
Possible duplicate worker record
UI-3
Planned
One Subject per person (IC/passport-keyed)
What happened
"Devi K." vs "Devi Krishnan" · passport match 97% · same phone
The difference
Below the 99% auto-merge bar — human decides
Field diff: name spelling onlyEmail anchor: identicalPassport N-4482913 on both
SOCSO submission rejected
UX-2
Planned
July filing accepted by PERKESO
What happened
File bounced: format error on 2 rows
The difference
Obligation sits honestly at remitted-unconfirmed — not an error state, but aging
Rejection reason: row 14, 31 invalid wage bandObligation state: remitted-unconfirmed · day 3
Client disputes attendance — Devi, 11 Jul
UB-9
Planned
Client claims worker absent (deduction requested)
What happened
Clock events + Ah Hock confirmation show present, night shift 22:00–06:00
The difference
Evidence contradicts the claim — pay must not silently change
Clock-in 22:01 · clock-out 06:03Supervisor confirmation on recordClient email claim attached
Same receipt sent twice — Devi's Grab claim
UC-3
Planned
One receipt pays once (claim CL-401, RM 24, already approved)
What happened
The same Grab e-receipt arrived again as claim CL-403
The difference
Held automatically — nothing pays twice; a human decides what it was
Receipt match: 100% (same trip id, same total)CL-401 status: approved · RM 24 paidCL-403 status: held
▸ autoNight premium auto-applied — Devi, 11 Jul
▸ autoMeal allowance matched — Ravi, 12 Jul