Fairness readings computed on modeled data demonstrate the instrument, not a real audit result. more
Govern · people-affecting decision · HR9B
Access revocation on exit
Revokes system access on the leaving date. more
Who is accountable, and what the oversight actually is
Named, with the measure written out rather than implied by a role title.
Regulatory position
How this decision is classified and what the affected person can see.
Selection rate by cohort, by period
Impact ratio against the reference cohort. more
| Cohort | Reference |
|---|
Alarms on this decision point
Each with the action recorded against it and the person who owns it.
Appeals against this decision
Every contest recorded, with who reviewed it, how long they spent and what changed.
| Ref | Subject | Grounds | Routed to | Service level | Human time | Outcome | Evidence | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| APL-0013 | EMP-07740 employee · DE | Access was revoked four days before the agreed leaving date, blocking handover. | Yusuf Adeyemi Chief Technology Officer | 6 / 24 hr | 15 min | Overturned Termination date in the HR system had not been updated after an extension. more | IT1A-1020#1 | Closed |
The impact ratio is the cohort’s selection rate divided by the reference cohort’s. For a decision where being selected is the benefit, the threshold is four-fifths and a ratio below it is the alarm. For a decision where being selected is the harm, the test is inverted and a ratio above 1.25 is the alarm. Both are stated on the reading rather than left to the reader.
A reading is only computed when the cohort and the reference cohort each carry at least thirty people and at least five events. more
This decision runs in US, UK, DE, SG, AU. Local law shapes what may be measured: where a works council agreement or a local statute restricts cohort analysis, the exclusion is recorded in the monitoring status rather than silently applied.