UC1 · Step 5 of 5 — Recap

Maria Rivera · Staffing Clerk · Dept 3630 / Line 5

What just happened

In about 90 seconds of clicking, Maria:

Opened her default scope without navigating.
Spotted the only SHORT order on her line.
Added two employees to the team.
Saw the app validate against Kronos punches in real time.
Saved the assignment, which automatically informed the timekeeper, the supervisor's dashboard, and the downstream PLP/BI feed.

Today	With the new app
Maria writes on a paper staffing sheet.	Maria enters directly in the app.
Timekeeping re-keys the sheet hours later.	Nothing to re-key.
Punch/activity mismatches surface the next day.	Mismatches surface within seconds.
The supervisor asks Maria "how are we doing?"	The supervisor sees the same KPI in real time.
PLP/BI data depends on the timekeeper's pace.	PLP/BI poll picks it up on its next cycle.

Kronos still owns punches, schedules, pay codes, and meal/missing-punch exceptions. Maria's app reads from Kronos but does not rewrite it.
Maria's judgment is still the input. The app validates her decisions against the rules; it does not make the decisions for her.
The warning vs hard-fail behavior matches what was discussed in the June 4 transcript and the proposed solution brief.
The rollback path is unchanged. If pilot has to revert, Maria returns to the paper staffing sheet for the affected scope; no data migration is required.

Is Maria's scope picker right? Should the app default to her last-used scope, her assigned scope, or always require a fresh pick?
Is the SHORT / OK / UNITS / SPREAD status set the right vocabulary? What other statuses do staffing clerks need at a glance?
Is the warning vs hard-fail line correct? Should coverage gap escalate to a hard fail under any conditions (length, role, shift end)?
Is the Recent Activity panel the right place to show audit, or should audit live on a separate tab the timekeeper opens?