Job people-handbook-contradictions-and-stale-dates-report · revised 12 October 2026
Find where your staff handbook disagrees with itself or has gone out of date
One report listing where your handbook contradicts itself, cites expired dates or removed products, or names roles that have gone, each finding quoting its text and what it conflicts with.
You might be seeing
- Two sections give different notice periods or limits
- The handbook still names a product, office or role you no longer have
No passwords, keys, card details or admin invites needed to start.
What usually happened
A handbook grows by additions, so old and new rules sit side by side. Nobody reads it end to end, so contradictions and expired dates survive until someone relies on the wrong one.
Who it’s for: HR or office lead before a handbook refresh, or when a customer or insurer asks to see your policies.
Usually starts when: You are about to update the handbook, or someone has noticed two policies that say different things.
The result: You receive a table of the places we find where the handbook disagrees with itself, cites an expired date or removed product, or names a role that no longer exists. Each finding quotes the handbook text and what it conflicts with, and ends with a question for the owner. Nothing is rewritten.
Check whether this job fits
Answer these without sending files, logins or personal data. Nothing is submitted unless you choose to contact us.
What you get
- The findings table
- The planted-inconsistency test result
- A list of pages we could not read
- A one-page summary for the owner
Included
- One handbook of up to 80 pages as a copy you send
- A table with the quote, the location, why it conflicts and a question for the owner
- A seeded test: 15 inconsistencies your named person plants in a copy and keeps hidden from us
- Dates, figures, names and roles checked only against the handbook itself and a list of current facts you give us
Not included
- A check against employment law
- Statutory minimum rules
- Rewritten policy text
- Advice on what the handbook should say
How we know it’s done
Agreed with you before work starts. Each check produces evidence you keep.
In a copy where your named person planted 15 inconsistencies we did not see, the report finds at least 13 and lists none that are not real conflicts.
Evidence: The planted list beside the report.
Every finding in the real handbook quotes the handbook text and what it conflicts with, another place or a fact from your list, with page or section.
Evidence: The findings table, which your named person can check line by line.
Your named person opens 20% of the findings, at least 10, and confirms each is a real conflict or marks it a false finding.
Evidence: Your marked sample and the count of false findings.
Sign-off. Your named HR owner checks the sample and signs off in writing. The planted test is a smoke test, not a measured rate, and a false finding is counted and reported. Payment follows sign-off.
If it fails. If a test is not met, you do not pay for this fixed scope. We hand over what we found and agree whether to stop or re-quote; no surprise work.
When it fits, and when we stop
It fits when
- The handbook is text we can read, not scanned images
- You give a short list of current facts: roles, products, offices and figures that changed
- A named person owns the handbook and answers the questions we raise
We stop and tell you if
- You ask whether the handbook is legally compliant or what it should say
- More than a fifth of the pages cannot be read as text
- Nobody owns the handbook
What could go wrong
This job reads files you send and writes a report. It changes nothing in your systems, so there is nothing to revert. Our copies of your files are deleted when the job ends.
Scroll the table sideways to read it all.
| Risk | How we handle it |
|---|---|
| A real conflict is missed and the report looks complete. | The planted test shows how many of 15 known problems were found, and the report says it cannot prove none remain. |
| A finding is read as a legal opinion. | Each page says the report compares the handbook with itself and with your facts, and is not employment-law advice. |
| The handbook contains named cases or personal data. | Policy text only is accepted; names and case notes are removed before it is sent. |
A separate automated reviewer checks every output against the agreed test before hand-over. No person on our side reviews unless your agreement names one. Your named HR owner approves what is used.
How we deliver
We arrange the work and independent review, then show you the result against the agreed checks. You keep authority over your systems.
- Agree the handbook copy, the current-facts list and the report format
- Your named person plants 15 known inconsistencies in a copy and keeps the list
- Read the real handbook and list conflicts, expired dates and removed names
- Check the planted copy to see how many of the 15 were found
- Separate automated review that each finding quotes both places
- Hand over the table and the test result; delete our copies
This is a one-off job, not emergency cover or a subscription. We confirm eligibility, the total price, a start window and a delivery date before you accept, and an enquiry creates no charge or booking. Work starts only after agreed inputs, secure access and any needed permissions are in place.
Need to keep it working?
Discuss a monthly check that repeats this report when the handbook changes.
Ongoing work is separately scoped and quoted: no monitoring, response-time guarantee or automatic subscription is included in this job.
Explore an ongoing managed lane, or mention the responsibility you need in your enquiry.
What you can check
This is a new service. We have not delivered this job for a client yet.
Other ways to get this done
- Paste the handbook into a general chat tool and ask it for contradictions. It can give a free first list, but it will not tell you what it missed.
- Ask two people to read it with a highlighter. It is thorough and slow, and people skim the sections they know.
Questions
Is this an employment-law check?
No. It compares the handbook with itself and with the facts you give us. Statutory rules are for your HR adviser or solicitor.
Will it tell me what to write instead?
No. It asks the owner a question about each conflict. The owner decides.
Can a general chat tool do this for free?
It can give a first list. This job adds a planted test so you know how many problems it finds, and a quote for both places in every finding.
Send an enquiry
Send us
- The handbook page count and format
- When it was last changed
- Two places you already suspect disagree, quoted without names
Later, once you agree
- A copy of the handbook through an agreed secure route, and a second copy with 15 inconsistencies planted by your named person, the list kept by them until the test run
- Your list of current roles, products, offices and figures
- The name of the person who answers our questions
- The agreement that names the model provider, its country and how long it keeps data, settled before any real personal data is shared
You keep the handbook and decide what to change. We work on a copy you send, return a report and delete our copy when the job ends. The handbook should hold policy text, not named staff cases.
Email fallback: open your mail app
If website submission is unavailable, review and send the fallback email yourself. An email fallback is not a website receipt. Or write to hello@syntheticindustry.ai with “people-handbook-contradictions-and-stale-dates-report” as the subject.