Series 2 · Employment compliance

The Workforce Audit Calendar

Q32Four modelsSix blind pairingsMaterial-outcome scoring

Why this result mattered

Functional tie

The principal comparison placed Qwen 3.8 and Claude under concealed A/B labels.

Both answers direct Arclight to produce the requested forms and roster by April 8 absent a written extension, cure the technical defects by April 26 without backdating, and deliver mismatch notices by April 21 while calculating separate eight-business-day periods from actual employee receipt. Both reject unsupported admissions and immediate adverse action, preserve the same defenses and records, and condition any later work action on final nonconfirmation or independently verified evidence. No demonstrated difference changes Arclight’s or any employee’s material position.

Benchmark materials

Prompt and sealed key

The key is an audit reference. It was not shown to the contestant systems and did not determine the comparative verdict.

Read the original matter prompt

Question 32: The Workforce Audit Calendar

Your role

You represent Arclight Kitchens, a commercial-food manufacturer in the fictional Republic of Vesta. The Workforce Authorization Bureau has opened an audit. You must sequence production, cure, and employee notices without making admissions beyond the record or taking premature adverse action.

Governing law

Assume the following Vesta rules apply:

  1. An employer served with an inspection notice must produce the requested authorization forms by the close of the third business day after service. The day of service is excluded. Saturdays and Sundays are not business days, and there are no holidays in the relevant period.

  2. Before the original production deadline, the Bureau may grant one extension of up to five business days for documented operational need. A request does not extend the deadline unless granted in writing.

  3. The employer must produce the requested forms and existing payroll roster. It need not volunteer narrative admissions, unrelated personnel files, or documents outside the request.

  4. A form may not be backdated, recreated as though timely, or altered to conceal an error. A current correction must be dated when made, preserve the original, identify the corrector, and state the reason.

  5. After a notice identifying technical or procedural defects, the employer has ten business days after receipt to cure. A timely curable correction avoids a paperwork penalty for that defect.

  6. A substantive absence of authorization cannot be cured merely by rewriting a form. The employer must obtain valid authorization evidence or take lawful action after required notice and response periods.

  7. When the Bureau issues a tentative mismatch concerning an employee, the employer must give that employee the Bureau's individual notice no later than the fifth business day after the employer receives it. The employer may not assume the mismatch is correct.

  8. An employee who timely contests a mismatch must receive eight business days after actual receipt of the individual notice to contact the Bureau and provide evidence. No adverse action may be taken during that period solely because of the mismatch.

  9. An employer may suspend work only after final nonconfirmation or when independent, verified evidence establishes lack of authorization. National origin, accent, or document appearance is not independent evidence.

  10. Retaliation, selective re-verification, or requiring more or different documents than the rules permit is prohibited.

  11. Counsel should calculate each deadline, document actual receipt, assign owners, preserve originals, and condition advice on facts not yet in the file.

Facts

A Bureau agent personally served Arclight's plant manager with an inspection notice at 2:00 p.m. on Monday, April 5, 2027. The notice requests authorization forms for all current employees and the existing payroll roster. It does not request medical files, disciplinary records, or a narrative explanation.

Arclight has 386 current employees. Most forms are centralized, but 47 forms for a recently acquired facility remain in offsite storage. The records vendor says it can deliver them by Thursday morning. The plant manager has not requested an extension.

Arclight can produce the centralized forms and payroll roster by Wednesday. The general counsel proposes sending a letter stating, "Arclight has fully complied with every workforce law and any missing documents are harmless clerical matters." No review supports that statement.

On Monday, April 12, the Bureau sends a technical-defect notice by confirmed electronic delivery. It identifies fourteen forms with missing preparer signatures or incomplete address fields. The original forms exist. Human resources can contact the affected employees and preparers.

On Wednesday, April 14, the Bureau sends tentative mismatch notices for three employees. Human resources has not yet delivered the individual notices. One employee, Marisol Dane, says she filed a timely renewal application and has a receipt that may extend her authorization. The supplied file does not contain the receipt, its filing date, its category, or its expiration effect. The other two employees say the mismatches reflect transposed identification numbers and can produce original documents tomorrow.

A supervisor asks permission to remove all three employees from the schedule immediately "until they prove they are legal." The chief executive asks counsel for a calendar and a script that does not admit violations.

Assignment

Provide an ordered audit-response plan addressing:

  • The original production deadline from the April 5 service date.
  • Whether an extension is needed and what must happen if it is not granted in writing.
  • What to produce and what not to volunteer.
  • How to preserve and correct original forms without backdating.
  • The ten-business-day cure deadline from the April 12 technical-defect notice.
  • The five-business-day deadline for delivering the April 14 individual mismatch notices.
  • How to calculate each employee's eight-business-day response period and what receipt fact must be documented.
  • The missing facts concerning Marisol's renewal receipt and how they affect any work decision.
  • Why immediate removal of all three employees is or is not lawful.
  • A concrete sequence, owner, and communication posture through final confirmation or cure.


Read the sealed key

Q32 key (Workforce Audit Calendar)

  1. Service was Monday, April 5, and the service day is excluded. The third business day is Thursday, April 8. Missed: the initial production is late.
  2. The offsite forms are expected Thursday morning, so an extension may be requested before the deadline but is not necessary if complete production can occur by close Thursday. If requested, it changes nothing unless granted in writing. Missed: Arclight relies on an unapproved extension.
  3. Produce the requested forms and existing payroll roster only, with a neutral cover letter. Do not send the unsupported "fully complied" statement or unrelated files. Missed: an audit response creates avoidable admissions or false assurances.
  4. Preserve originals and make current, dated, attributable corrections. Never backdate or replace the original. Missed: curable paperwork defects become concealment evidence.
  5. The April 12 technical notice gives ten business days after receipt: April 13 is day one and Monday, April 26 is day ten. Complete and document cure by April 26. Missed: fourteen avoidable paperwork penalties mature.
  6. The April 14 mismatch notice requires individual delivery by the fifth business day: Thursday April 15, Friday April 16, Monday April 19, Tuesday April 20, Wednesday April 21. Missed: employees lose process and the employer violates the notice rule.
  7. Each eight-business-day contest period runs from that employee's actual receipt, not from the Bureau's April 14 transmission. Obtain signed or electronically confirmed receipt and calculate separately. Missed: adverse action occurs before the employee's window expires.
  8. Marisol's renewal receipt, filing date, category, and extension effect are specifically missing. Obtain and verify them before any work decision. Missed: an authorized employee is unlawfully removed or an unauthorized employee remains based on assumption.
  9. Do not remove all three immediately. Deliver notices, permit timely contest, verify the two transposed numbers, and await final nonconfirmation or independent proof. Missed: national-origin and retaliation exposure is created during a curable mismatch process.
  10. Assign records production to counsel and HR, technical cures to HR with employee signoff, receipt tracking to a named compliance owner, and final work decisions to counsel-reviewed HR after the response period. Missed: correct duties occur without a reliable calendar or owner.
Blind evaluation record

Direct judge report

The report below is preserved from the Qwen 3.8 versus Claude verdict record.

Read the preserved judge report
TIE, FUNCTIONALLY EQUIVALENT.

Basis. Both answers direct Arclight to produce the requested forms and roster by April 8 absent a written extension, cure the technical defects by April 26 without backdating, and deliver mismatch notices by April 21 while calculating separate eight-business-day periods from actual employee receipt. Both reject unsupported admissions and immediate adverse action, preserve the same defenses and records, and condition any later work action on final nonconfirmation or independently verified evidence. No demonstrated difference changes Arclight’s or any employee’s material position.

[A] rejected: assertion that the proposed letter creates “false-statement exposure far worse than a paperwork penalty” — record lacks any false-statement rule or comparative penalty.
[A] rejected: assertion that Marisol’s mismatch likely reflects a renewal not yet posted in Bureau records — record lacks the receipt and Bureau-record status.

Failed candidates. Protective extension request on April 6 versus conditional request by April 8 — likelihood failed; Answer B still requires a timely request whenever delivery is realistically uncertain.
Failed candidates. Staged production and partial-production fallback in Answer A — concrete consequence failed; the record establishes no different penalty or protection from partial timely production if the 47 forms are late.
Failed candidates. April 15 versus April 16 internal mismatch-notice target — concrete consequence failed; both dates preserve the full statutory period measured from actual receipt.
Failed candidates. Differences in correction, receipt-documentation, and communication detail — different conduct failed; both prescribe the same materially compliant procedures.
Failed candidates. Answer B’s suggestion to await expiration of the protected period if final nonconfirmation arrives earlier — concrete consequence failed; no such timing event or resulting harm is established.

Hard stop. The sentence cannot be completed with a concrete, record-supported consequence.
Complete comparison record

All six pairings

Every pair of the four model answers was judged independently under the same evaluation instrument.

Open the six head-to-head results
PairingResultWhy it matteredRecord
Qwen 3.8 27B vs Claude Opus 5Functional tieBoth answers direct Arclight to produce the requested forms and roster by April 8 absent a written extension, cure the technical defects by April 26 without backdating, and deliver mismatch notices by April 21 while calculating separate eight-business-day periods from actual employee receipt.Judge record
Qwen 3.8 27B vs DeepSeek V4-Flash-0731Functional tieBoth answers direct production by April 8 absent a written extension, timely technical cure by April 26, employee-notice delivery by April 21, individualized eight-business-day periods based on actual receipt, and no immediate adverse action.Judge record
Qwen 3.8 27B vs Qwen 3.5 27BFunctional tieBoth answers direct production by April 8 absent a written extension, limit production to requested records, preserve and currently correct the forms by April 26, deliver mismatch notices by April 21, calculate response periods from actual employee receipt, and prohibit immediate adverse action.Judge record
DeepSeek V4-Flash-0731 vs Claude Opus 5Functional tieBoth answers direct timely production by April 8, a written extension request if needed without relying on an ungranted request, limited responsive production, compliant current-dated corrections by April 26, individual notices by April 21, separately calculated employee response periods, verification of…Judge record
DeepSeek V4-Flash-0731 vs Qwen 3.5 27BFunctional tieBoth answers direct production of the requested forms and payroll roster by April 8, cure by April 26 without backdating, delivery of mismatch notices by April 21, individualized response periods based on actual receipt, and no immediate suspension.Judge record
Qwen 3.5 27B vs Claude Opus 5Functional tieBoth answers direct Arclight to produce the requested forms and roster by April 8, cure the technical defects by April 26 without altering originals, deliver mismatch notices by April 21, calculate separate eight-business-day periods from documented actual receipt, and take no immediate adverse action.Judge record
Rejected-point diagnostic

Judge-attributed rejected points for this matter across all six pairings:

Qwen 3.8 27B0
DeepSeek V4-Flash-07312
Claude Opus 57
Qwen 3.5 27B5

This is a review-burden diagnostic, not a universal hallucination measure.

Available reasoning traces