The FDIC considers it a fairly important internal control mechanism for fraud: https://www.fdic.gov/news/financial-institution-letters/1995/fil9552.html https:

The FDIC considers it a fairly important internal control mechanism for fraud: https://www.fdic.gov/news/financial-institution-letters/1995/fil9552.html https://www.fdic.gov/news/financial-institution-letters/1995... To quote the most relevant bit (although the page is short and readable): ---- "Vacation Policies - It is the FDIC's goal that all banks have a vacation policy which provides that active officers and employees be absent from their duties for an uninterrupted period of not less than two consecutive weeks. Such a policy is considered an important internal safeguard largely because of the fact that perpetration of an embezzlement of any substantial size usually requires the constant presence of the embezzler in order to manipulate records, respond to inquiries from customers or other employees, and otherwise prevent detection. It is important for examiners and bank management to recognize that the benefits of this policy may be substantially, if not totally, eroded if the duties performed by an absent individual are not assumed by someone else. Where the bank's policy does not conform to the two-week recommended absence period, examiners should encourage the board of directors to annually review and approve the policy followed and the exceptions allowed. It is important in such cases that adequate compensating controls be devised and strictly enforced. When it is determined, after thorough consideration of all relevant facts and circumstances, that the bank's vacation policies are deficient, the matter should be discussed with the chief executive officer or directors. Comments and recommendations on the supplemental Internal Routine and Controls schedule may be appropriate."