Is there a way to ensure that the code is being written by whoever it claims to be writing?

Question

Work organization

I work as a team leader in a remote team. Found an embarrassing moment. The developers of the company secretly share access to the git and task tracker, and work after hours, replacing each other (and perhaps even secretly hiring one of their friends whom we do not know) and most likely sleep for 4 hours, working all day long. We are paid hourly, so the motivation obviously flows like water, projects through the roof. The time tracker used by the team is easy to deceive in terms of who uses it, and the management does not plan to change the usual system, and there are no leaks in payment, everything is within the framework of projects.

I want to note right away that I am not opposed to the progress of the team, projects were closed one after another with maximum speed, but I would not want to work
1) with liars
2) with overworked developers, who at one fine moment will break the thread and, having earned enough money, they will easily merge (I did it myself), and we will incur losses many times more than we earned on such "overtime work"

Personally, I am ready to slow down, if only everything was clear and according to plan, so that the developers would work no more than 8 hours, and not 12-16 as it is now.
In addition, not all developers do this, so we need some way to track it so as not to offend the right ones.

I thought it was trite to keep track of the number of hours of each developer, but the proof of the lie is so-so to be honest - you can’t blame a person for working above the norm. Proofs are needed precisely at the level of tasks / code as proof that he is clearly not doing his job in secret from the company.

UPD: although I agree that the root of the problem is hourly pay, which encourages overtime, the question remains open. In theory, access to the code through git can be transferred to left-handed people who have nothing to do with the company at all and can push their shit and still get paid for it (indirectly through those who gave them access and whom we pay). How to counter this?

Answer 1

No problem, pay exactly 40 hours a week and not a minute more, except in individual cases, agreed individually and in advance.

Answer 2

management has no plans to change the usual system

this is a sentence if the business owners are not motivated. works, why change something?

I am ready to work with both liars and overworked ...

and here is the opinion of a business representative

Answer 3

Technically: in relation to git, there was an article recently on Habré where a person demonstrated how Linus Torvalds himself and other famous personalities participate in his project. But in fact, it's just a fake, indicating their e-mail. To avoid this, you need to switch to the use of signatures. Certificates and all. Everyone has their own, and preferably, a usb-key so that it is impossible to transfer credentials without transferring the key and pin code. Deleters will not run to each other with keys, most likely.
Organizational: it is necessary to organize work in such a way that there is no point in working beyond certain hours. Here we (although not programmers) at work in KPI have the "load" parameter, and (like many others) the management changes it a little from time to time, depending on the situation, usually once a quarter. And here, for example, it is written that you need to score at least 85% for the full bonus (fulfillment of all KPIs is calculated by the formula and directly affects the bonus). And it turns out that if there is already a high load during the month (but they also control the weekly, etc.), then there is simply no point in overfulfillment and extra load (do not put off until tomorrow what can be done the day after tomorrow).
You will only have the task of determining those parameters and their values ​​that will suit the company and will not give excessive fatigue to employees. They themselves don't want to work too hard if they don't get paid more for it anyway (if there's a limit).
On the other hand, if an employee feels that he can work 12-16 hours a day, and can work that way, then what's the difference? Otherwise, if he still freaks out or just gets tired of working, it means that he is not smart enough, and does not understand the dangers in this mode of operation.
Not from development, but from the field of electronics repair: I somehow worked in a similar mode - during the day at one job, from 8 to 17 hours, and then from 20 to 24 for another. And so it turned out at the peak for almost two months - I was really tired in this mode, it’s good that the flow of iron became less, and in the evening I didn’t go out every day, or just for an hour or two. Now I wouldn't volunteer to work in such a regime.