That is not automatically required or automatically advisable. Assess each person’s eligibility, evidence and the actual project dependencies before setting a group schedule.
Plan sequencing without promising identical outcomes
One employee’s missing record or different history may require separate attention. Do not treat another person’s approval as permission for the whole team to begin work. Group filings by each person's actual readiness rather than by team or project, so someone with a complete record is not held back by another person's unresolved gap.
Keep each individual's supporting file separate and self-contained, since a reviewer examining one case should not need to rely on facts drawn from a colleague's file to understand it, and note explicitly wherever one person's file references a shared document, so the connection is visible rather than assumed. Coordinate with the receiving worksite about how role coverage will work during a staggered start, so operational pressure to keep everyone aligned does not become a reason to file before someone's record is actually complete. Confirm with each person individually whether any personal circumstance, such as a pending document or an unresolved employment detail, affects their own timeline before assuming the group can move together, and record that check even when the answer is that nothing has changed.
Communicate realistic expectations to the business side early, since a staggered approach usually produces steadier results than forcing every case onto the same schedule regardless of how ready each person actually is.