The announced reform of the mandatory digital time registration, which the Government had positioned as one of the great labor changes of this legislature with a view to 2026, is now at a standstill. Internal discrepancies between ministries and the technical problems surrounding the implementation of the new system have slowed down a rule that was intended to reinforce the real control of the working day, especially with regard to overtime and the traceability of data.
This standstill has generated uncertainty in the business world, especially among SMEs and the self-employed: after months of messages pointing to an imminent tightening of controls, now the official discourse speaks of delays and lack of a clear timetable.
However, the focus is not so much on what has not yet been approved, but on what is already being demanded by the Labor Inspectorate.
The regulations in force: time recording is now mandatory
Beyond the political debate, the current legislation leaves no room for doubt. Since May 2019, all companies in Spain are required to keep a daily record of the working day, including the time of entry, exit and breaks taken by each worker.
The law does not explicitly impose the use of specific software, but it does establish a series of requirements that, in practice, are difficult to meet with manual systems. Both the Labor Inspectorate and the courts have been applying a consolidated criterion: the record must be objective, reliable, accessible and non-manipulable.
It is precisely at this point that the problems begin for companies that continue to rely on traditional methods.
Why paper and Excel are no longer convincing to the Inspection
Paper records or spreadsheets present a basic problem: they are easily altered. An Excel file can be modified without leaving a trace, and in the event of an inspection the burden of proof is on the company to demonstrate that the data has not been changed before or after the visit.
In practice, proving such unalterability is almost impossible. The lack of version control, traceability of changes and identification of the author of each modification means that these systems lack legal credibility. For this reason, the Inspectorate is considering many of these records as invalid, even when they physically exist.
The penalties are not minor: fines for non-compliance with time recording can range from 751 to 7,500 euros. Identical time sheets day after day, documents filled out in the same handwriting or digital files without access control are often equated, for legal purposes, to a total lack of record-keeping.
The reasons for the delay of the reform
The blocking of the new regulations responds to important technical and legal issues. The debate focuses on how to ensure the interoperability of the systems, the security of the data and the possible remote access of the Inspectorate to the records.
The future regulation aims to go beyond simple record-keeping: it proposes the standardization of formats, greater control over the conservation of information and reinforced traceability, which explains the complexity of the agreement and the delay in its final approval.
The risk of waiting: sanctions, conservation and privacy
Although the reform is on hold, the sanctioning regime is already in place and is based on the current regulations: from the legal point of view, the main risk is the lack of inalterability of the system. On the operational level, the law requires records to be kept for four years, which is difficult to guarantee with paper or archives without backup copies.
In addition, a third factor is becoming increasingly important: data protection. Manual systems, such as sheets that are visible to the entire workforce, can violate the GDPR by exposing sensitive information on working hours, absences or medical leave.
When will the new law arrive?
At present, there is no definite date for the final approval of the new digital time register. The most likely scenario points to 2026 or even 2027, once the technical and political conflicts have been resolved. But this timetable does not change the essentials.
The Labor Inspectorate is not waiting for the new standard to act. It already applies strict criteria based on current legislation, and these criteria clearly penalize manual or easily manipulated systems.
