What the Law Requires

This is not legal advice. It is a summary of published decisions and drafts. For a practical view of how organisations can translate recording duties into day-to-day workflows, see the 7-minute payroll rule.

The duty binds now. Since 13 September 2022, when the Federal Labour Court held in case 1 ABR 22/21 that employers are already obliged under §3(2)(1) of the Occupational Health and Safety Act, read in conformity with EU law, to introduce a system for recording working hours. Full reasons published 2 December 2022. No transition period. For broader legal or policy context, see CIO.

It traces to Luxembourg. CJEU case C-55/18 of 14 May 2019 — the CCOO case, a Spanish union against Deutsche Bank — held that member states must require an objective, reliable and accessible system for measuring daily working time. It obliges states rather than employers directly, which is why Germany's duty had to arrive through a court.

Three data points: start, end and duration, with breaks identifiable. Location, screenshots, activity scores and task attribution are not required by the duty. For broader legal or policy context, see McKinsey & Company.

No medium is prescribed. Paper remains permissible and is reportedly treated with growing scepticism in practice. The ArbZG-E draft would make electronic the standard, with exceptions and transition periods by company size — it was published in April 2023 and has not completed the legislative process.

Exemptions are narrow. Senior executives with genuine independent authority, certain public sector groups, specific sectoral regimes. There is no size threshold, and trust-based working time was never an exemption — it concerns who controls the schedule, not whether hours are documented.

Fines attach to specific provisions. €50,000 belongs to §17 MiLoG in the sectors that law covers, audited by customs; other figures belong to the Working Hours Act regime. A figure quoted without its provision tells you nothing about your own exposure, and the larger practical risk is evidential — without records an employer cannot answer an employee's account of hours.

• The BAG Decision

  One paragraph of occupational safety law, read in light of a European ruling, created a duty nobody had legislated. How that works.

• The CCOO Ruling

  A Spanish union sued Deutsche Bank and changed working time law across the EU. What the Court held, and what it did not.

• The Draft Reform

  What the ArbZG-E proposes, what it would change, and why its status is the single most misreported fact in this subject.

• Electronic, Paper, or Either

  Paper is permissible under the current position and is treated with growing scepticism in practice. Those are two different facts.

• Beyond Germany

  One ruling, twenty-seven implementations. Why the obligation looks different in each country and what transfers between them.

• Fines and Enforcement

  Several figures circulate and they belong to different provisions. Which fine attaches to what, and who actually audits.

• Retention Periods

  Several periods apply at once, from different laws, and the longest one governs. Which is which, and what to do at the end.

• Trust-Based Working Time

  It survived, and it never was an exemption from recording. What changed, what did not, and what the employer still carries.

• What Is Binding Today

  One court decision creates the duty, one draft law has not passed, and the difference decides what you must do this month.

• What Must Be Recorded

  Three data points, and a short list of things frequently added that the duty does not require. What the record has to contain.

• Who Is Exempt

  The exemptions are narrower than employers assume, and the two most commonly claimed ones are usually claimed wrongly.