“It is not appropriate to approve the projected royal decree.” This concludes the opinion issued by the Council of State on the reinforcement of time registration, the regulation with which the Ministry of Labor seeks to avoid wasting at the least a part of the draft regulation to scale back the working day. The opinion, to which EL PAÍS has had entry and which was permitted final week, could be very vital of the textual content proposed by Labor: though it applauds the tip of the rule – avoiding unpaid extra time via the obligatory nature of an interoperable digital system by Inspection -, it considers that it doesn’t appropriately measure the financial affect of the measure, that it invades legislative territory regardless of being a regulation (as CEOE has been denouncing), that it isn’t appropriately tailored to the precise wants of the sectors and that it doesn’t guarantee employee information safety. The non-binding opinion additionally contains vital extracts from the experiences issued by different authorities establishments in current months, such because the Ministry of Economy, the Ministry of Public Administration or the Spanish Data Protection Agency (AEPD).
The Ministry of Labor criticizes these experiences. “It is incomprehensible that someone, as these reports do, can be against an instrument that wants to guarantee that the law is complied with in our country, and that companies that abuse the hours of their workers do not compete unfairly with the rest and pay overtime accordingly,” they point out from the division of Yolanda Díaz.
The Council of State, chaired by the socialist Carmen Calvo, considers that “the impact on companies has not been assessed by the regulatory impact report in the way it must be for the correct processing of the projected regulation.” The opinion signifies that, since digital registration shall be obligatory for 1.35 million firms (based on ministry information collected by the Council), Labor’s assertion that it’s going to not pose a burden “is unrealistic” and {that a} mission of such traits “requires more extensive processing.”
“This digital system must be purchased by paying the license, connected to a network and constantly accessible,” argues the advisory physique, which works additional and estimates the “initial” affect of the measure at 867 million euros yearly, “without taking into account implementation, worker training and maintenance.” They arrive at this determine by multiplying the 55.4 euros annual value per employee estimated by the ministry by the 15.6 million staff focused by the measure. “Given these figures, the statement of the report according to which the project does not significantly impact the economy in general […] “It doesn’t correspond to the enterprise actuality to which it refers nor does it appear to derive from an in depth evaluation of it,” says the Council of State.
Also regarding costs, the Council of State criticizes that there is no calculation of budgetary impact and links it to the complaint in this regard from the ministry headed by Óscar López: “Of special interest is the report from the Technical General Secretariat of the Ministry for Digital Transformation and Public Service, which estimates that the project will entail a great budgetary impact for all public administrations, an impact that has not been assessed.”
The Council of State also gives weight in its opinion to the report of another ministry led by the PSOE, Economy. It underlines that the analysis of this department evaluates the objective of the project “favorably”, but at the same time it reflects, literally, why the Economy evaluates “unfavorably” the “implementation” of the same: “A long transitional period and tools that minimize the operational impact for SMEs are considered necessary; and it is necessary to take into account that a homogeneous imposition of these obligations does not take into account the existence of sectors whose specificities mean that these measures may turn out to be adapted to their reality.”
The Council of State itself elaborates on this diagnosis, pointing out that there are sectors that “have peculiarities that make it advisable to not impose a single digital management system, which might be relevant, for instance, to doormen of city properties, prepare drivers or your entire hospitality business.” “It is appropriate, therefore, to establish that the projected royal decree will not apply to special work days,” adds the opinion.
Data protection
The opinion is especially critical in terms of data protection, in line with the AEPD, which issued an unfavorable report because it considers that the project does not guarantee the correct use of that information and that there is a lack of legal support. “It is not enough to say that non-legitimized persons will not access the data; it is necessary to establish guarantees so that this does not happen,” summarizes the Council.
The Council indicates that the opinion “doesn’t make clear sure features of such relevance as whether or not a biometric management has been or shall be chosen or whether or not the specifically protected information shall be accessible or not, for the reason that system is just not absolutely developed in its technical features.” The advisory body denounces that “it’s supposed to implement a digital mannequin that has not but been outlined, primarily based on technical necessities that haven’t been dictated.”
Given this analysis, the agency considers that the Labor data “will not be enough to correctly justify the regulatory initiative adopted, which impacts a constitutionally assured proper to privateness of all salaried staff in Spain.” “Protection against possible risks cannot be based on simple rhetorical claims about data protection, but must be based on the description of the technical system, the form of access, the limitation on unauthorized entry and the specification of the data that is collected,” the agency adds.
Other reviews
The Council of State believes that the Labor approach “is not limited to complementing or developing what is stipulated in the law” already in force, “but rather imposes new obligations and burdens on employers and workers, thus going beyond the scope of regulatory power.” That is, as CEOE has been denouncing, it considers that this ministry initiative should be a bill (which requires the approval of Parliament) and not a regulation (it applies without approval from the Legislature). “What the law can do, the regulations cannot do,” summarizes the Council of State.
The Council also emphasizes that the declaration of urgency of the project “is not adequately justified” [el Consejo de Ministros aprobó esta declaración en septiembre]that the data provided in the regulatory impact report are “manifestly insufficient” and that the reports issued by different institutions have not been duly taken into account: “It is not about accumulating reports and documents, it is about evaluating the considerations issued by individuals and by other ministerial departments and trying to achieve a complete standard.”
The opinion even affects the ministry’s way of expressing itself: “To level out in a preamble that the registration of working hours will promote the well-being of all folks in any respect ranges, enhance productiveness, have an effect on private and household conciliation and enhance Spain’s aggressive place within the international market is extreme. What is typical of authorized language is just not the expression of espoused goals or expectations. A sure restraint could be applicable.”
At the same time, despite all the previous criticisms, the Council of State concedes that “the target pursued by the draft royal decree submitted for session deserves a optimistic evaluation.” “The working day should not be extended beyond what is provided by the regulations and its effective control can have an impact on the well-being of workers,” states the advisory body.
Labor emphasizes that the time registration effort “is a measure that is part of the coalition government agreement signed in 2023, so questioning it is questioning a democratic commitment between PSOE and Sumar.” “Reducing the working day is not only socially necessary,” provides Trabajo, “but economically viable and supported by international evidence.” The ministry says it should “firmly defend a reform that improves people’s lives and truly modernizes our labor market.”
https://elpais.com/economia/2026-03-23/varapalo-al-refuerzo-del-registro-horario-el-consejo-de-estado-emite-un-dictamen-muy-desfavorable-al-proyecto-de-diaz.html