Introducing time tracking without losing trust
Time tracking touches a sensitive nerve: staff can easily experience it as monitoring. That can be defused, technically and organisationally — with data minimisation, clear rights and an arrangement the works council can support.
Not whether, but how
Since the Federal Labour Court ruling of September 2022 the division of roles is clearer than many assume.
The ruling came out of proceedings about co-determination: a works council wanted to force the introduction of electronic time recording. The court denied it that right of initiative — on the grounds that the duty to record already exists in law, and that co-determination applies only where a question is not already settled by statute.
A practical division of labour follows from that. Whether hours are recorded is not open to negotiation. How they are recorded very much is: which routes are used, whether the mobile app with its location check is deployed, which evaluations are produced, who may see them, how corrections are handled. Those are exactly the points that make sense in a works agreement — and they decide whether the introduction lands as progress or as mistrust.
Our advice from practice: settle these questions before the technical setup, not after. An environment once configured with every option turned on is hard to dial back — and the impression sticks.
Collect only as much as the purpose requires
The purpose of recording is to document working time — not to observe behaviour. That distinction decides what may be collected and what may not. Absences are held as a type, not as a diagnosis. Location is captured when clocking, not continuously. Evaluations are aimed at time accounts, not at individuals' attendance patterns.
The controller within the meaning of the GDPR remains your company. ITN-Network processes the data on your behalf, governed by a data processing agreement; processing takes place on infrastructure in Germany.
Deletion periods, retention and the details of the data processing agreement are settled as part of the engagement — bring your own requirements and those of your data protection officer into the preparation.
Editors see and change only the groups they are responsible for.
People who can see their own hours and accounts can report mistakes early — which takes the monitoring character out of it.
Changes are recorded. That protects both sides, employees included.
Whether the check on permitted locations applies, and to whom, is your decision per group — not the software's.
Four points to settle before the setup
Answering these questions beforehand saves arguments later — and lets the environment be configured properly from the start.
Which recording routes will be used?
Browser, phone, kiosk, terminal — per group of employees. The mobile app with its location check is the point that needs the most explaining.
Will the location check be used?
If so, for which groups and with what response when there is a discrepancy. If not, it stays at the location recorded at the moment of clocking, which the app requires anyway.
- decided per group
- graded responses
- no movement profile
Who may see which evaluations?
Map editor rights per group rather than giving everyone everything. It is quick to set up and hard to retrofit later.
How are corrections handled?
Who may enter something after the fact, is a reason required, how are employees informed? Traceability here is in both sides' interest.
How rights, groups and logging are represented in the application is set out in the administration chapter of the feature reference.
Frequently asked questions about data protection and co-determination
Does the works council have to agree to time tracking?
The duty to record is itself statutory and therefore not up for negotiation — that was the core of the Federal Labour Court ruling of 13 September 2022. Co-determination applies to how it is arranged: which routes are used, how location data is handled, who may see which evaluations. For an assessment in your own business, consult your legal advisers.
What data arises from time tracking?
At its core, timestamps attributed to a person: arrival, departure, the start and end of breaks, from which targets, actual hours, breaks, premiums and balances are calculated. Alongside that, absences such as leave or sickness recorded as a type, not as a diagnosis. Where recording happens through the mobile app, the location at the moment of clocking is added.
Are employees' locations tracked continuously?
No. Location is captured at the moment of clocking, not continuously. No movement profile arises — only a record of where an entry was made from. Whether that check is active at all is something you decide per group of employees.
Who can see employees' hours?
Editor rights per group control that. A site manager sees their own area, head office sees the whole, and employees see their own hours and accounts. Changes are logged so it stays traceable who altered what.
Who is the controller for data protection purposes?
Your company, as the employer, is the controller. ITN-Network processes the data on your behalf; that is settled by contract. Processing takes place on infrastructure in Germany.
More on this: what the law requires and the mobile app with its location check.