Without time records, employers lose in court

The problem: an employee claims overtime

Imagine this situation: an employee sues your company claiming payment for overtime. They claim they worked 200 extra hours last year.

Who has to prove what?

The answer depends on whether you have a time tracking system or not.

The general rule: who claims, proves

In labor law, normally whoever makes a claim must prove it. If an employee says they worked overtime, they should demonstrate it.

But here’s the twist: if the company doesn’t have time records, the situation changes radically.

The “iuris tantum” presumption in favor of the worker

When the company fails to comply with its obligation to keep time records (art. 34.9 ET), courts apply a presumption in favor of the worker.

According to consolidated judicial doctrine:

The employer’s failure to comply with the duty to keep time records generates an iuris tantum presumption that the overtime hours claimed by the worker were actually worked.

This means that:

• ❌ Without records → It’s presumed the worker is right
• ✅ With records → The worker must provide full proof

What does the Supreme Court say?

The Supreme Court has established clear criteria on the burden of proof:

When there ARE time records

The worker must provide full proof of the overtime worked. It’s not enough to just claim it; they need:

• Emails with timestamps
• Colleague testimonies
• Building access logs
• Other objective evidence

When there are NO time records

Circumstantial evidence is enough. Courts accept:

• Coherent statement from the worker
• Assigned workload volume
• Generic testimonies
• Any reasonable indication

Real court cases

TSJ Catalonia (2022)

Company without records. Worker claims 150 overtime hours based only on their statement and workload. Result: judgment against the company.

TSJ Madrid (2023)

Company with incomplete records (only entry, no exit). Worker claims overtime. Result: presumption applied in favor of the worker.

TSJ Basque Country (2024)

Company with complete and traceable records. Worker claims overtime without proof. Result: claim dismissed.

The cost of not having records

Beyond administrative penalties (€751 to €7,500 for serious violations), the real risk is:

1. Losing overtime lawsuits with judgments of thousands of euros
2. Domino effect if other employees file similar claims
3. Reputational damage and deteriorated workplace climate

The solution: a reliable and accessible record

To protect your company you need a system that:

• ✅ Records entry and exit for each employee
• ✅ Is immutable (with change traceability)
• ✅ Is accessible to workers, representatives, and Inspection
• ✅ Retains data for 4 years
• ✅ Generates reports for potential litigation

Conclusion

Time tracking isn’t just a legal obligation: it’s your best defense in a labor lawsuit. Without it, the presumption works against you and the odds of losing skyrocket.

Cleverfy offers you a record that meets all legal requirements and protects you against claims.

---

Sources: Art. 34.9 ET, Art. 12.4.c ET, Consolidated judicial doctrine TSJ and AN