The Federal Labour Court decision of 13 September 2022, case 1 ABR 22/21, is central to German working-time recording. Employers must organise a system that records daily working time; implementation also raises participation and data-protection questions.
Legal context and practical consequences
The court derived the duty from section 3(2)(1) ArbSchG and addressed recording the start, end and duration of daily work, including overtime. That decision alone does not require a particular electronic product. Trust-based working does not remove the recording duty. The obligation to record must be distinguished from choices about the system, and recorded time does not automatically establish a separate overtime-payment entitlement.
Preparing the review
Provide contracts, amendments, relevant pay or attendance records and correspondence. Health information should be limited to what is necessary and kept out of general distribution lists. Translate the legal outcome into clear responsibilities for HR, managers and payroll. Collective participation and individual rights remain separate elements of the assessment.
Four practical examples
Example 1
Trust-based working is used without records. Introduce suitable recording while preserving appropriate flexibility.
Example 2
An employee answers messages late at night. Review working time and rest periods across the whole day.
Example 3
Recorded overtime was not authorised. Assess evidence and the basis of any payment claim separately.
Example 4
A new time-recording app is introduced. Review data access and works council participation before implementation.
Source and further information
Official source · Related employment-law topic
Archive allocation: April 2026. Written and reviewed retrospectively on 13 November 2026. Court decisions retain their actual decision dates.