Key points
- Confirm the applicable implementing rules before procuring technology; a supplier’s offer does not establish the legal requirements.
- Assign responsibility for correcting discrepancies and retaining original entries, amendments and their reasons.
- Review the export and recovery of records and the processing of personal data.
The duty and its implementing rules
The reform of 1 May 2026 introduced electronic recording of the start and end of working time in Article 132, section XXXIV, of the Federal Labour Law. The decree provides for general STPS rules on scope and exceptions, to take effect from 1 January 2027. [1]
At the editorial cut-off of 30 October, the search of the official sources consulted did not establish that rules prescribing a mandatory platform, format or use of biometrics had been published. That regulatory development should be checked before technology is procured. A supplier's commercial proposal does not, by itself, establish the legal requirements.
Attendance, discrepancies and payroll
As an operational preparation measure, it is useful to review how workers are identified, who can correct an entry and what explanation is retained for each adjustment. The procedure can address connection failures, missed entries, authorised absences, shift changes and work away from the premises, with defined responsibilities and preservation of the original record.
A joint review by HR, payroll and operations can identify differences between scheduled hours, recorded time and pay. Building-access records may provide information, but their usefulness depends on what they actually measure and the context of the work. Automatically equating presence with work can lead to incorrect conclusions.
Record integrity and evidence
Under the decree, the record's contents constitute full proof only if the agreement contemplated between worker and employer is established. That rule does not give every time clock or file automatic, conclusive evidential value. [1]
From a records-management perspective, the information should be capable of being reconstructed: the original entry, amendments, the person responsible and the reason. Testing data export and readability outside the platform is also useful. This helps assess whether the records will remain available when the supplier changes or a discrepancy needs to be explained.
Privacy when selecting the system
Processing must address purpose, proportionality, information and security under personal data legislation. [2] Selecting a system requires identifying the information the business needs, who can access it, what the supplier does and how corrections or workers' requests will be handled.
A preliminary exercise using fictitious data can test discrepancies, access permissions and file recovery without collecting unnecessary information. The final decision should bring together legal review of the applicable framework, actual operational needs and the system's configuration.
Sources consulted
- Decreto por el que se reforman, adicionan y derogan diversas disposiciones de la Ley Federal del Trabajo, en materia de reducción de la jornada laboral Article 132, section XXXIV, and fifth transitory provision.
- Ley Federal de Protección de Datos Personales en Posesión de los Particulares Articles 5, 10 to 16, 18 and 20.
General information. Application to a particular matter requires assessment of its circumstances and the provisions in force.
