The short answer: it depends on what you mean by “rounding”. Having the system systematically and unilaterally record 09:03 as 09:00 violates the obligation for exact recording imposed by article 34.9 of the Workers' Statute. Having a “courtesy tolerance” agreed upon in a collective bargaining agreement and applied symmetrically is another story. The line between one and the other is not obvious, and that is the reason for this note.
What the law says about exact time recording
Article 34.9 of the Workers' Statute (ET), reformed by Royal Decree-Law 8/2019, obliges companies to guarantee a daily record of working hours that includes the specific start and end time. The keyword is “specific”. Not “approximate”, not “usual”, not “agreed”. The time at which each employee clocks in and out, day by day.
The new Royal Decree on digital time recording, whose publication in the Official State Gazette (BOE) is expected in 2026, reinforces this requirement by adding the demand that the record be unalterable and traceable: if someone modifies an entry, it is recorded who did it, when, and why. This puts an end to the silent rounding that was done at the end of the week to “balance” the books.
There is no rule that expressly authorizes the rounding of time clock entries. The Labor Inspectorate considers any system that does not capture the actual clock-in and clock-out time to be a deficient record.
The difference between rounding and tolerance
This is where concepts get mixed up in most companies that call a consultancy firm with questions.
Rounding implies modifying the recorded data: the person clocks in at 08:57 and the system notes 09:00. Or they clock out at 17:04 and the system records 17:00. That is manipulation of the record, regardless of whether it harms the employee or not.
Tolerance is something else. Some collective bargaining agreements provide that the first few minutes of lateness are not deducted from the salary if they are made up within the same day or week. It is an agreement on salary compensation, not an authorization to falsify the record. The time clock can say 09:04 and the tolerance can establish that those 4 minutes do not generate a deduction — but the time 09:04 must be in the record. That is the line.
The distinction is relevant because a company can have a completely legal tolerance policy and at the same time have a problem with the Inspectorate if the time clock system automatically rounds the records.
Can rounding harm the employee?
Yes, and it is the strongest argument in a labor dispute. If the company rounds up clock-ins (08:57 → 09:00) and rounds down clock-outs (17:04 → 17:00), it is systematically subtracting minutes from the workday. A few minutes a day turn into hours per month — and by the end of the year, into entire unpaid workdays. The courts have considered this a breach of the recording obligation and, in several cases, a covert salary deduction that was not agreed upon.
If the rounding were always favorable to the employee, the problem would be lesser from the employee's point of view, but just as illegal from the Inspectorate's point of view: the record is not exact and cannot be used to verify the actual workday.
At Emplyx, clocking in is recorded to the second. If the company wants to configure a “courtesy tolerance” visible to the employee, it can do so — but the actual record is always stored with the exact time and is available for the Inspectorate.
We allow quick editing with traceability, because sometimes what is legal and daily operations seem incompatible. For example, in the restaurant world, planning accompanies reality: it is planned a posteriori, adapting what has happened to what should have happened. Emplyx, in its understanding of the problem, allows that quick editing based on the adaptation flow — always with an audit log, which is exactly what separates operational practice from deficient recording.
What if rounding is agreed upon in a collective agreement?
There are collective bargaining agreements that contain clauses on “courtesy times” or “clocking margins”. Those clauses do not authorize falsifying the record: what they can regulate is the internal management of those minutes (whether they are deducted, whether they are compensated, how they are accumulated). The clocking time remains the actual time.
If your agreement has a clause of this type, it is advisable to read it together with the labor department. In practice, most are limited to establishing that the first 5-10 minutes of occasional lateness do not generate disciplinary sanctions — not that the system can alter the record.
Frequently asked questions
Can the company round clock-in times to the exact hour? Not without an explicit agreement with employee representatives and provided that the rounding is neutral or favorable to the employee. Systematically rounding up clock-ins or down clock-outs violates the obligation for exact recording under article 34.9 of the Workers' Statute and can constitute a serious infraction before the Labor Inspectorate.
What is the difference between tolerance and rounding? Tolerance is a salary policy: it establishes that certain minutes of discrepancy do not generate a deduction. Rounding modifies the recorded data. The law requires that the record reflect the actual time; what happens afterwards with those minutes (whether they are deducted or not) is a matter of company policy or collective agreement.
Can an employee file a claim if their company rounds time clock entries? Yes. If the rounding implies an unagreed reduction of working hours or a covert salary deduction, the employee can file a claim before the labor courts. They can also report it to the Labor Inspectorate, which can issue a report for deficient time recording.
Does the new Royal Decree change anything regarding rounding? It reinforces the implicit prohibition: by requiring the record to be unalterable and traceable, it makes it very difficult to apply automatic rounding without leaving a trace of the modification. A system that rounds at the source does not generate traceability — and that is what the Inspectorate will look for when auditing.
What happens if the time clock software rounds by default? If the software provider applies automatic rounding without an option to disable it, the company remains responsible for the non-compliance before the Inspectorate. The argument that “the software does it on its own” does not exempt you. Check the configuration of your tool — tools like Emplyx record the exact time by default; access is free for up to 10 employees (see prices).
If your time clock system has any “rounding” configuration activated by default, it is worth reviewing it this week, not when the inspector arrives. The cost of disabling it is zero; the cost of not doing so can be seen in the note on sanctions for not keeping a time record in 2026.