In autumn 2025, the labour supervision authority carried out a targeted inspection focusing on compliance with rules on working time, rest periods and working time records. The report is available at the following link:https://mvff.munka.hu/#/ff_munkaido_pihenoido_celvizsgalat_jelentes_251222
The authority’s summary report contains an important – and, in practice, unfortunately not surprising – finding: irregularities related to working time records continue to occur on a widespread basis.
Based on the findings, these issues are often not merely administrative errors but may also serve to conceal breaches related to working time and wage supplements.
Typical infringements related to working time records
During the inspections, the authority identified several recurring issues.
- Absence of records or records not kept at the place of work
At a number of employers, no working time records were available on site at all. It was also common practice for documents to be compiled only later, when data had to be provided to the authority.
This is particularly problematic, as it prevents real-time verification of the actual working hours worked by employees.
- Incomplete or falsified records
During the inspections, the following issues were identified, among others:
- working time records were completed in advance,
- no data was recorded for certain days,
- certain working days (for example, Saturday work) were not recorded,
- or parallel (double) record-keeping systems were used.
In several cases, records contained only crossed-out entries or blank lines, making it impossible to determine why the employee did not work on a given day.
- Records “corrected” retrospectively
A particularly problematic practice is when records are prepared retrospectively, often mirroring the working time reported to the tax authority.
In many cases, employees are asked to sign these records afterwards.
There were also instances where employees reported different working hours during the inspection than those shown in the documents later presented – which employers attempted to explain by claiming that the employee had been “confused” during the inspection.
- Part-time registration, full-time work in reality
According to the authority’s experience, manipulation of working time records is often linked to the practice of registering employees as part-time workers while they in fact work full-time.
In such cases, the absence of records or their retrospective completion may help conceal the actual terms of employment.
Why accurate working time records matter
Accurate, real-time records are not merely an administrative obligation.
According to the authority, manipulation of records is often used to conceal the following breaches:
- avoidance of overtime payment,
- non-payment of wage supplements,
- improper handling of overtime.
Ultimately, this results in financial disadvantage for employees.
What lies behind the irregularities?
According to the inspection, the breaches stem partly from intentional practices and partly from organisational shortcomings.
The most common reasons include:
- outdated or missing time-recording systems,
- lack of digital access systems or applications,
- chaotic work organisation,
- lack of HR resources,
- practices aimed at concealing overtime,
- cost-reduction considerations,
- “trust-based” operations, which in reality mean a lack of control,
- managerial indifference or underestimation of the importance of compliance.
In white-collar roles, it is also common for working time boundaries to become blurred – for example, due to responding to emails in the evening.
Lack of work schedules is also a serious issue
The authority also observed cases where employers communicated work schedules verbally, considering written documentation unnecessary administrative burden. However, this constitutes a breach.
Without a formal work schedule:
- compliance with working time rules cannot be verified,
- wages cannot be calculated accurately,
- overtime cannot be properly determined.
Rest periods: breaks are often not provided
The inspection also addressed breaches related to rest periods. A typical situation occurs in retail or hospitality, where only one employee is on duty during a shift and the employer does not allow the premises to close during lunch breaks.
In such cases, employees often eat only when there are no customers. Additional breaks required for working time exceeding nine hours are frequently not provided at all.
What does this mean for employers?
Based on the authority’s findings, it is clear that working time recording is not merely an administrative requirement but a key element of labour law compliance.
Employers should pay particular attention to:
- maintaining accurate and up-to-date working time records,
- preparing written work schedules,
- complying with rest period rules,
- lawfully accounting for overtime and wage supplements.
Failure to do so may result not only in administrative fines but also in significant employment law risks in the event of future employee claims.