Planned versus clocked: attendance control in Chile
Reviewed on October 23, 2026 · 3 min read
In short
The employer must keep an attendance record: a book, a time clock or an electronic system authorised by the Labour Directorate, only one type per employer. Comparing that record with the plan, person by person and week by week, reveals the overtime nobody decided before an inspection does.
The schedule says what was planned. The attendance record says what happened. Overtime, lateness and shifts nobody covered live in the difference between the two, and that difference is the first thing an inspection checks.
The record is mandatory
El empleador tiene el deber de controlar la asistencia y determinar las horas de trabajo, sean ordinarias o extraordinarias. Estará obligado a llevar un libro de asistencia del personal, un reloj control con tarjetas de registro o un sistema electrónico de registro.
The employer must control attendance and determine both ordinary and overtime hours. There are three valid forms: a book, a time clock with cards, or an electronic system. Only one per employer: the Labour Directorate requires a single type, paper or electronic. The attendance record also has to stay at the workplace; unlike other employment documents, it cannot be centralised.
If the system is electronic
Electronic systems are governed by the Labour Directorate's Resolución Exenta N° 38 of 2024, which is in force. What matters for a restaurant:
- The system must be authorised by the Labour Directorate and certified by an independent company. A WhatsApp group where people say they've arrived is not a valid system.
- Every clock-in generates a receipt sent automatically to the worker's personal email. An SMS doesn't comply.
- The worker has permanent access to their own records for at least the last five years.
- Correcting a record has a procedure: the worker is notified and has 48 hours to object; if they object, the original record stands.
Compare against the plan
The record is for more than compliance. It is the only source of how many hours were really worked, and therefore how much overtime must be paid: the Labour Directorate says to add it up at the end of each week from the record. See overtime.
The most useful comparison is per person and per day:
| What you see | What it usually means |
|---|---|
| Clocked more hours than planned, several days | Unplanned overtime, or a badly cut shift |
| Clocked on a day with no shift | Someone covered for someone else without it being on the schedule |
| Had a shift and didn't clock | Absence, or a missed clock-in that needs fixing |
| The week adds up to more than the contract | Overtime that is owed even if never agreed |
A few minutes' difference on one day says nothing. A difference of two hours or more built up over the month does: either there is overtime nobody decided, or a clocking problem worth fixing before someone else finds it.
How Batuta handles it
Batuta doesn't replace the attendance record: the record stays in your authorised system. Batuta can bring in clock-ins from GeoVictoria, Talana or Buk and compare them with the plan, person by person. In Reports, anyone with a difference of two hours or more over the month is flagged.
Frequently asked questions
- Can the team clock in through WhatsApp?
- Not as an attendance record. An electronic system must be authorised by the Labour Directorate and certified, and must send a receipt of each clock-in to the worker's personal email.
- Can I keep a paper book in one restaurant and an electronic clock in another?
- The Labour Directorate requires one type of system per employer: paper only or electronic only.
- How is a wrong clock-in corrected in an electronic system?
- Through the Resolution 38 procedure: the worker is notified and has 48 hours to object; if they object, the original record stands.
Sources
This guide explains Chilean law for information only and is not legal advice. Legal quotations are given in the original Spanish, the authoritative text, and each links to its official source; if something changed after the review date, the source prevails.