Algorithmic transparency for workers in Spain, what Royal Decree 723/2026 requires from 5 October

What must be disclosed under letter k of Article 3.2

Letter k requires employers to disclose the existence of algorithmic or automated decision-making systems. Where those systems are used to decide on working conditions, the information must also cover their guidelines, criteria and operating rules. The text is in Royal Decree 723/2026 (in Spanish), which transposes Directive (EU) 2019/1152 on transparent and predictable working conditions. It replaces Royal Decree 1659/1998, which had governed this information for almost three decades.

The employment decisions covered

The article lists six areas of decision introduced by the words «such as», so the list is open.

• The length and distribution of working time
• The allocation of tasks
• The setting of pay
• Career progression
• The place of work
• Termination of the contract

The common thread is that the system plays a part in setting or changing a working condition. An algorithm that allocates weekend shifts is covered. One that only sorts the emails in an inbox is not, because it decides nothing about the employment relationship.

Candidate selection is not on the list, because this information is given to people who have already been hired. Recruitment algorithms have their own rules under the Spanish Workers’ Statute (Estatuto de los Trabajadores) and the GDPR.

The existence of the system and its guidelines, criteria and rules

The Royal Decree does not spell out what guidelines, criteria and operating rules are. The most complete reference is the guide Algorithmic information in the workplace (in Spanish), published by the Spanish Ministry of Labour in May 2022. It was written for Article 64.4(d) of the Workers’ Statute and for the GDPR, not for this decree, but it describes the same kind of information. Of the fifteen items it lists, these are the most useful for drafting each worker’s document.

• Which specific decisions are taken with the system and whether it profiles people
• The software or product used and the company that supplies it
• The degree of human involvement in the final decision
• The variables the system uses and how it weights each one
• The rules that turn those variables into a decision
• The consequences the decision may have for the person

In practice, the information is only useful if the worker can understand it. Take a bonus that weights on-time deliveries at 60 % and customer ratings at 40 %. The worker must be able to read it in exactly those terms, and know that a manager reviews every calculation before it is paid.

What counts as an algorithmic or automated system

The Royal Decree does not define an algorithmic or automated decision-making system. Nor does it require the system to be artificial intelligence or to decide without human involvement. The 2022 guide already took the view, for the Workers’ Statute, that the right to information arises even when the algorithm merely supports the decision. The line is drawn by the use, not by the tool.

Borderline cases are settled by asking whether the system’s output carries weight in a decision about the person. If it does, the prudent course is to disclose. Disclosing too much costs a paragraph in the contract. Disclosing too little is an infringement.

When and how the information must be given

The information is given before the employment relationship begins, under Article 7.1. It can be included in the written employment contract itself. If it is not, the employer provides it in one or more separate documents, on paper or in electronic form. Electronic form is valid if the worker can access, store and print it. The employer must also keep proof that it was sent or received, under Article 6.

The Spanish Public Employment Service (SEPE) published on 1 October 2026 the model information document (in Spanish) required by the first additional provision. It is a seven-page form, also available in Catalan, Galician, Basque and Valencian. Its section I is headed “existence of algorithmic or automated decision-making systems related to the setting, variation or modification of working conditions” and leaves a free-text box. The heading only names the existence of the system. Letter k also requires its guidelines, criteria and rules when the system decides on working conditions, so the box has to include them or refer to an annex signed with the document. Using the model is optional, and not using it does not exempt the employer from the duty to inform, according to the first additional provision itself.

Example: a delivery company with software-driven shifts and bonuses

This case is fictitious. Rutalia Logística, S.L. runs last-mile parcel delivery in Madrid with 140 couriers on its payroll. One piece of software allocates shifts every week according to forecast demand and declared availability. Another calculates a monthly bonus with two indicators, on-time deliveries and recipients’ ratings.

On 13 October 2026 Rutalia takes on twelve couriers. Before their first day it gives them the contract with an annex on the two systems. The annex explains what data they use, how much each indicator weighs and who reviews the results. For the Christmas peak it also hires eight people for three weeks. The obligation does not reach them, because their employment lasts no more than four weeks.

On 20 October, a courier hired in 2025 asks for the information in writing. Rutalia has thirty working days to provide it. In November, the bonus software provider changes the weighting and gives more weight to recipients’ ratings. That change means informing all affected staff again, at the latest on the day it applies. As Rutalia has a works council, the change also triggers the council’s right to information under Article 64.4(d) of the Workers’ Statute. If the provider gives no advance notice, Rutalia is in breach without knowing it.

How it fits with the Workers’ Statute, the GDPR and the AI Act

Royal Decree 723/2026 is not the first Spanish rule requiring employers to explain workplace algorithms. What is new is that it requires the information for every worker, for any system and before the first day. Until now there were two layers, and the AI Act will add another in 2027.

The preamble of the Royal Decree makes the link with the Artificial Intelligence Act explicit. It states that letter k «is based on Articles 2.11, 26.7, 26.11 and 86 of Regulation (EU) 2024/1689». Article 2.11 allows Member States to keep or introduce rules that are more favourable to workers on the use of AI by employers. Spain has used that leeway to bring forward individual information by more than a year. It has also extended it to systems the AI Act does not treat as high-risk, or that are not AI at all.

Article 86 of the AI Act recognises a different right, the right to an explanation of a specific decision taken with a high-risk system. Letter k does not go that far. It requires the rules to be described before they are applied, not each result to be justified afterwards. The AI Act in employment, including recruitment, is covered in our AI Act compliance guide for businesses.

The software provider and trade secrets

The duty to inform lies with the employer, even if someone else developed the algorithm. In many startups and scaleups, shifts, appraisals or incentives run on third-party software. The employer does not know by itself the rules it has to explain, and only the provider can supply that information.

What to ask the provider for in the contract

The contract with the provider must enable the employer to comply with Articles 3.2(k) and 7.3. It should include at least these commitments.

• A description of the variables, weighting and decision rules, written so that it can be passed on to staff
• Advance notice of any change to the model or its parameters, with enough time to inform staff before it takes effect
• Documentation on the human involvement the system allows and on the tests or audits carried out
• Cooperation in handling requests from workers and from the works council

These clauses fit in the SaaS or licence agreement and in the service level agreement, as part of technology contracting with each provider. Negotiating them at signature costs less than at renewal, and we explain how to draft them in our guide on algorithmic transparency clauses with your software vendor.

How far the duty goes against trade secrets

Disclosing guidelines, criteria and rules does not mean handing over the source code. The Ministry of Labour’s 2022 guide says so expressly for the Workers’ Statute and the GDPR. Letter k uses equivalent wording, which points to how the system works and not to how it is programmed. The provider can protect its code and training data as trade secrets. What the contract must avoid is leaving the employer without an understandable explanation of how the system decides.