Business law
Published on 15 September 2026
On 15 September 2026 the «Boletín Oficial del Estado» (the Spanish official gazette, where a rule only becomes law once published) carried Royal Decree 723/2026 of 9 September. It partially transposes Directive (EU) 2019/1152 on transparent and predictable working conditions. It takes effect on 5 October 2026 and entirely replaces Royal Decree 1659/1998, which had governed this area for twenty-eight years.
Let me start with what the rule does not do, because that is where the confusion will come from.
Directive 2019/1152 contains a broad catalogue: a maximum probationary period, the right to take parallel employment, minimum predictability of work, measures against on-demand contracts, the right to request a more secure form of employment with a reasoned reply, and mandatory training provided free of charge and counted as working time.
None of that is in this Royal Decree. Its own preamble says so: this is a partial transposition, confined to information rights. On probation it only requires you to state its length and conditions; the substantive cap remains the one in article 14 of the Estatuto de los Trabajadores, the Spanish Workers' Statute. On training it only requires you to say that the right exists, not to provide it free or within working hours.
If you read a headline announcing any of those institutions as a novelty applicable in October, the headline is wrong.
This is the substantive change, and it is about the calendar rather than the paperwork.
Under the 1998 regulation, an employer had two months from the start of the relationship to hand over the information. Article 7.1 of the new Royal Decree requires it to be provided before the employment relationship begins. Two months of leeway become none.
Spain here goes beyond the European floor: the Directive itself (article 5.1) is satisfied with delivering the core items within the first seven calendar days and the rest within a month. The more-favourable-provisions clause allows this, but the practical effect is that the information stops being a later HR formality and becomes part of the act of hiring.
The same applies to changes: there used to be a month from the date a change took effect; now you must inform as soon as possible and, at the latest, on the day the change takes effect (article 7.3).
Article 3.2 sets out seventeen items, against nine in the repealed regulation. Four deserve a closer look.
The reason for a fixed-term contract. For temporary contracts you must state the enabling cause, the specific circumstances justifying it and its connection with the expected duration. That is, word for word, the standard article 15.1 of the Workers' Statute already requires in the contract itself. The novelty is not the requirement: it is that a second document now says the same thing and may say it worse. Any divergence between contract and information is documentary evidence handed to the other side in a permanent-status claim.
Algorithmic systems. You must disclose the existence of algorithmic or automated decision-making systems and, where they are used to set or alter working conditions (working time, task allocation, pay, career progression, place of work or termination), also their parameters, criteria and operating rules. This is not article 64.4.d) of the Workers' Statute, which requires informing the works council. Here the duty is individual, so it exists even where there is no employee representation, which is the situation of most small companies. And it is not limited to artificial intelligence: the rule speaks of «algorithmic or automated» systems, so a shift-allocation module or a performance-scoring tool falls within the wording.
Equality and compliance. You must state whether the company has an equality plan and identify it, along with the protocol against sexual harassment and harassment on grounds of sex, the work-life balance policy where it improves on the statutory minimum, and LGTBI measures where they exist. Anyone who should have those instruments and does not will be declaring it in writing, to each employee.
Proof of delivery. Article 6.2 requires the employer to keep proof of transmission or receipt. An email without acknowledgement, or a document uploaded to a portal with no read record, proves nothing.
The single transitional provision says that, for relationships in force on 5 October, the employer need only hand over the information to those who request it, within thirty working days of the request. That sounds reassuring.
But its second paragraph adds that any change after the entry into force must be notified automatically, without any request and within the ordinary deadline. In other words: «only if they ask» holds true until the first change. A shift change, a change of workplace, a variation of terms, and that contract enters the new regime.
Little through the direct route. Quite a lot through the indirect ones.
The Royal Decree creates no penalty regime and does not touch the LISOS, Spain's statute on offences and penalties in the social order. It remains article 6.4, a minor offence, with a fine of 70 to 750 euros under article 40.1.a). Worth knowing: the number of employees affected grades the fine within that band (article 39.2) but does not multiply it, since the statute provides expressly for multiplication where it wants to, and does not do so here.
The real risk sits elsewhere. A file with no record of delivery leaves the employer unable to prove what was agreed in any dispute over terms. And a poorly documented reason for a fixed-term contract, now in two places, is the short road to a declaration of permanent status, where the offence is serious and is penalised per employee affected.
There is also a group that tends to be overlooked: farms receiving Common Agricultural Policy aid. Annex III of Royal Decree 1049/2022 brings Directive 2019/1152 into the rules on social conditionality, so non-compliance can translate into a reduction of the aid. There the figure at stake is not 750 euros.
Before 5 October there is work that is done once and then forgotten: a template information document that cross-refers to statute and collective agreement where the rule allows it, a delivery route that records who received what, and a review of how the cause is drafted in live fixed-term contracts. The rest is execution.
The State Public Employment Service must publish an official template within twenty days of the Royal Decree's publication, but the rule itself warns that its absence postpones nothing. Waiting for the template is not a strategy.
If your company needs to review its whole hiring process, you can see how I work on these matters in the business area.
Editorial responsibility: Carles Jiménez, attorney-at-law (Barcelona Bar No. 34.946). This note was prepared with the assistance of artificial-intelligence tools and reviewed and approved by the author before publication.
Tell us about your situation and we will tell you, frankly, how we can help.
Contact us