Remote Work and Employee Monitoring – What Every Employer Should Know

Remote work has already become a reality for many employers, bringing with it new tools for the management of remote teams. For a significant number of companies, the question is no longer whether to employ staff working from home, but rather how to manage them effectively. Time-tracking and productivity-monitoring tools used in the context of remote work are now widely implemented in practice, however, there are specific legal requirements that employers must comply with when using such tools – requirements which are often overlooked.

The purpose of this article is to address several aspects that warrant particular attention in relation to the management of remote-working teams, without claiming to cover the topic in full.

1. Automated working time recording is permissible, but gives rise to employer obligations.

The Bulgarian Labour Code (following the amendments introduced in 2024) permits the actual working time of employees working from home to be established through an automated working time recording system. It is important to note, however, that upon request the employer is obliged to provide each such employee with access to their respective working time records.

A separate issue which should not be overlooked is the compliance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). As a rule, the use of such working time recording tools involves the processing of personal data and such processing must be lawful, limited to what is necessary for the specific purpose, and carried out with the employee being duly informed of such processing. This matter requires particular attention and, at a minimum, existing documentation/policies relating to personal data protection should be updated so as to reflect the specific tools being used.

2. Automated assessment does not replace managerial judgment

The Labour Code also introduces specific obligations which are often underestimated when agreeing on terms and conditions relating to remote work. The procedures for assigning and reporting work, as well as the scope and content of the work and the criteria for assessing performance, must be regulated either in the individual employment agreement (and/or a collective labour agreement) or in the employer’s internal regulations. In other words, such rules cannot exist simply as an established practice, but must be formally documented (and, accordingly, properly communicated to the employees).

Where work is assigned and reported through an information system, the employer’s obligations become even more specific. The employer is required to provide the employee with written information regarding the type and scope of the respective data collected, processed and stored by the system. Furthermore, where an information system for the algorithmic management of remote work is used – namely, a system that automatically makes decisions in relation to the assignment, reporting and supervision of work – the employer must inform the employee in writing of the manner in which such decisions are made. Moreover, upon a written request by the employee, the employer is obliged to review the specific decision made by the system and notify the employee of the final outcome.

The obligations under the Labour Code outlined above govern the employer-employee relationship in the context of remote work. However, where the management systems used fall within the scope of artificial intelligence (AI), an additional layer of applicable European regulation must also be taken into account. Regulation (EU) 2024/1689 (the AI Act) introduces an obligation relating to AI literacy, which has been applicable since February 2025. In broad terms, where an AI system is deployed, the employer is required to take all reasonable measures to ensure that the personnel using the system possess a sufficient level of knowledge and understanding thereof. This also extends to the individuals who, by law, are required to review decisions made by the system upon request. In practice, in order to properly comply with this obligation, such individuals must understand how the system operates.

In summary, the implementation of a system for algorithmic management is not merely a technological decision on the part of the employer, but also gives rise to legal obligations, compliance with which requires adequate training of employees who will work with the system.

Consider the following:

• Have the procedures for assigning and reporting work, as well as the criteria for evaluating remote work performance, been regulated in your employment agreements (and/or collective labour agreements) or in your internal regulations?
• If you use an automated working time recording system, are you able to provide employees with access to their respective data upon request?
• Have your internal data protection documents and policies been updated in line with the tools being used?
• If you use a system for algorithmic management, have employees been informed in writing of the manner in which decisions are made? Do the individuals responsible for reviewing such decisions sufficiently understand how the system operates?

If any of the above questions cannot be answered clearly, this in itself is a sufficient reason to address the matter without delay.

Disclaimer: The analysis and information provided in this article are for general informational purposes only and should not be considered legal advice. If you require legal assistance in relation to a specific case, we recommend consulting a competent attorney.