/ New Labor Directorate Ruling on Exceptions to Working Hour Limits

On April 16, 2026, the Labor Directorate issued Ruling No. 252/20, which revisits previous rulings and establishes new doctrine regarding the concept of “immediate superior supervision.”

Francisco Espinoza
Area Director

On April 16, 2026, the Labor Directorate issued Ruling No. 252/20, through which it reconsidered previous rulings and established a new doctrine regarding the concept of “immediate superior supervision” for the purposes of applying Article 22, paragraph 2, of the Labor Code.

This ruling updates the administrative criteria regarding the exclusion from working hour limitations, placing emphasis on the specific nature of the duties actually performed by the worker, and not solely on formal, contractual, or technological elements.

1. Previous Doctrine

Article 22, paragraph 2, of the Labor Code provides:

“Workers who provide services as managers, administrators, agents with administrative powers, and all those who work without immediate superior supervision due to the nature of the tasks performed shall be excluded from the limitation on working hours.”

In interpreting this latter provision, the Labor Directorate, through Opinion No. 84/04 of February 6, 2024, established that immediate superior supervision would exist when the following elements were cumulatively present:

a) Criticism or evaluation of the work performed, that is, supervision or control of the services provided;

b) The supervision or control is exercised by persons of higher rank or hierarchy within the company or establishment or automated means without human intervention.

c) That supervision be exercised in a contiguous or proximate manner, understood as a functional proximity between the supervisor and the person performing the work, no longer limited solely to physical proximity but extended to the control possibilities offered by technological development.

Under this criterion, the Labor Directorate had maintained that only those positions whose nature absolutely precluded the use of any lawful means of supervision or control would be excluded from the working hour limitation.

2. New doctrine established by Ruling No. 252/20

In Opinion No. 252/20, the Labor Directorate concludes that some of the criteria previously noted are not adequately reconciled with the literal wording of the law or with a harmonious interpretation of the labor legal system, particularly regarding the concept of immediate superior supervision and the role of technological control mechanisms.

The administrative authority emphasizes that Article 22, paragraph 2, of the Labor Code clearly establishes that the exclusion from the limitation on working hours applies only when the worker performs services without immediate superior supervision, due to the nature of the work performed.

Consequently, the determination of such an exclusion cannot be made in the abstract, nor on the basis of purely formal elements—such as the job title, the contractual designation, or the existence of record-keeping systems—but must be based on a concrete and case-by-case analysis of the functions the worker actually performs.

For such an analysis, the ruling states that the following factors, among others, must be considered:

i) the degree of autonomy the worker has in organizing their time and work arrangements;

ii) whether their performance is evaluated primarily based on results or on adherence to a specific schedule;

iii) the existence of a supervisor who directly oversees the manner and timing of task execution;

iv) whether the position involves representing the employer or making autonomous decisions; and

v) whether existing control mechanisms affect the actual performance of the work or only its results.

Likewise, the Labor Directorate adds that this analysis must be conducted by considering current forms of work organization, such as goal-based schemes, greater functional autonomy, remote or hybrid work, and less hierarchical organizational structures, which are not, in and of themselves, incompatible with the exclusion of the limitation on working hours.

3. Summary of Current Criteria

In summary, Ruling No. 252/20 establishes that:

• Subordination and dependency, as an essential element of the employment contract, should not be confused with immediate superior supervision.
• A worker may be fully subject to the relationship of subordination and dependence and yet be excluded from the limitation on working hours if the nature of their duties does not entail direct and functional control over the manner and timing in which they perform their work.
• The existence of recording systems, technological tools, reporting mechanisms, or traceability does not in itself constitute immediate superior supervision, nor does it automatically preclude the applicability of the exclusion.
• The determining factor is whether such mechanisms entail, in practice, effective, direct, and functional control over the performance of the work.
• Although Law No. 21,561 eliminated certain formal or geographical grounds for exclusion, it did not modify the substantive standard of immediate superior supervision nor did it equate the mere availability of technology with the effective exercise of control.