Starting point
A mid-sized engineering services firm was sending more and more employees to projects abroad. Payroll ran through an external provider fed with manual input, and assignments were handled case by case inside the HR team: social security, tax, residence permits, every time from the beginning. Payroll often learned of an assignment only when the first incorrect payslip had already gone out. Corrections, queries from the tax advisers and employees abroad without an A1 certificate (the EU form proving which country's social security applies) were the result.
I was employed there permanently. It was my entry into HR operations, with responsibility for payroll, contracts and global mobility. Then Covid arrived. The office emptied, payroll input suddenly came from home offices, and the number of assignments dipped briefly before growing faster than before. The old routine would not have carried that.
The decision was taken to move payroll and assignment management onto a SaaS platform. The rollout had to be fully remote, alongside the running monthly payroll, and it needed a works council agreement, because a payroll system with reporting functions is subject to co-determination under Section 87 (1) no. 6 of the Works Constitution Act (BetrVG).
Approach
Requirements first, vendor second. The mistakes of the previous months became a list of what the system had to do: assignments as a distinct case type with deadlines, an interface to time tracking, roles and access rights, audit-proof filing, reporting without a detour through Excel. Three vendors were tested against that list, by video demo, with the same test cases drawn from our own records.
In parallel, the negotiation with the works council (Betriebsrat, the elected employee body in German companies). I did not open with a finished draft. I opened with a session in which the system was shown: which data it stores, who can see what, which reports are possible and which should be ruled out. The agreement grew out of that: purpose limitation for the data, access roles, deletion periods, a ban on performance and behaviour analysis beyond the payroll purpose, and a fixed procedure for later changes. Four video sessions, one document, signed before migration.
The rollout itself ran in three steps: data migration from the old lists with every record checked, two months of parallel running alongside the old procedure, then cut-over. The assignment process was modelled in the system as a case: country, duration, contract form, A1 or exemption, tax liability, residence permit, with fixed deadlines and one contact person per case. From then on, tax advisers and social security bodies received complete documentation out of the system instead of individual enquiries.
Outcome
After the parallel run, payroll went out without corrections and every assignment passed through the same case with the same deadlines. Line managers reported assignments earlier because the system spared them queries. The works council agreement held, including through later extensions, because the change procedure had been part of it from the start.
The entire rollout took place without a single in-person meeting. At the time that was necessity, but it showed that a system change involving a works council can run cleanly on video if the order is right: show first, agree second, migrate third.
What transfers to your company
- Requirements before vendorsA list drawn from your own mistakes of the last few months is the best specification. Test vendors with the same cases, not with their demo data.
- Works council before migration, not afterA payroll system with reporting is subject to co-determination. Show the system first, then agree, and the negotiation gets shorter.
- Parallel run instead of a cut-over dateTwo months of double payroll cost time, but every discrepancy surfaces before it reaches an employee.
- An assignment is a case, not an emailCountry, duration, A1, tax, residence, with deadlines in the system. Then payroll knows about the assignment before the first run.
Case study from an earlier permanent role, anonymised. No company names, only the industry and the role. More about me
Frequently asked questions
How long did the rollout take?
About seven months from the requirements list to the first independent payroll run, two of them in parallel operation. The works council negotiation ran alongside vendor selection and did not delay the migration.
Was this an interim assignment?
No. I was a permanent employee, responsible for payroll, contracts and global mobility. It was my first system rollout with a works council, and the order of work from back then still applies in my mandates today.
Which SaaS platform was it?
That stays anonymised, and it is not the point. The choice followed the requirements from our own records. Another company with other cases would reach a different decision.
What was in the works council agreement?
Purpose of the data processing, access roles, deletion periods, exclusion of performance and behaviour monitoring beyond the payroll purpose, the council's information rights, and a procedure for later changes to the system. Practical experience, not legal advice.
Would it have worked remotely without Covid?
Yes. The video sessions with the works council were shorter and better prepared than earlier in-person meetings, because the system was shown on screen rather than described.