Do I Investigate Internally or Refer to the Labor Directorate?
On receiving a Ley Karin complaint the employer has a short window, three business days, to make one decision: run the investigation in-house or refer it to the Labor Inspectorate. The duties stay the same either way; what changes is control, timing and where the risk of a procedural error sits.
Last updated:
This page frames the choice Article 211-C forces within three business days of a complaint: the decision and its deadline, an honest comparison of the two routes, when each one fits, and the duties that hold regardless of the path. It closes with the questions HR and legal leads ask most.
The decision and its deadline
The window is short and the clock starts the moment the complaint is received, not when the company feels ready to act.
Under Article 211-C of the Labor Code, within three business days of receiving a complaint the employer must either open an internal investigation or refer the record to the Labor Inspectorate. From that same moment it must adopt safeguard measures for the affected person and keep strict confidentiality. The procedure and its deadlines are set out in the Ley Karin regulation.
Neither route is inherently safer. They distribute the same duties differently.
There is one case where there is no choice. If the complaint is directed against those who represent the employer (the manager, the administrator or whoever habitually exercises management functions), Article 12 of the regulation requires that it always be referred to the Labor Directorate. An internal investigation is not an option.
The two routes, side by side
Each option trades control for distance from the case. The right one depends on the company's real capacity to investigate well.
Investigate internally
The company controls timing, keeps the context in-house and can act fast. In exchange it carries the full burden of impartiality, rigor and confidentiality. It needs a trained, independent investigator and a documented procedure; without them, the investigation itself becomes the weak point.
Refer to the Labor Inspectorate
A public, external body runs the investigation, which reinforces perceived impartiality and offloads the procedural risk. In exchange the company gives up control over timing and depth, and still must apply the safeguards, keep confidentiality and enforce the resulting ruling.
When each route fits
The decision is less about preference and more about capacity, sensitivity and who is involved.
Capacity and speed
There is a trained, clearly impartial investigator, the facts are circumscribed, and acting quickly to protect the affected person matters. The company can document every step.
Sensitivity and conflict
The complaint involves senior management, there is no one internally free of conflict, the case is complex or high-profile, or impartiality could be questioned. External handling protects the process and the company.
Whichever route is chosen, a core set of duties does not move.
What holds either way
The choice of investigator does not suspend the employer's own obligations toward the people involved.
- Immediate safeguard measures for the affected person, from the moment the complaint is received.
- Strict confidentiality throughout the process, protecting the privacy and dignity of everyone involved.
- Compliance with the legal deadlines and, at the end, applying the measures or sanctions that follow from the ruling.
Related in this cluster
The choice sits inside a broader duty. See the employer\'s liability under the Ley Karin for the fronts of exposure a mishandled procedure opens, and the sanctions and fines that follow.
Frequently asked questions
How long does the company have to decide?
Three business days from receiving the complaint. Within that period the employer must choose between investigating internally or referring the matter to the Labor Inspectorate (Article 211-C of the Labor Code). Failing to decide within the deadline, or leaving the complaint unaddressed, is an infraction in itself.
Can I always refer to the Labor Directorate to avoid the conflict?
Yes, referral is a legitimate route and sometimes the most prudent one, but it does not release the company from its duties. Even when referred, it must immediately adopt safeguard measures for the affected person, keep confidentiality, and ultimately apply the measures or sanctions that follow from the ruling. Referral moves the investigation, not the employer's responsibility.
When is an internal investigation advisable?
When the company has a suitable, impartial investigator trained in the subject, able to protect confidentiality and meet the deadlines. An internal investigation gives control over timing and knowledge of context, but demands rigor: a poorly run procedure becomes, itself, a source of exposure.
How long does an internal investigation take?
The internal investigation must conclude within thirty business days. Once finished, the report is sent to the Labor Directorate within two business days; the Directorate has thirty days to rule and, once notified, the employer applies the measures or sanctions within fifteen calendar days.
Does the choice change the company's exposure?
The chosen route does not alter the underlying duties, but it does change the margin for error. In both cases the company answers for safeguards, confidentiality and meeting deadlines; what changes is who runs the investigation and, with it, where the risk of a procedural defect lies.
Official sources
Transform Your Legal Challenges into Competitive Advantages
Discover how our innovative approach can drive your business
