A time clock with GPS tracking is two purchases wearing one name. One records a location at the moment somebody clocks in and forgets the rest of the day. The other follows a person continuously while they are on the clock. They cost about the same and carry completely different obligations to the people being recorded.
Decide which one you are buying
Almost every legitimate need is met by a location captured at the punch: it confirms somebody reached a site, which is genuinely hard to establish otherwise for mobile work. Continuous tracking requires a justification you can state in a sentence, and if you cannot state it, switch it off before rollout rather than after somebody objects in writing.
Prove that collection stops
Clocking out should end collection entirely. Test it on a real phone and look at what the record shows for the evening, because a product that keeps collecting after the shift is a problem you have bought rather than inherited. An indicator the worker can see while tracking is running does more for acceptance than any assurance.
What a location actually proves
That a device was somewhere when a button was pressed. That is useful as corroboration and weaker evidence than employers assume, because phones are inaccurate indoors and a location can be spoofed by anybody who cares to. Treat it as a record rather than an accusation, because opening a disciplinary conversation on a single reading is how employers get this wrong.
Questions people ask about time clock with gps tracking
Can we track staff outside working hours?
No, and products that make it easy are the ones to avoid. Collection should end at clock out and you should be able to demonstrate it does.
Do we have to tell people?
Yes. Covert monitoring of staff is a serious matter almost everywhere and the notice is straightforward to write.
What if somebody refuses location?
You need an alternative that does not disadvantage them, and a shared device at a fixed point is the usual answer.