An exact number of hours cannot be given, as it depends on how many platforms you use, how often you check them, and how many people within your organization have access. What is certain: with four separate compliance portals, there is added time that has nothing to do with the content itself. Logging in, searching for the right tab, resetting a password because you haven't been there in three months — it adds up, and it adds up on top of the time the actual obligation already costs.
The biggest time drain is not the data entry itself, but the constant switching back and forth. Someone who needs to check four times a month whether something is outstanding does not do this in practice as one ten-minute task, but as four separate moments spread across the week, each with its own login screen and its own way of working.
Where the time actually goes in practice
At most organizations, the time is spent in three recognizable steps. First, logging in itself: a different password per platform, sometimes a second verification step, sometimes a colleague who has to be called because only they have access. Then the searching: which platform was about packaging again, and which one about personal data? If you don't work with all four every day, you forget that after a few weeks. And finally, updating: an address change or a new product must be entered in each platform separately, with the risk that one of them gets skipped.
None of these three steps is a major problem in itself. Added together, and repeated over several months, it is the reason why a check that takes fifteen minutes on paper takes up an afternoon in practice.
What that means for those who manage the portals
At an installation company, this management often falls to one person: the director or office manager, alongside all their other tasks. At a slightly larger organization, it is distributed, for example between an HR manager for personnel-related obligations and an office manager for the rest. In both cases, the same applies: the more portals, the greater the risk that someone loses track of who has access to what and when it was last checked. This is not a matter of carelessness, but of a structure that is not set up to handle multiple systems at the same time.
frequently asked questions about how that works in practice gives a picture of the situations that organizations most often run into, regardless of which platform it is.
One overview instead of four
Reglia does not change the obligations themselves; those remain with the platforms that explain and maintain them. What reglia does do is bring the login and search moment back to one place: one account, one company dossier that each connected platform can read, and one overview of what is outstanding. This does not save the time that an obligation itself costs, but it does save the time lost in switching back and forth between them.
How that works exactly and what reglia does and does not do with your data is explained on the page about how reglia works. Which platforms are currently connected and what each one does individually, you can see on the overview of connected platforms.
What remains, even with a combined overview
A shared dossier and a joint overview shorten the processing time, but they do not take over the substantive assessment. Whether an obligation applies to your organization and within what timeframe you must act remains something that belongs with the relevant platform or, for your specific situation, with a lawyer or the competent supervisory authority. Reglia makes no determination on this itself; it only brings together what would otherwise remain separate.
If you would like to see how that looks in practice for your own organization, you can freely view which platforms are available and whether creating a business account is worthwhile for you.