Short answer
The pay transparency rules themselves do not prescribe a timeframe within which you must classify your jobs based on objective, gender-neutral criteria. There is no deadline like there is for responding to an information request or submitting a pay gap report. The duration of the classification process itself therefore does not depend on the law, but on your organisation: the number of jobs, the extent to which jobs are already documented, and how many people internally are involved in the decision-making. In practice, companies with a limited number of jobs and a reasonably up-to-date job catalogue complete the process in a few weeks. Companies without job descriptions, with many custom-made jobs or with multiple locations that each used their own classification, typically need a couple of months.
This distinction is important for two reasons. First, because the classification is the foundation for obligations that do have a deadline, such as responding to an information request or submitting figures for a reporting requirement. Second, because a hastily executed classification takes more time later than a classification that is set up correctly from the start.
What determines the timeframe
The first factor is the starting situation. If you already have job descriptions, a job framework or a salary structure built at job level, then the classification is often a matter of reorganising and testing against gender-neutral criteria. If that foundation is lacking, the process begins with describing the jobs themselves, and that is the part that takes the most time.
The second factor is the number of jobs and how they are spread across your organisation. A plumbing company with thirty employees and a handful of recognisable jobs (installer, planner, administrative assistant, manager) moves through the process faster than an organisation with many unique or hybrid jobs, where you constantly need to determine which category a job falls into.
The third factor is the number of people involved. A classification drawn up by one person and later reviewed goes faster than a process where managers, HR and possibly the works council are involved in thinking through the classification. More people involved means more consultation, but also a classification that is more broadly supported and less likely to be questioned once someone raises concerns about it.
Where the process gets stuck
In practice, classification processes usually get stuck at three points. The first is the lack of clear criteria: without documented, objective standards for what counts as equal work, discussion arises for each job, and that discussion takes more time than the classification itself.
The second bottleneck is jobs that do not fit well into a category. Edge cases, such as a job that is partly managerial and partly operational, require a choice that must be consistent with the rest of the classification. If you do not document that choice, you will have to explain later why a similar job has been classified differently elsewhere.
The third bottleneck is documentation. A classification that only exists in the heads of those involved is not reproducible once someone leaves or an employee asks what criteria the classification is based on. This is not just a matter of thoroughness; it also determines how quickly you can respond when a concrete question comes in.
What this means for your planning
Because there is no statutory deadline, there is room to set up the process carefully rather than under time pressure. That does not mean that delay is without consequences: the job classification is the basis for obligations that do have a deadline, and a classification that is not yet complete when those obligations take effect will still create time pressure. Anyone who in a few questions sees which obligations already apply to their own organisationgets a picture of how much time is practically still available before other obligations take effect.
The way you set up the classification also determines how reproducible and explainable it will be later. The knowledge base per topic sets out which steps belong to a classification and which criteria count as objective and gender-neutral in this context. Anyone who wants to know how a system structures the classification and what documents result from it will find that on the page where the classification and the underlying data come from.
The cost of a classification process is closely linked to the lead time: the more jobs and the less documentation already exists, the more time and therefore the more work it costs. An overview of what this means in different situations is on the page with the rates per situation.
This explanation is descriptive and not legal advice on your specific situation. For a ruling on the classification of your own jobs, or on whether a difference in compensation is justified, a lawyer or the competent supervisory authority is the right point of contact.
Do you want to know where you stand first? The free quick-scan gives you an indication in a few questions of which obligations apply to your organisation and which topics need attention.