Accept and hand over an Estonian employment service

Accept outputs you can observe

Signing the service agreement establishes the purchase. It does not demonstrate that the first payroll, employee questions and internal approvals work together. Use one ordinary change and one employee question to test the handover. These fictional records show what a useful acceptance memo looks like, including a failed state. The dates are an example operating calendar, not Estonian statutory deadlines.

The service began with EUR3,000 gross monthly in December. The manager now proposes EUR3,200 from 1 January. The provider should prepare the required employment paperwork and payroll action within the purchased scope; the business still decides whether to authorise the increase. Passing the test means the effective date, approved document and payroll input agree. It does not mean a screen displays the new number.

The first run fails, and that is useful

On 10 December, the manager sends the proposed increase. On 11 December, operations forwards it for preparation. On 12 December, a draft December payroll shows EUR3,200. Mark the test FAILED: the change is a January instruction and is not yet authorised. Stop that version from being released, preserve the draft reference and tell the payroll operator exactly which field is wrong.

The correction is not simply 'salary fixed'. December returns to EUR3,000; the January change remains pending; the provider identifies any employment-document action required. On 15 December, the authorised parties complete the change process. Operations then sends the approved January instruction with its document reference and effective date. The January draft shows EUR3,200, finance checks the resulting funding calculation, and the authorised approver releases that specific version.

Expected result: December EUR3,000; January EUR3,200; no duplicate EUR200 adjustment. This is an acceptance example, not a calculation of employee net pay or employer charges. If your provider's system cannot retain a future-dated change separately, the service must specify a reliable alternative process before this test passes.

Test an employee question through to an answer

The employee asks, 'Why does my bank payment differ from the gross salary on my contract?' An acknowledgement is not the answer. In this test, the provider explains the payslip lines, identifies the payroll period and deductions, and checks the bank-payment figure against the payroll record through the secure employee channel. The example contains no real employee financial information.

If the records agree, record 'explanation delivered; no payroll correction identified' and the employee's remaining question, if any. If they differ, open a payroll correction with a named next action and a promised update date agreed for that case. Do not close it merely because a ticket was answered. Business operations should see the status without receiving unnecessary personal tax details. This distinction makes a support demonstration much more informative than asking how many channels a provider offers.

Handover means someone can operate the next cycle

The fictional delivery memo names the product director for salary decisions, operations for complete inputs, finance for funding and the provider's payroll team for processing. It records the agreed submission and approval dates from the service calendar, the provider's escalation route and the current proposal version. For a new starter, registration confirmation is a separate prerequisite; the Estonian standard registration rule is tied to commencement of work, not to whether a service invoice has been paid.

Sources: emta.ee

The completed acceptance memo

Memo EE-ACCEPT-02, 18 December: employer identity and initial registration evidence accepted by the responsible reviewers in this fictional case; December payroll test corrected and accepted; January change approved for the future period; employee explanation delivered; weekend escalation contact still OPEN. The service can proceed only under the actual team's decision about that remaining requirement. The example does not manufacture an approval for your purchase.

Enter the two tests as requirements in the service acceptance tool and the unresolved contact as an open requirement. Export the memo and hand it to the colleague covering the next cycle. Keep the failed version reference: it explains why the procedure now requires an effective-date check. Re-run the relevant test when the employing arrangement, payroll input method or scope changes. Repeating every procurement check after an ordinary salary change would add work without answering a new question.