Absence Management
Leave Dates
UK / wider Europe Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Leave Dates Ltd · www.leavedates.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Link to this page
Add ?theme=dark to the image address for dark backgrounds.
The badge shows the category and the month of the latest evaluation, and EU-Made where
that is the product’s provenance. It never shows a score.
Leave Dates at a glance
- Vendor
- Leave Dates Ltd
- Headquarters
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Data hosting
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Free plan
- Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026
- Starting price
- “After the trial, pricing plans start from £0.75 per person, per month, with no minimum contract.” (vendor’s words) source, captured 13 Oct 2026
- Panel verdict
- The AI panel rates Leave Dates 1.5/5, the mean of 6 judges. Leave Dates, an absence-management product from Leave Dates Ltd, registered in England and Wales, is strongest at everyday requests and approvals — scores cluster at 6-7, crediting mobile requests, a shared colour-coded wall chart and pre-booking checks for overlaps, balances and understaffing — and weakest at regulated German sick-leave handling, at 1-2, where we found no public information on the electronic certificate of incapacity, the six-week continued-pay limit or BEM. how scores are made
- As of
- Vendor pages captured 1 Oct 2026 to 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
The panel's verdict
Leave Dates, an absence-management product from Leave Dates Ltd, registered in England and Wales, is strongest at everyday requests and approvals — scores cluster at 6-7, crediting mobile requests, a shared colour-coded wall chart and pre-booking checks for overlaps, balances and understaffing — and weakest at regulated German sick-leave handling, at 1-2, where we found no public information on the electronic certificate of incapacity, the six-week continued-pay limit or BEM. Leave policies score 4-6: automatic proration, configurable carry-over and day-or-hour tracking are documented, but every stated rule is the UK's Working Time Regulations and its 5.6 weeks, and we found no public information on German federal-state holidays. Sovereignty sits at 0-1, with hosting location, ownership and subprocessors unstated, and pricing transparency at 1-2: tier names Essential and Plus are public but no price figures, minimum users or minimum term appear, so an annual invoice is not computable. Payroll handover scored 4 with no spread, and absence data protection 3-4, with role-based access claimed alongside terms permitting aggregated, anonymised data use. The judges did not meaningfully split.
Speaks for it
- Mobile and web requests and approvals with pre-booking checks for overlaps, insufficient balances and team understaffing
- Automatic proration for starters, leavers and part-timers, with allowances tracked in days or hours
- Configurable carry-over with a maximum and expiry deadline, tracked automatically, with manual override and locking of system values
- Excel export in every plan, with API, webhooks and Zapier documented as integration routes
- Calendar sync with Google and Outlook, Slack summaries and email notifications, and a shared colour-coded wall chart
Held against it
- Every documented statutory rule is UK law — Working Time Regulations 1998, the 5.6-week minimum, the 12.07% accrual — and we found no public information on German federal-state holidays or on keeping statutory and contractual entitlement apart
- We found no public information on eAU retrieval, sick certificates, the six-week continued-pay limit, BEM or child-sick days
- We found no public information on a named payroll system such as DATEV, on mapping absence types to payroll codes, or on monthly period closing
- Hosting location, ownership and subprocessors are unstated, and the contracting entity is Leave Dates Ltd, registered in England and Wales — outside the EU
- No price figures, pricing basis, minimum user count or minimum term appear on the captured pages, so an annual invoice is not computable
Best for
- You need an everyday planner for requesting, approving and reporting on annual leave, where the bench's scores cluster highest at 6-7
- Your team mixes full-timers, part-timers, starters and leavers and needs automatic proration, day-or-hour allowances and configurable carry-over
- You operate under UK leave law, whose 5.6-week formulas and part-time entitlement examples the documented guidance follows
- Your payroll handover can work from Excel export or API, webhook and Zapier routes rather than a named payroll connector
Avoid if
- You must run German sick leave end to end — the eAU, the six-week continued-pay limit, BEM and child-sick days stay outside what the captured pages document, and scores sit at 1-2
- Your payroll chain needs a named German payroll system such as DATEV, absence-to-payroll-code mapping and a monthly period lock — the documented route ends at Excel export, API, webhooks and Zapier
- You require documented data residency, a subprocessor list and a data-processing agreement covering sickness data before signing — sovereignty scored 0-1 and the contracting entity is registered in England and Wales
- You need to compute your annual invoice from published prices — only tier names and a feature comparison are public, with no price figures, minimum users or minimum term
The scores
| Criterion | Panel median |
|---|---|
| Entitlements & German leave rules | 2 of 5 |
| Requests, approvals & team calendar | 3 of 5 |
| Sick leave, eAU & continued pay | 0.5 of 5 |
| Payroll handover, time tracking & API | 2 of 5 |
| Health data, access & works council | 1.5 of 5 |
| European sovereignty | 0 of 5 |
| Pricing transparency | 1 of 5 |
Entitlements & German leave rules
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the tool computes leave the way German and Austrian law and contracts do: entitlements per contract and working-time model, part-time proration, carry-over and expiry with the required notice, public holidays per federal state, half days and hourly leave, and special leave types.
0 — A fixed number of days per person typed in by hand; no carry-over, no proration and no public holidays.
3 — Annual entitlements and national public holidays, with carry-over as a manual adjustment and no statement on part-time or regional holidays.
5 — Entitlements per employee with automatic proration for joiners, leavers and part-time working days, public holidays per German federal state or Austrian region, half days, configurable carry-over with an expiry date, and custom leave types.
8 — Several working-time models per employee with changes over time recalculated, hourly leave, carry-over expiry with automatic notices to employees before leave lapses, special leave and parental leave types with their own rules, and entitlement changes logged.
10 — Leave law modelled and documented: entitlement rules per contract or collective agreement, statutory minimum and contractual leave kept apart where they expire differently, balances recalculated retroactively with an audit trail, and the rules a tool applies published in its help centre.
The Team Lead
Proration is genuinely automatic — part-timers, starters and leavers are handled, allowances work in days or hours, and carry-over runs automatically with a configurable limit and an expiry date. But every rule I can find is written against UK law (the 5.6-week minimum, the 12.07% accrual rate, rolled-up holiday pay), and we found no public information on German federal-state public holidays, half days, or keeping statutory and contractual leave apart where they expire differently. 2 3 6 7
The Managing Director
Pro-rata for part-timers, starters and leavers is genuinely handled, allowances can run in hours, and carry-over limits with an expiry date are calculated automatically with manual override and locking. But the product states it is built for UK Working Time Regulations and every documented formula is the 5.6-week UK regime; I found no public information on German statutory minimum leave kept apart from contractual entitlement, holidays per German federal state (the bank-holiday import says 200+ countries and regions without naming German Länder), or automatic notices to employees before carried-over leave lapses. 2 3 6 7
The Payroll Accountant
Proration for starters, leavers and part-timers, carry-over with a configurable limit and expiry deadline, hourly allowances and custom leave types are all documented — but every rule I can find is UK law: the 5.6-week minimum, the 12.07% accrual and Working Time Regulations 1998. I found no public information on public holidays per German federal state, the German statutory minimum, or statutory and contractual entitlements kept apart where they expire differently, so I cannot vouch for it computing leave the way German contracts do. 2 3 6 7
The Data Protection Officer
Automatic pro-rating for starters, leavers and part-timers, hourly allowances, configurable carry-over with an expiry the system tracks, and custom leave types are all evidenced. But every statutory statement on the captured pages is UK law — Working Time Regulations, 5.6 weeks, the 12.07% accrual rate — and we found no public information on German federal-state holidays or on keeping statutory and contractual entitlement apart where they expire differently. 3 6 7 2
The HR IT Integrator
Automatic proration for starters, leavers and part-timers, allowances in days or hours, configurable carry-over with an expiry date and automatic expiry tracking, custom leave types and parental leave types are all evidenced. The engine is documented as built around the UK Working Time Regulations with 5.6-week worked examples, and holiday handling is a generic import covering 200+ countries and regions; I found no public information on German federal-state holidays, statutory versus contractual minimums kept apart, or logged entitlement changes. 2 3 6 7 8
The Skeptic
Carry-over is properly computed — configurable limit and expiry deadline, expiry tracked automatically, system values lockable — with automatic proration for starters and leavers, day or hour tracking, and custom leave types. But every documented rule is the UK's Working Time Regulations and its 5.6 weeks; we found no public information on public holidays per German federal state, on keeping statutory and contractual leave apart, or on notifying employees before carried-over leave lapses. 2 3 6 7 8
Requests, approvals & team calendar
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The everyday flow: an employee requests leave on a phone, the right person approves, a substitute is named, and the team can plan around it — judged on configurable approval chains and on what colleagues are allowed to see.
0 — Leave requested by email or in a shared calendar; no approval step and no record of who approved.
3 — Requests with a single approver and a team calendar, but no substitutes, no blocking rules and every absence reason visible to everyone.
5 — Mobile requests and approvals, approvers per team or department, substitutes named on the request, a team calendar that shows absence without the reason, email or push notifications, and calendar sync.
8 — Multi-level approval chains, minimum staffing rules or blackout periods, delegation while the approver is away, configurable calendar visibility per role, Microsoft Teams or Slack integration, and every request, approval and cancellation logged.
10 — Approval logic that matches a real organisation: rules per location, team and leave type, conflicts checked against staffing and shift plans before approval, a complete history per request, and reporting on pending and overdue approvals.
The Team Lead
This is what I would live in: requests and approvals on the phone, a shared wall chart that updates the moment someone requests, and — the thing I actually need — checks for team leave limits exceeded or understaffing run before a booking goes through, with overlaps highlighted to the approver. Slack and email notifications, calendar sync and audit trails are all evidenced; what I found no public information on is a named substitute on each request ("handovers" appears once as a word in the feature list), multi-level approval chains, and delegation while an approver is away. 2 3 8 9
The Managing Director
Mobile and web requests and approvals, email and Slack notifications, calendar sync and a shared wall chart are all evidenced, and bookings are checked for overlaps, insufficient balances and understaffing before approval — that is the everyday flow I need. I found no public information on substitutes named on a request, multi-level approval chains, delegation while an approver is away, or reporting on pending and overdue approvals, and the colour-coded chart appears to display each absence type unless privacy settings say otherwise. 3 8 9
The Payroll Accountant
Mobile requests and approvals, a shared wall chart with pending leave striped out, overlap and understaffing checks before booking, Slack notifications and calendar sync are all documented, with privacy options over what colleagues can see. I found no public information on multi-level approval chains, delegation while an approver is away, or reporting on pending and overdue approvals, which holds this in the middle band. 2 3 8 9
The Data Protection Officer
Requests and approvals run on web and mobile with Slack and email notifications and calendar sync, a shared colour-coded chart with privacy options over visibility, and pre-booking checks for overlaps, balances and team understaffing. We found no public information on named substitutes, multi-level approval chains or delegation while an approver is away, and "audit trails" appears as a marketing phrase without detail on what is actually recorded. 8 9 3 2
The HR IT Integrator
Mobile requests and approvals, a shared colour-coded wall chart with privacy options, Google and Outlook sync, Slack summaries and handovers on the request are all documented, and bookings are checked for overlaps, insufficient balance and understaffing before they go through. I found no public information on multi-level approval chains, delegation while an approver is away, or reporting on pending and overdue approvals. 2 3 8 9
The Skeptic
Mobile requests and approvals, a shared colour-coded wall chart, Slack and email notifications, calendar sync, and — better than most — booking checks against team leave limits, understaffing and overlaps, with privacy options for what colleagues see. What I miss is everything above a single approver: no public information on multi-level chains, substitutes named on the request, or delegation while the approver is away. 2 3 8 9
Sick leave, eAU & continued pay
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Sick notifications and the German electronic certificate of incapacity: whether the tool retrieves the eAU from the health insurer itself or through a named payroll system, how sick days are counted towards the six-week continued-pay and BEM thresholds, and how child-sick days and certificates from private insurance are handled.
0 — Sickness recorded as another leave type with no word on the eAU, certificates or thresholds.
3 — A sick-leave type with a document upload, and "eAU" mentioned without saying who retrieves it or how.
5 — Sick notification by the employee in the app, the eAU retrieval process documented — by the tool itself or via a named payroll system — with the retrieval status visible to HR, and child-sick days as a separate type.
8 — eAU retrieval from the statutory health insurers documented end to end with the certified software named, retrieval results written back to the absence, sick days counted towards the six-week continued-pay limit per illness, BEM thresholds flagged to HR only, and paper certificates for privately insured employees handled.
10 — Sick leave handled as the regulated process it is: eAU retrieval automated with error and follow-up handling, continued-pay and sickness-benefit transitions tracked, BEM invitation workflow supported, reasons and documents restricted to named roles, and the whole process documented in the help centre.
The Team Lead
Sickness is a tracked leave type with its own policy and there is general document storage for absence records, but we found no public information on the eAU, on who retrieves certificates, or on counting sick days towards the six-week continued-pay or BEM thresholds. The only statutory sick rule evidenced is the UK long-term-sick carry-over of up to four weeks, which is not the German process. 3 6 8
The Managing Director
Sickness is one tracked absence type with custom policies and a general document store, and the only absence-analysis artefact is a free Bradford Factor calculator. I found no public information on the eAU or its retrieval from health insurers, on counting sick days towards the six-week continued-pay limit or BEM, on child-sick days, or on paper certificates for privately insured employees. 1 3 8
The Payroll Accountant
Sickness is just one more configurable leave type, with holiday still accruing during it and up to 4 weeks carried over after long-term sickness — all UK framing. I found no public information on eAU retrieval, who retrieves it, certificates, or counting sick days towards the six-week continued-pay limit per illness, and for my payroll run that is the whole regulated process. 3 6 8
The Data Protection Officer
Sickness is one absence type among many, with holiday accrual during sickness and a four-week carry-over discussed under UK rules, but I found no public information on the electronic certificate of incapacity — who retrieves it, from the insurers or via a payroll system — on the six-week continued-pay limit, on BEM or on child-sick days. Until someone states who may see a sickness reason or a certificate and for how long, this is unregulated absence recording. 3 6 8
The HR IT Integrator
Sickness appears as one tracked absence type among many, and I found no public information on eAU retrieval, sick certificates, child-sick days or any counting towards the six-week continued-pay limit. For a German payroll chain this regulated process would stay entirely outside the tool. 3 8
The Skeptic
Sickness is one more configurable absence type with generic document storage; I found no public information on the eAU, on who retrieves a certificate from a health insurer, on the six-week continued-pay threshold, on BEM, or on child-sick days. The only long-term-sickness rule documented is the UK carry-over of up to four weeks of untaken leave. 3 6 8
Payroll handover, time tracking & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting absences into the payroll run with the right codes and keeping balances consistent with time tracking: exports or integrations for the payroll systems German companies use, time-account interaction, and an API.
0 — No export beyond a screen list; absences are retyped into payroll.
3 — A CSV or Excel export of absences per month, with no named payroll system and no API.
5 — A documented export or integration for DATEV (LODAS or Lohn und Gehalt) or another named German payroll system, absence types mapped to payroll codes, and a documented API.
8 — Several named payroll integrations, absence and overtime balances shared with time tracking, configurable payroll codes per leave type, monthly closing that locks past periods, webhooks, and an API with published limits.
10 — Payroll handover that closes the month: absences, sick days and eAU results delivered to payroll in its own format with corrections flagged, a period lock with an audit trail, a versioned API with a deprecation policy, and the full absence history exportable at contract end.
The Team Lead
Excel export of absences sits in every plan, an API plus webhooks and Zapier sit higher up, and TOIL accrual feeds straight into the leave allowance — so absences are not retyped by hand. But we found no public information on any named payroll system such as DATEV, on mapping leave types to payroll codes, or on a period lock for monthly closing. 2 6 8
The Managing Director
Excel export ships in all plans, with an API, webhooks and Zapier documented alongside. I found no public information on any named payroll system such as DATEV, on mapping absence types to payroll codes, or on a monthly closing that locks past periods — so absences would still be retyped into my payroll run. 2 8
The Payroll Accountant
There is an Excel export in every plan, a reporting solution giving access to all data, and API, webhooks and Zapier are advertised. I found no public information on any named payroll system such as DATEV or LODAS, absence types mapped to payroll codes, or a monthly closing that locks past periods, so absences would still be retyped into payroll and a paid month would not be locked. 2 6 8
The Data Protection Officer
An Excel export exists in every plan alongside an API with webhooks and Zapier, which is more than a bare list to retype. But we found no public information on any named German payroll system such as DATEV, on mapping absence types to payroll codes, or on a monthly period lock, so the handover to payroll remains a manual step. 2 8
The HR IT Integrator
Excel export is in every plan and API, webhooks and Zapier are named as integration routes, which is a step beyond a hand-keyed list. I found no named German payroll connector such as DATEV, no absence-to-payroll code mapping, no time-tracking account to reconcile balances against, and no published API documentation or rate limits — TOIL accrues inside the tool rather than in a time system. 2 8
The Skeptic
Excel export in every plan plus a documented API, webhooks and Zapier is real plumbing — but no payroll system is named anywhere, so there is nothing on mapping absence types to payroll codes, monthly closing, or keeping balances consistent with time tracking. For a German payroll run, absences would be retyped or stitched together through Zapier. 2 8
Health data, access & works council
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What the tool does with data that is health data in law: who can see a sickness reason or certificate, how long absence records are kept, whether access is logged, and whether the vendor documents what a works agreement on absence recording needs.
0 — Nothing stated about who sees sick data or how long absences are kept.
3 — Roles for employees, managers and admins, but sickness reasons and documents visible to managers by default, and no retention setting.
5 — Sick-leave reasons and certificates restricted to HR by configurable permissions, colleagues see only "absent", retention or deletion of absence records configurable, and a DPA available.
8 — Field-level permissions per leave type, access to health-related records logged, retention rules per record type with automatic deletion, employees able to see their own records, and documentation aimed at works councils or a works agreement.
10 — Health data governed and evidenced: Art. 9 GDPR processing explained per feature, deletion runs logged and reportable, audit logs exportable, no analytics or AI features run on sickness data without explicit configuration, and the vendor publishing a template or checklist for the works agreement.
The Team Lead
Role-based access, audit trails and privacy options over what colleagues can see are stated, which is the baseline I need before putting a team calendar on the wall. But we found no public information on retention or deletion settings for absence records, on permissions per leave type, on a data processing agreement, or on anything aimed at a works council — and the terms allow the supplier to use aggregated, anonymised absence data for benchmarking and analytics. 3 5 8 1
The Managing Director
Role-based access, audit trails and privacy options for absence visibility are stated, which is a start. I found no public information on restricting sickness reasons or documents to HR by configurable permission, on retention or deletion settings for absence records, on a data processing agreement, or on anything aimed at a works council — and the terms grant the supplier broad rights to use aggregated anonymised data for analytics and benchmarking, with a benchmark report published from that data. 3 5 8 1
The Payroll Accountant
Role-based access, audit trails and privacy options over calendar visibility are documented, and the terms allow aggregated anonymised data to be used for analytics and benchmarking during and after the subscription. I found no public information on retention or deletion settings for absence records, a data processing agreement, field-level permissions for sick-leave reasons and certificates, or any documentation aimed at a works council. 3 5 8
The Data Protection Officer
Roles, permissions and "privacy options" over visibility are claimed, with audit trails and secure cloud storage as marketing phrases, but nothing says who may see a sickness reason or certificate, how long absence records are kept, or that access to them is logged in a reviewable way. The terms allow the supplier to use, retain, disclose and publish "Aggregated and Anonymised Data" for analytics, benchmarking and industry reporting during and after the subscription, and we found no statement excluding health-related absence data from that, nor any retention setting, DPA or works-council material. 3 8 5
The HR IT Integrator
Role-based access, audit trails, privacy options over who sees absence and employee self-view of records are stated, and the terms give the supplier broad rights to aggregated and anonymised data for analytics and benchmarking. I found no public information on retention or deletion settings for absence records, on whether sickness reasons and documents are restricted to HR, on a data processing agreement, or on works-council documentation. 3 5 8 9
The Skeptic
Role-based access, audit trails and privacy options around leave visibility are claimed, but I found no public information on who may see a sickness reason or certificate, on retention or deletion of absence records, or on a data-processing agreement covering special-category data. The terms also reserve aggregated, anonymised customer data for analytics, benchmarking and industry reporting — the very material a works council will interrogate. 3 5 8
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where absence and sickness data lives, who the contracting entity is, and who the subprocessors are — including email, push-notification and support providers. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, and subprocessors unnamed.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option while the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — email, push notifications, analytics or support — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessor list published with locations, and a DPA that covers sickness data as special-category processing.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor European, and certification published.
The Team Lead
The contracting entity is Leave Dates Ltd, registered in England and Wales — outside the EU — and the captured pages leave the hosting location and every subprocessor unnamed, including email and push notifications. A UK and EU-based support team is mentioned, but that is support staffing, not where the data sits; we found no public information on data residency, EU hosting, or certification. 3 5
The Managing Director
The contracting entity is registered in England and Wales, and I found no public information on hosting location, ownership or any subprocessor — the UK and EU-based support team is the only European element visible anywhere in the chain. For absence data that includes health data in law, that is not a chain I can put my name to. 3 5
The Payroll Accountant
The contracting entity is a company registered in England and Wales, outside the EU, with a UK-based support operation, and I found no public information on where absence and sickness data is hosted or who the subprocessors are. No hosting location, no subprocessor list, no certification — that is the bottom of my scale. 3 5
The Data Protection Officer
The contract runs with a supplier registered in England and Wales, and we found no public information on where absence and sickness data is hosted, on the company's ownership, or on the subprocessors behind email, push and support. The single European element we found is a UK and EU-based customer support team, which speaks to staff rather than to where the data sits. 5 3
The HR IT Integrator
The contracting entity is Leave Dates Ltd, registered in England and Wales, with hosting unstated and no subprocessor list published; the only chain statement I could find is a UK and EU-based support team. I found no public information on EU data residency or a DPA covering sickness data as special-category processing. 3 5
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: price per employee or per user, which features (eAU, payroll export, time tracking) sit in which tier, minimum users and the minimum term.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A starting price exists, but the pricing basis or which features it covers is unstated — the invoice is unknowable.
5 — Tier prices public with the pricing basis given, but at least one commonly needed piece (eAU, payroll export, time tracking, extra admins) is unpriced or "on request".
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its basis, add-on prices listed, minimum users, minimum term and VAT treatment given.
10 — Complete price computability: the annual invoice derivable for a given headcount and feature set, with every add-on, setup fee and overage published.
The Team Lead
The pricing pages do show named tiers with which features sit where — calendar sync and TOIL lower down, SSO and the API higher up — and VAT receipts are emailed and saved. But we found no public information on price figures, the pricing basis, minimum users or the minimum term, so I cannot compute what a twelve-person team would actually pay per year. 2
The Managing Director
The published pricing page names the tiers and some of what each contains, and VAT receipts are issued by email, but no price figure per user or per employee, minimum user count or contract term appears on the captured pages. The real annual invoice for a forty-person company is therefore not computable from public information. 2
The Payroll Accountant
The plan comparison is public — Essential versus Plus feature by feature, including bulk uploads, Excel export, SSO and Slack summaries — and VAT receipts are issued. I found no public information on any price per employee or user, minimum users or minimum term, so an annual invoice cannot be computed from the public pages. 2
The Data Protection Officer
Plan names and the split of features between Essential and Plus are public, so a buyer can see where SSO, unlimited allowances and calendar sync land. But we found no price figures at all — no per-user cost, no pricing basis, no minimum term — so the annual invoice cannot be worked out from the public pages, whatever VAT receipts arrive afterwards. 2
The HR IT Integrator
The plan page maps features to tiers — calendar sync, TOIL and multi-person requests in Essential, SSO and personalised leave years in Plus — and describes VAT receipts saved in the billing area. We found no public price figures, pricing basis, minimum users or minimum term, so the annual invoice is not computable from public pages. 2
The Skeptic
A pricing page compares three tiers feature by feature and the terms describe a per-user subscription cap, but no price figure of any kind appears in the captures — no cost per tier, no add-ons, no minimum term, no VAT treatment of the prices. Only the existence of VAT receipts is documented; a buyer cannot compute an invoice from this. 2 5
European sovereignty — proven facts
0 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
Questions about Leave Dates
Is Leave Dates European?
Yes, though not from the EU. whats-best.ai classifies Leave Dates as UK / wider Europe.
Where does Leave Dates store data?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
Does Leave Dates have a free plan?
Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.
What are the best alternatives to Leave Dates?
As of 15 Oct 2026, the panel rates Kenjo (3/5), flair (2.5/5) and HRlab (2.5/5) highest among the other 16 Absence Management products evaluated. Ratings that look equal are rounded to half stars; the order uses the unrounded rating, then the name. The highest-rated European alternative is Kenjo (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Leave Dates alternatives.
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 1 Oct 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors, Legal entity. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
- AI can misread a source. Extraction and judgement are automated; a citation guarantees traceability, not infallibility. If something here is wrong, say so — no account needed, every report is decided within 5 business days, and accepted corrections are published.
What we left out
A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.
- 8 product facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 4 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 subprocessors facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 compliance fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 integrations fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 support fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 sovereignty dimensions could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and are shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us
- 6 of the readings below were written against an earlier fact sheet — a fact has been corrected, added or pulled since. Until the panel next runs on this product you are reading the older judgement. Know more? Tell us
Sources (9)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 3 Absence management www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Privacy policy www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Entitlements & German leave rules — found from sitemap www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Entitlements & German leave rules — found from sitemap www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Requests, approvals & team calendar — found from sitemap www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Requests, approvals & team calendar — found from sitemap www.leavedates.com Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →