whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Employee Scheduling

Beeple

Provenance unknown Report an error

Panel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars

Category median

Sovereignty: not determined

0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.

by Beeple BV · www.beeple.eu

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Link to this page

Beeple: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai Beeple: AI-assisted analysis on whats-best.ai (dark)

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.

Beeple at a glance

Vendor
Beeple BV
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
Panel verdict
The AI panel rates Beeple 1/5, the mean of 6 judges. Beeple BV is employee-scheduling software aimed at larger staffing agencies with teams of more than 20 employees, and the bench's scores point to one clear strength: staff self-service, scored 4 by every judge, on a mobile app where employees enter available and unavailable times, recurring or by part of day, with employer approval. how scores are made
As of
Vendor pages captured 13 Oct 2026; evaluated by the panel 15 Oct 2026. all sources

Beeple alternatives, European ones first →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Works Council Advocate

Weighted verdict

Co-determines how hours and overtime are distributed and how staff are monitored (BetrVG §87), and will not sign a works agreement for a system that watches more than it plans. Asks who sees absence reasons, what the app stores about location, what is logged and when it is deleted. Reads "performance insights" as a warning.

Same scores as the panel view — this lens weights them the way this judge cares.

Scored by The Works Council Advocate

Panel median The Works Council Advocate This judge’s scores over the panel median. Each label opens its reasoning below.
Scores per criterion, in stars out of 5
Criterion Panel median The Works Council Advocate
Roster building & demand planning 2 of 5 2 of 5
Working-time law & collective agreements 0 of 5 0 of 5
Mobile self-service for deskless staff 2 of 5 2 of 5
Works council & employee data 0 of 5 0.5 of 5
Payroll handoff & integrations 2 of 5 1.5 of 5
European sovereignty 1 of 5 0 of 5

Roster building & demand planning

How this is scored

How a plan gets built across locations, roles and qualifications — templates, staffing requirements, forecasting from sales or occupancy, and whether the product proposes a roster or only draws one.

0 — A shared calendar of shifts; no templates, no roles or qualifications, and no notion of how many people a shift needs.

3 — Shift templates and a weekly grid per location, with roles attached, but staffing needs and qualifications are the planner's memory rather than the system's.

5 — Templates, roles and qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts, multiple locations and departments, and coverage gaps shown before publication.

8 — Demand-based planning from a named data source (POS revenue, footfall, occupancy or bookings), automatic roster proposals the planner can accept or adjust, labour cost shown against budget while planning, and cross-location staff sharing.

10 — Planning closes the loop: forecast, proposed roster and actual hours compared in one place, the proposal explains which rule or demand figure drove each assignment, and the vendor documents the forecasting method rather than calling it AI.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Work-schedule templates exist and an automatic scheduling feature is documented as available, but the captured pages never show how a proposal is formed or on what basis assignments are made. We found no public information on staffing requirements per shift, roles and qualifications, coverage gaps before publication, or planning from demand data — and the body that co-determines how hours and overtime are distributed needs to see the rules behind any automatic assignment. 1 2 3

Report an error

Working-time law & collective agreements

How this is scored

Whether the roster knows the rules it is subject to — ArbZG rest periods and maximum hours, youth and maternity protection, Minijob earnings limits, Tarifvertrag and works-agreement rules, surcharges — and whether it enforces them, warns, or leaves them to the export.

0 — No working-time rules described anywhere; the pages mention no check on daily hours, breaks or rest periods.

3 — Compliance is claimed as "supported" but the pages name no specific rule, or only a generic overtime warning exists.

5 — Named checks for the ArbZG daily maximum, the 11-hour rest period and breaks, plus a Minijob earnings warning, shown to the planner before publication; whether the check blocks or only warns is stated.

8 — Configurable rule sets per contract or employee group covering Tarifvertrag surcharges (night, Sunday, holiday), time accounts, youth-protection limits and works-agreement rules, with the planner's override of a violation recorded and reasoned.

10 — The rules are modelled as law, not as warnings: maintained rule sets for named collective agreements, sector-specific exceptions (care, hospitality) documented with the statute they rely on, every override attributable, and published guidance mapping each feature to the provision it serves.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

We found no public information on any check of daily hours, rest periods, breaks, youth or maternity protection, Minijob limits, or collective-agreement surcharges; the captured pages name no working-time rule the roster enforces, warns on or blocks on. A works agreement cannot be negotiated for a system whose handling of the law is invisible. 1 2 3 6

Report an error

Mobile self-service for deskless staff

How this is scored

What the employee on the shop floor actually gets: a mobile app to read the roster, enter availability, request and accept swaps, claim open shifts and clock in — in their language, on their own device or a shared one.

0 — No employee access; the roster is printed or sent as a PDF.

3 — A read-only app or web view of one's own shifts, with changes still requested by phone or chat.

5 — Mobile app with availability entry, absence requests, shift-swap requests with manager approval, open-shift claiming and push notification of changes.

8 — Swaps and open shifts resolved under the rule set (qualifications and rest periods checked before approval), clock-in by app or shared terminal with offline handling, multilingual interface, and team communication that keeps shift talk out of private messengers.

10 — Self-service is designed for people who never open a laptop: swap and cover flows that resolve without a manager where the rules allow, accessibility and language coverage stated, use on a shared or personal device both supported, and employees able to see and export the data held about them.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The mobile app genuinely lets staff enter availability and unavailability, by part of day and recurring, with the employer still able to approve what is entered. We found no public information on absence requests, shift swaps, open-shift claiming, clock-in, or notification of changes, nor on whether employees can see and export the data held about them. 5

Report an error

Works council & employee data

How this is scored

Whether the product can be introduced under co-determination (BetrVG § 87) — role-based visibility, what is logged, which monitoring can be switched off, retention of availability, absence and location data — and whether the vendor supplies what a works agreement needs.

0 — No roles or visibility settings described, no statement of what is stored, logged or retained, and GPS or activity tracking presented without any mention of switching it off.

3 — Basic admin and employee roles exist, but visibility of absence reasons or location data is not configurable and retention is unstated.

5 — Configurable roles limiting who sees whose data, GPS and similar tracking optional and off by default or stated as switchable, a published DPA, and a retention or deletion statement for employee records.

8 — Fine-grained visibility (absence reasons hidden from colleagues and line managers where not needed), an audit log of who viewed and changed an individual's data, configurable deletion periods, and documentation the vendor offers for works-council approval.

10 — Data minimisation is designed in and evidenced: a model works agreement or feature-by-feature data inventory published, no performance or behaviour scoring of individuals, monitoring functions individually deactivatable, and deletion executed automatically per configured period.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The only role the pages describe is a 'poweruser' who creates templates; we found no public information on visibility settings for absence reasons, on location or activity monitoring and whether it can be switched off, on audit logs, on retention and deletion periods, or on documentation a works council could work from. Nothing published so far would let us co-determine this system's introduction under the works constitution act. 3

Report an error

Payroll handoff & integrations

How this is scored

How planned and worked hours, surcharges and absences reach payroll — DATEV, Lohn und Gehalt, the tax adviser — and how the roster connects to the POS, HR and time systems a shift business already runs.

0 — No payroll path and no integrations; the month leaves as a spreadsheet someone retypes.

3 — Generic CSV export said to suit payroll, with no named payroll system and no surcharge handling.

5 — A named payroll integration or documented export (e.g. DATEV Lohn und Gehalt or LODAS) covering hours, absences and surcharges, plus at least one named POS or HR integration.

8 — Vendor-maintained payroll integrations with a lock step before transmission, wage types mapped per surcharge, POS integrations feeding forecasting, an HR master-data sync, and a documented API.

10 — Payroll is designed for, not exported to: several named payroll systems maintained, retro corrections after the close handled, the tax adviser given scoped access, and a versioned public API with webhooks and a deprecation policy.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Exports come as Excel, XML or PDF with a dictionary of payment codes and payroll-integration code fields, but the captured pages name no payroll system and show no surcharge handling. An API Partners programme is mentioned without published API documentation, and we found no public information on POS or HR integrations. 1 6 7

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

Where the employee data lives, who the contracting entity is, who the subprocessors are, and whether that is documented rather than assumed. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted seriously here, because a scheduling tool holds availability, absence and often location data about employees who had no say in the vendor.

0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting region unstated or non-EU, subprocessors not named.

3 — EU hosting offered as an option or claimed without a provider, while the contracting entity is non-EU or the subprocessor list is absent.

5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but the subprocessor chain (messaging, push notification, analytics, support) includes non-EU providers without an explained safeguard.

8 — EU or DACH hosting with a named data-centre provider, EU contracting entity, full subprocessor list published, and any non-EU processing — push notification services included — named with its legal basis.

10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor in the EU, certification published, and a DPA that covers the employee data the app collects on personal devices.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

No hosting region, contracting-entity location, certification or subprocessor list is on record for this vendor. For a tool that holds employees' availability and absence data — data the employees had no say in handing over — that silence is itself the finding and is worth the lowest score here. 1

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

Whether a buyer can compute the real annual invoice for their headcount and locations — including the time clock, payroll export, forecasting and other modules sold as add-ons — from public pages alone.

0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.

3 — A per-employee headline exists, but which features sit in which tier, the add-on modules, or a minimum seat or location count are unpriced or unmentioned.

5 — Per-employee or per-location prices public for the main tiers with the billing period stated, but at least one commonly needed piece (time clock, payroll export, forecasting, terminal hardware) is an unpriced add-on.

8 — Every tier and add-on priced publicly with the per-employee maths, how inactive or seasonal staff are counted, minimum term and VAT treatment stated; only genuinely custom work lacks a number.

10 — Complete price computability: a calculator or table producing the annual invoice for a given headcount, location count and module selection, including hardware, onboarding and renewal terms.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The captured pages offer a free demo and no prices; we found no public per-employee or per-module pricing, billing period, minimum term or VAT treatment, so a buyer cannot compute an annual invoice from published information. 1

Report an error

Questions about Beeple

Is Beeple European?

Not determined: the vendor’s pages as captured do not say where Beeple is based.

Where does Beeple store data?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.

Does Beeple have a free plan?

Not stated on the vendor’s pages as of 13 Oct 2026.

What are the best alternatives to Beeple?

As of 21 Oct 2026, the panel rates Bizimply (3/5), gastromatic (3/5) and Shiftbase (3/5) highest among the other 25 Employee Scheduling 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 gastromatic (EU-Made). Ratings are the AI panel’s opinion, formed from public evidence: how scores are made. The full list, with European products first: Beeple alternatives.

Where this could be wrong

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.

Do you know more about Beeple? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (7)

The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.

  1. 1 Vendor page www.beeple.eu Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap help.beeple.eu Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap help.beeple.eu Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap help.beeple.eu Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap help.beeple.eu Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap help.beeple.eu Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap help.beeple.eu Checked 13 Oct 2026 Details →