Employee Scheduling
Combo
EU-Made Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 2 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Combo SAS · combohr.com
Report an error on this page Is this your product? →
Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.
No written verdict for this product
The panel scored Combo, but the summary our synthesizer wrote did not survive our own contradiction check — twice. Rather than print a paragraph we cannot stand behind, we print none. Every score, rationale and source below is unaffected; read them and draw the conclusion yourself.
The scores
Roster building & demand planning
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Shift Manager
The pages tell me a schedule exists — collaborative optimized planning, real-time ratios, till integration — but nothing about how it's built. We found no public information on shift templates, roles and qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts or automatic roster proposals, so I can't tell whether it stops the wrong person landing on the till. 1 2
The Operations Director
"Planification optimisée et collaborative" with budget-versus-actual analysis and payroll-mass ratios is reporting after the fact, not planning against demand. I found no public information on shift templates, staffing requirements per shift, qualifications, coverage warnings, forecasting from till data, or sharing staff across locations — the reasons I buy a planner. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
The pages promise "planification optimisée et collaborative" with real-time ratios and budget-versus-actual analysis, but we found no public information on templates, roles or qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts or demand forecasting fed by the till integration. Without a stated headcount per shift, the planner's memory is doing the work the tool should be doing. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
The pages advertise "planification optimisée et collaborative" with real-time ratios, but we found no public information on shift templates, qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, or coverage gaps before publication. My council co-determines how hours are distributed, and from these pages we cannot even tell whether the system knows how many people a shift needs, let alone forecasts from sales data. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
The captured pages promise "planification optimisée et collaborative" with real-time ratios and budget-versus-actual analyses, but that is the whole story I get: I found no public information on shift templates, roles or qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, coverage warnings, demand forecasting or automatic proposals. For a planner that might be fine; for judging whether the roster builds itself, the pages leave me guessing. 1 2
The Skeptic
Planning is described as "planification optimisée et collaborative" with real-time ratios and budget-versus-actual analysis, but we found no public information on shift templates, qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open shifts or automatic roster proposals. The till integration appears only among payroll features, with no demand-based forecasting from sales or footfall described. 1 2
Working-time law & collective agreements
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Shift Manager
They name real French mechanisms — legal modulation of working time, monthly hour smoothing, overtime tracking, compensatory rest — and a customer note praises collective-agreement compliance reminders, which is more than a generic compliance badge. But we found no public information on rest-period or daily-hours checks shown before publication, on youth or maternity limits, or on whether anything blocks rather than just reminds. 1 2
The Operations Director
The pages name real French machinery — overtime tracking, compensatory rest, "Modulation légale des heures et du temps de travail", and reminders for the convention collective — which is more than a generic compliance claim. I found no public information on checks for daily rest, breaks or maximum hours shown before publication, or whether any check blocks or only warns. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Named French working-time mechanisms appear on the pricing page — overtime tracking, compensatory rest, monthly hours smoothing and legal modulation — and a customer review praises reminders for the collective agreement, which is more than a generic overtime warning. But we found no public information on rest-period or break checks, on any earnings-limit warning, and nothing saying whether a violation blocks publication or only nags. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Overtime tracking, compensatory rest, monthly hour smoothing, legal modulation of working time and reminders tied to the collective agreement are actually named, which is more than a generic warning. We found no public information on checks for rest periods or breaks before a roster is published, or whether a breach blocks the plan or only warns the planner. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
Named French working-time mechanisms are listed — overtime tracking, compensatory rest, monthly hour smoothing and legal modulation of working time — plus reminders for the convention collective from a customer's own words. But I found no public information on rest-period or break checks between shifts, which is what protects someone like me juggling two jobs, or on whether a violation blocks publication or is only flagged. 1 2
The Skeptic
Named French working-time concepts appear — overtime tracking, compensatory rest, monthly hour smoothing, "modulation légale" and reminders for the convention collective — but the pages never say whether a violation is blocked, warned about before publication, or merely exported. We found no public information on checks for daily maximum hours, rest periods or breaks, and nothing on youth or maternity protection. 1 2
Mobile self-service for deskless staff
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Shift Manager
Staff run their own absence and leave requests that I validate in one click, there is web-and-mobile messaging, schedules go out by SMS, and a time clock add-on records entries and exits. We found no public information on availability entry, shift swaps, open-shift claiming or push notifications of changes, so Saturday-morning cover still looks like a phone job. 1 2
The Operations Director
Teams submit their own leave and absence requests with one-click manager validation, there is messaging on web and mobile, rosters go out by SMS, and a time clock exists as a paid option. I found no public information on availability entry, shift swaps, open-shift claiming or push notification of changes. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Employees get messaging on web and mobile, schedule publication by SMS, leave requests they file themselves for one-click approval, and a time-clock option at +2 € / employé / mois. We found no public information on availability entry, shift swaps, open-shift claiming or push notification of roster changes. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Teams submit their own leave, absence and lateness requests that a manager validates in one click, rosters are published by SMS, and messaging runs on web and mobile — genuine self-service for absences. We found no public information on availability entry, shift swaps between colleagues, claiming open shifts, or whether the time clock works on a shared terminal. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
My shifts can reach me by SMS, teams file their own absence and leave requests with one-click manager validation, messaging runs on web and mobile, and there is an optional time clock at +2 € / employé / mois — all genuinely phone-shaped. But my core test is the swap without three calls, and I found no public information on shift swaps, open-shift claiming, availability entry, push alerts, clock-in offline handling or app languages. 1 2
The Skeptic
Employees submit absence requests that a manager validates in one click, schedules are published by SMS, and messaging runs on web and mobile. We found no public information on availability entry, shift swaps, open-shift claiming or push notification of changes, and the time clock — priced at "+2 € / employé / mois" — is described only as recording entries and exits, with nothing on clock-in by app or shared terminal. 1 2
Works council & employee data
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Shift Manager
Manager access to team schedules is configurable, the privacy policy states concrete retention periods (contract plus three years, applications two years, invoices ten), no automated decisions are made, and there is a CNIL declaration. We found no public information on a published data-processing agreement, an audit log of who viewed whose data, configurable deletion periods, or documentation to support a works-council or CSE process. 2 3 4
The Operations Director
Manager access to team schedules is configurable, and the privacy policy states retention periods, standard contractual clauses for transfers, a CNIL declaration, and that no automated decisions are made. I found no public information on an audit log of who viewed or changed an individual's data, configurable deletion for availability and absence records, or documentation for a works agreement. 2 3 4
The Payroll Officer
There is real access configuration — "Paramétrage des accès managers aux plannings des équipes" — plus a GDPR-aligned policy with a CNIL declaration number, published retention periods, and an explicit statement that no automated decisions are made. We found no public information on an audit log of who viewed an individual's data, on configurable deletion periods, or on documentation a works council could work from; retention appears only as fixed vendor periods. 2 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
The privacy policy states in writing that no automated decision-making with legal effects takes place, and rights management lets me configure which managers see which team schedules — a sentence I can take to the council. The published retention periods cover candidates, prospects, invoices and the client relationship; we found no public information on retention or deletion of employee absence and time data, on a data processing agreement, on visibility of absence reasons, or on an audit log of who viewed an individual's record. The advertised hourly productivity ratios and performance tracking come with no published boundary between aggregate figures and scoring of individuals. 1 2 3
The Frontline Employee
Manager access to team schedules is configurable, the privacy policy states retention periods for each data type and affirms no automated decision-making, and there is a CNIL declaration — decent grounding for an employee who never chose this vendor. I found no public information on an audit log of who viewed my data, configurable deletion periods, visibility of absence reasons, or documentation a works council could use. 2 3 4
The Skeptic
Manager access to team schedules is configurable ("Paramètrage des accès managers aux plannings des équipes"), a CNIL declaration number is published, and retention periods are stated — for applicants, prospects and invoices rather than employee availability and absence records. We found no public information on an audit log of who viewed an individual's data, configurable deletion periods, or documentation offered for works-council approval; no location or activity tracking is described. 2 3 4
Payroll handoff & integrations
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Shift Manager
Variable pay elements are calculated automatically and exported, payroll prep is offered in PayFit and SILAE formats, and the Combo-to-SILAE connector is priced per employee per month — a real named payroll handoff, plus DPAE and personnel-register exports. Till solutions are mentioned as integrated with no brand named, and we found no public information on a documented API, a lock step before transmission, or wage-type mapping per surcharge. 1 2
The Operations Director
Variable pay elements are said to be calculated automatically and exported to payroll software, with named targets — a SILAE connector priced "+1,5 € / employé / mois" and PayFit formats — plus payslip distribution as an option. Till integration is claimed only as "Intégration aux solutions de caisse" with no named system, and I found no public information on a documented API, a lock step before transmission, or wage types mapped per surcharge. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
"Du planning à la paie. Sans ressaisie" is backed by named systems — payroll preparation in PayFit and SILAE formats, the SILAE connector at +1,5 € / employé / mois, payslip distribution at +1,2 € / employé / mois — and variable pay elements are said to be calculated automatically before export. But we found no public information on a lock step before transmission, on wage-type mapping per surcharge, or on a documented API, and the till integration names no provider. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Variable pay elements are calculated automatically and exported to payroll software, with SILAE and PayFit named, a payroll report, an Excel export of payroll variables and a paid SILAE connector, plus a stated integration with cash-register solutions. We found no public information on a documented API, a lock step before transmission, or how retro corrections after the payroll close are handled. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
Variable pay elements are calculated automatically and flow to named payroll tools — PayFit and SILAE — with a priced SILAE connector at +1,5 € / employé / mois, payslip distribution at +1,2 €, an Excel export of pay variables, cash-register integration and DPAE exports. I found no public information on a documented API, a lock step before transmission, or wage types mapped per surcharge, so it sits solidly above a bare export without reaching the maintained-integration league. 1 2
The Skeptic
Variable pay elements are calculated automatically and exported to named French payroll systems — a SILAE connector priced at "+1,5 € / employé / mois", plus PayFit formats and an Excel export of pay variables. The till connection is generic ("intégration aux solutions de caisse") with no named POS provider, and we found no public information on wage types per surcharge, a lock step before transmission, an HR master-data sync, a documented API, or any German payroll path. 1 2
European sovereignty
panel opinion
panel disagrees
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Shift Manager
COMBO SAS signs from Paris, the privacy policy states data is stored on servers in EU territory, Google France is named for the website and users' data storage, and there is a CNIL declaration. Card data is processed by US-headquartered payment providers under standard contractual clauses, and we found no public information on a full published subprocessor list, a named provider behind the application's own hosting, or published certification. 3 4
The Operations Director
COMBO SAS contracts from Paris, data is stated to sit on EU servers, and Google Cloud Platform - Google France is named as hosting users' personal data; the non-EU exposure I can see is the payment chain Chargebee (Stripe), covered by standard contractual clauses. The captured pages give no full subprocessor list — the privacy policy names the hosting processor only generically — and I found no public information on push or messaging subprocessors. 3 4
The Payroll Officer
The pages show a Paris-based SAS and claim data stays on EU servers, with standard contractual clauses cited for transfers outside the Union. But the privacy policy names the hosting subprocessor only generically, no subprocessor list is published, and US-headquartered Stripe and Chargebee hold subscriber card data for the life of the subscription. 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity is a French company and personal data is stated to sit on servers in the European Union, hosted by Google Cloud Platform - Google France. Card payments run through Chargebee and Stripe, both US-headquartered, and the policy keeps transfers outside the EU open under standard contractual clauses; we found no public information on the remaining subprocessors behind messaging, push notification and support. 3 4
The Frontline Employee
The privacy policy states data is stored on servers in EU territory, the contracting company is a Paris SAS with offices in Paris, Montpellier and Madrid, and a CNIL declaration is on record. But the subprocessor chain is not published in full — the privacy policy names its hosting subprocessor only generically, US-headquartered payment providers (Stripe via Chargebee) process subscriber card data, and transfers outside the EU are acknowledged under standard contractual clauses. 3 4
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is COMBO SAS of Paris, storage is stated to sit on servers in EU territory with Google Cloud Platform – Google France named as host, and standard contractual clauses are cited for transfers outside the EU. Only the payment processor Chargebee (Stripe) — US-headquartered for subscriber card data — is named as a subprocessor, and we found no public information on a full subprocessor list covering messaging or push services, on ownership, or on published certification. 3 4
Pricing transparency
not rated — the vendor publishes no price
Show reasoningHide reasoning
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.
The Shift Manager
Three add-ons are priced exactly — the time clock at 2 € per employee per month, payslip distribution at 1,2 €, the SILAE connector at 1,5 € — and there is a 7-day trial without a credit card. We found no public information on the price of the main subscription tiers, which features sit in which tier, minimum seats or locations, or VAT treatment, so a buyer cannot compute the annual invoice. 2
The Operations Director
The options are priced exactly — the time clock at "+2 € / employé / mois", the SILAE connector "+1,5 €", payslip distribution "+1,2 €" — and there is a 7-day trial without card. I found no public information on the price of the main subscription tiers themselves, VAT treatment, minimum seats or term, so the annual invoice cannot be computed from public pages. 2
The Payroll Officer
Three add-ons are precisely priced — time clock at +2 € / employé / mois, the SILAE connector at +1,5 € / employé / mois, payslip distribution at +1,2 € / employé / mois — and there is a 7-day trial without a card. But we found no public information on the price of the main plan itself, nor on VAT treatment or minimum term, so a buyer cannot compute the real annual invoice from these pages. 2
The Works Council Advocate
The pricing page carries exact public prices for three optional modules — the time clock at +2 € per employee per month, the Combo to SILAE connector at +1,5 € per employee per month, payslip distribution at +1,2 € per employee per month — and a seven-day trial without a bank card. We found no public price for the main plans themselves, so a buyer computing the real annual invoice for their headcount cannot do it from these pages alone. 2
The Frontline Employee
The add-ons are priced cleanly — payslip distribution +1,2 € / employé / mois, the SILAE connector +1,5 € / employé / mois, the time clock +2 € / employé / mois, with a 7-day trial and no card required. But I found no public information on the main plan prices, which features sit in which tier, minimum seats or locations, contract term or VAT treatment, so a buyer still cannot compute the real annual invoice from these pages. 2
The Skeptic
The captured pricing page gives exact figures for three add-ons — the time clock at "+2 € / employé / mois", payslip distribution at "+1,2 € / employé / mois" and the SILAE connector at "+1,5 € / employé / mois" — plus a 7-day trial without card. We found no public information on the price of the main plans, minimum seats or locations, VAT treatment, or how inactive or seasonal staff are counted, so the annual invoice is not computable from public prices alone. 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
2 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 | Incorporated in FR | 3/3 pts | 3 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 4 Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 22 Sep 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. Google est un prestataire dont la maison mère est américaine, et la page contracte via sa filiale française Google France; l'information figure dans les mentions légales du site, sans liste de sous-traitants dédiée au produit SaaS.
- 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.
- 10 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
- 9 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 compliance 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 subprocessors 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
- 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
- The panel’s written verdict is withheld: our own re-read found claims in it that the evidence does not carry, and a second synthesis did not fix them. The scores and the material below are unaffected. Know more? Tell us
Sources (4)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage combohr.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page combohr.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy fr.combohr.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice combohr.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →