Employee Scheduling
Deputy
Rest of world Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Deputechnologies Pty Ltd · www.deputy.com
Compare with Planday → Compare with When I Work → 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.
The panel's verdict
Deputy, from Deputechnologies Pty Ltd, is an employee scheduling product founded in Sydney whose captured pages name auto-scheduling, demand forecasting, micro-scheduling and multi-location operation. It scores highest on staff self-service and pricing transparency, at 5 to 6: a mobile app with shift swap and find replacement, leave and availability management, time clocking and messaging, plus published prices of "$5 per user per month" for Lite, "$6.50" for Core and "$9" for Pro (USD excl. all applicable taxes) and a 10% annual discount. It is weakest on sovereignty, scored 0 to 1: the contracting entity shown is Deputy Corporation of San Francisco, and the judges found no public information on hosting region or named sub-processors. Working time rules and payroll and integrations sit at 3 to 4: the captured pages name no German rule, and the payroll module is available on annual Core and Pro plans in the US. On roster planning the judges split from 4 to 6 — lower scores point to an undocumented method, higher ones to the named planning features.
Speaks for it
- Lite's feature list includes a mobile app with Shift Swap & Find Replacement, Leave & Availability Management, and a time clock app.
- Per-user prices are published for all three tiers — "$5 per user per month" (Lite), "$6.50 per user per month" (Core), "$9 per user per month" (Pro) — with a stated 10% annual discount.
- Auto-Scheduling, Demand Forecasting, Micro-Scheduling and Wage And Labor Budgets are named features, with multi-location, franchise and enterprise addressed as buyer groups.
- A privacy centre publishes GDPR resources and notifications when sub-processors are added or removed.
- Pro adds Custom Access Levels, Location Hierarchies, Single Sign-On and 24/7 Live Chat.
Held against it
- We found no public information naming any German working-time rule — the ArbZG daily maximum, the 11-hour rest period, Minijob earnings limits — or whether a check blocks publication or only warns.
- The payroll module is available on annual Core and Pro plans in the US, with a monthly base and per-employee fee that varies by business size.
- We found no public information on a named payroll system such as DATEV, on a named POS or HR integration, or on surcharge handling.
- The contracting entity shown is Deputy Corporation of San Francisco, and we found no public information on where employee data is hosted or on named sub-processors.
- We found no public information on retention or deletion periods for availability and absence data, or on switching off biometric time clocking.
Best for
- You run shift work across several locations and want a mobile app where staff set availability, swap shifts and clock in.
- You need a published per-user price you can budget upfront for a fixed headcount.
- Your business is US-based and can take the payroll module on an annual Core or Pro plan.
Avoid if
- You need rosters that demonstrably check German working-time rules before publication.
- Your payroll runs through DATEV or a German tax adviser and you need a documented handoff.
- Your procurement requires a stated hosting region or named sub-processors before employee data is loaded.
- You must know the full annual invoice before committing — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
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
Auto-Scheduling, Demand Forecasting, Wage And Labor Budgets and Micro-Scheduling are named features, alongside Location Hierarchies and solutions for single- up to enterprise-scale multi-location businesses — that says the product proposes the roster rather than just drawing one, which is what I want on a Thursday night. But the names come without detail: I found no public information on templates, qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, open-shift claiming, or the named data source behind the demand forecast. 1 2
The Operations Director
Auto-Scheduling, Demand Forecasting, Micro-Scheduling and Wage And Labor Budgets appear as feature names, and multi-location, franchise and enterprise are addressed as buyer groups. But the pages never name the data source behind a forecast, never show a staffing requirement per shift or qualifications, and Deputy AI is billed as included in every plan with no documented method; I found no public information on cross-location staff sharing or coverage gaps shown before publication. More than a weekly grid, less than a plan I can audit. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Auto-scheduling, demand forecasting, micro-scheduling and wage-and-labour budgets are named features, and single-location through enterprise and franchise operations are addressed, but the captured pages never say which data source feeds the forecast, and I found no public information on qualifications or staffing requirements per shift. A proposal engine I cannot trace does not earn full demand-driven credit. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Auto-scheduling, demand forecasting, wage and labour budgets, micro-scheduling and multi-location operation are all named as features, but the captured pages stay at feature names: we found no public information on staffing requirements per shift, qualifications, coverage checks before publication, or which data source feeds the forecast. For a works council the decisive question — who proposes the roster and who approves or adjusts it — goes unanswered, and "Auto-Scheduling" with "Deputy AI" in every plan only sharpens that question. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
The pages promise auto-scheduling, demand forecasting, labor optimization and wage and labor budgets, plus location hierarchies for multi-site businesses — clearly more than a blank grid. But we found no public information on staffing requirements per shift, coverage gaps before publication, open shifts, qualifications, or which data source the forecasting actually draws on, so how a plan gets decided stays opaque. 1 2
The Skeptic
Auto-scheduling, demand forecasting, micro-scheduling and multi-location hierarchies are all named features, but the captured pages never name the data source the forecast draws on, and I found no public information showing staffing requirements per shift, qualifications or coverage gaps before publication. The engine is branded "Deputy AI included in every plan" rather than documented as a method. That sits above a plain weekly grid yet well short of demonstrated demand-based planning. 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
Compliance is claimed by name — Advanced Labor Law Compliance, Break planning compliance, Fair workweek compliance — but I found no public information on the specific rules a German roster must obey: no rest-period or daily-hours check, no youth protection, no Minijob earnings warning. Nor is there anything on whether a warning appears before I publish, or whether it blocks an illegal shift rather than just flagging it. 1 2
The Operations Director
Every tier claims Labor Law Compliance, with Break planning compliance and Fair workweek compliance in the feature list, but I found no public information naming a single German provision — ArbZG daily maximum, the eleven-hour rest period, Minijob earnings limits, Tarifvertrag surcharges, youth or maternity protection — or whether any check blocks publication rather than warns. For my German sites the compliance claim is a label I cannot check. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
"Labor Law Compliance" appears in every plan and the pages do name break-planning and fair-workweek compliance, which is more than a bare claim. But I found no public information on rest periods, daily hour maxima, Minijob earnings limits, or night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, and nothing states whether a check blocks publication or only warns — for a German close, nothing here turns a worked hour into a correctly topped-up wage. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Compliance appears as claimed features — "Labor Law Compliance", "Advanced Labor Law Compliance", "Break planning compliance", "Fair workweek compliance" — without a named European rule among them: we found no public information on ArbZG daily maxima, the 11-hour rest period, youth or maternity protection, Minijob earnings limits or Tarifvertrag surcharges, and nothing on whether any check blocks publication or merely warns. A claim of compliance with no rule named is exactly what I cannot co-determine on. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
Every tier lists labor law compliance and the feature list adds break planning and fair workweek compliance, but we found no public information naming any specific German rule — the ArbZG daily maximum, the 11-hour rest period, Minijob earnings limits, Tarifvertrag surcharges. For someone stacking a second job, whether the roster checks my rest time before publishing is the whole question, and the captured pages answer it only with a marketing phrase. 1 2
The Skeptic
Every captured page repeats "Labor Law Compliance", with "Break planning compliance" and "Fair workweek compliance" — the latter a US predictive-scheduling regime — but no page names the ArbZG daily maximum, the 11-hour rest period or a Minijob earnings limit, and nothing states whether a violation blocks publication, warns the planner or merely exports. This is precisely the compliance-is-"supported" claim with no rule behind it that I keep hoping a vendor will finally cash out. 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
A mobile app with shift swapping and find-a-replacement, leave and availability management, time clocking and a messaging news feed covers most of what my floor staff touch every week. I found no public information on push notification of roster changes, offline clock-in, a multilingual interface, or whether swaps get checked against qualifications and rest periods before approval. 1 2
The Operations Director
Lite already gives floor staff a mobile app with availability and leave management, shift swap with find-a-replacement, a time clock app and messaging — real transactions, not a PDF. I found no public information on push notification of changes, offline handling for clock-ins, a multilingual interface, or swaps and open shifts being checked against qualifications and rest periods before approval. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
A mobile app with leave and availability management, shift swap and find-replacement, a messaging news feed, and a time-clock app with biometric clocking are all named. I found no public information on swaps being checked against the rule set before approval, offline clocking or language coverage, so it falls short of the complete shop-floor offer. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
The list shows a mobile app with availability, leave, shift swapping and find-a-replacement, plus messaging, a time clock app and biometric clocking — most of what the shop floor needs day to day. We found no public information on push notification of changes, swaps approved under rest or qualification rules, offline handling or language coverage; and biometric clocking is presented as a headline feature with no mention of it being switchable, which for me is a co-determination question, not a selling point. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
The bones of a good floor-level app are there: a mobile app with leave and availability management, shift swap with find-replacement, a time clock including biometric clocking, and messaging with a news feed so shift talk has a home outside private group chats. We found no public information on whether swaps are checked against qualifications and rest rules before approval, on interface languages, on offline clock-in, on push notification of changes, or on employees seeing and exporting the data held about them. 1 2
The Skeptic
The lite tier's own list gives the shop floor a mobile app with availability, leave, shift swap and "Find Replacement", plus a time clock app — most of a real self-service set. I found no public information on whether swaps are checked against qualifications or rest periods before approval, on offline clock-in, on multilingual coverage, or on push notification of changes, so it reads as mid-level with the rule-checking question unanswered. 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
Custom Access Levels on the Pro plan are the one thing I could take to a works council about who sees whose data. Beyond that I found no public information on retention or deletion of employee records, on a data-processing agreement, on an audit trail of who viewed what — or on switching biometric time clocking off. A privacy centre with sub-processor change notifications exists, but that will not carry a works agreement. 2 3
The Operations Director
Custom Access Levels on Pro show visibility is configurable, and there is a privacy centre with GDPR resources and notifications when sub-processors change. I found no public information on retention or deletion periods for employee records, on whether biometric time clocking or any location tracking can be switched off, or on documentation a works agreement could be built from — the audit reporting in Analytics+ is described only as additional audit reporting. 2 3
The Payroll Officer
Custom access levels exist in the Pro plan and there is a privacy centre with GDPR resources and sub-processor change notifications. But biometric time clocking is presented with no statement that it can be switched off, I found no public information on retention or deletion periods for availability and absence data, and no audit log of who viewed an individual's record — thin material for a works agreement. 2 3
The Works Council Advocate
Custom access levels exist but only on the top plan, a privacy centre with sub-processor change notifications is published, and Analytics+ adds "additional audit reporting" — more than nothing. But we found no public information on retention or deletion periods for employee records, on who may see absence reasons, or on deactivating biometric clocking, and the HR module advertises "shift performance" and turning "team data into useful insights" — language I read as individual performance monitoring that would have to be carved out of any works agreement before signature. 2 3
The Frontline Employee
Custom access levels in Pro, audit reporting in the Analytics+ add-on, and a privacy centre with GDPR resources and sub-processor change notifications are real building blocks. But we found no public information on retention or deletion periods for availability, absence and time records, on location or activity tracking and whether it can be switched off, or on documentation a works council could use — and this product holds exactly the kind of employee data co-determination covers. 2 3
The Skeptic
There is a privacy centre with GDPR resources, sub-processor change notifications and configurable access levels — though those access levels sit in the top tier, and "additional audit reporting" is sold as an add-on rather than shown as a per-employee view log. I found no public information on retention or deletion periods for availability and absence data, on whether biometric time clocking can be switched off, or on any documentation a works council would need for approval. 2 3
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
Payroll appears as Deputy's own add-on available on annual Core and Pro plans in the US, whose monthly base and per employee fee varies by business size, plus generic Payroll & HR Integrations and a named Deputy API. I found no public information on DATEV or any European payroll path, no named POS or HR integration, and nothing on how surcharges reach payroll. 1 2
The Operations Director
Payroll is sold as a US-only add-on on annual Core and Pro plans whose "Monthly base and per employee fee varies by business size", alongside generic Payroll & HR Integrations in Lite and a Deputy API. I found no public information naming a payroll system, no DATEV or Lohn und Gehalt path, no surcharge or wage-type mapping, and no named POS or HR system feeding the forecast — for my European payroll this is a conversation, not a handoff. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Payroll is sold as its own module — "Available on annual Core and Pro plans in the US. Monthly base and per employee fee varies by business size." — alongside unnamed "Payroll & HR Integrations" and a public API. The captured pages name no payroll system, no POS and no HR system, and I found no public information on wage types per surcharge, a lock step before transmission, or corrections after the month closes; as a handoff story this is a promise, not a design. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
The pages show a Payroll module offered as a US-only add-on whose "monthly base and per employee fee varies by business size", generic "Payroll & HR Integrations", and a "Deputy API" — we found no public information on a named payroll system such as DATEV, on surcharge handling, or on a named POS or HR connection. A German buyer cannot see from these pages how planned and worked hours would ever reach their tax adviser. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
An API is offered, the Lite tier lists payroll and HR integrations as a feature, and a payroll add-on exists on annual Core and Pro plans in the US with a monthly base and per-employee fee that "varies by business size". We found no public information on a DATEV, Lohn und Gehalt or other named European payroll handoff, no named POS or HR system, and no surcharge handling, so the German tax-adviser month is undescribed. 1 2
The Skeptic
A public API is listed and a payroll module is "available on annual Core and Pro plans in the US" with a base and per-employee fee that "varies by business size" — unpriced and US-only, while "Payroll & HR Integrations" names no system. I found no public information on a DATEV or Lohn-und-Gehalt handoff, no named POS integration, and surcharges are never mentioned, so the month's export remains a claim rather than a documented path. 1 2
European sovereignty
panel opinion
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
The contracting entity named is Deputy Corporation, 548 Market St PMB 77267, San Francisco, from a company founded in Sydney, and I found no public information on where employee data is hosted; the privacy centre confirms further sub-processors that go unnamed. GDPR resources and sub-processor change notifications are the only European-facing signals, and neither says anything about where my staff's availability and absence data actually sits. 1 2 3
The Operations Director
The vendor was founded in Sydney and the published contracting entity is Deputy Corporation of San Francisco; I found no public information on hosting region, an EU contracting option, or a named sub-processor list — the privacy centre confirms other sub-processors exist without giving their locations. With availability, absence and biometric time-clocking data about employees who never chose this vendor, I cannot place any of my sites on it. 1 2 3
The Payroll Officer
The contracting entity shown on the captured pages is Deputy Corporation in San Francisco, the vendor is Australian, hosting region is nowhere stated, and no sub-processor is named beyond an option to be notified of changes. A GDPR privacy centre exists, but nothing shows where the employee data lives. 1 2 3
The Works Council Advocate
The vendor is Australian, a US contracting entity at a San Francisco address serves the Americas, the hosting region is unstated, and the sub-processors are unnamed — the privacy centre confirms other sub-processors whose locations are not given, and a US payroll add-on sits in the chain. Availability, absence and time data of employees who never chose this vendor under a non-EU entity with US Cloud Act exposure is not something I can sign a works agreement around. 1 2 3
The Frontline Employee
Deputy is an Australian vendor with a US contracting entity in San Francisco named for at least some regions, and we found no public information on where employee data is hosted, on the contracting entity for a European customer, or on named sub-processors and their locations — the privacy centre only offers notifications when sub-processors change. My availability and clock-in times are exactly the data I had no say in handing over, and the captured pages leave unstated where they are processed. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
The contracting entity on the captured pages is Deputy Corporation of San Francisco, the parent is Australian, and I found no public information on an EU entity, on where employee data is hosted, or on any named subprocessor chain — the privacy centre confirms only that other sub-processors exist with locations unstated. A scheduling tool holding availability and absence data with no evidenced EU residence or processor transparency sits at the bottom of this scale. 1 2 3
Pricing transparency
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
Lite at $5 per user per month, Core at $6.50, Pro at $9, each stated as USD excl. all applicable taxes, billed upfront or in monthly installments with a SAVE 10% annual option — the base invoice for my headcount is computable from the pricing page. But the payroll add-on's fee varies by business size, the Flexi plan carries no number, and I found no public information on how seasonal or inactive staff are counted or on any minimum term. 2
The Operations Director
The three tiers are priced publicly — Lite at $5, Core at $6.50 and Pro at $9 per user per month, USD excluding applicable taxes, with 10% off for annual billing — so the maths for the core product is doable. But the payroll add-on "varies by business size", the Flexi plan and the AI Agent carry no figure, and I found no public information on how inactive or seasonal staff are counted or on any minimum term. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Three tiers carry public per-user prices — Lite at "$5 per user per month (USD excl. all applicable taxes)", then "$6.50" and "$9" — with billing options and a 10% annual discount stated. But the payroll add-on's fee "varies by business size", the Flexi plan is unpriced, Deputy AI is only "INTRODUCTORY FREE", and I found no public information on minimum terms or how inactive and seasonal staff are counted. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Per-user monthly prices are public for all three named plans — "$5 per user per month", "$6.50 per user per month", "$9 per user per month" ("USD excl. all applicable taxes"), with a stated 10% annual discount — so the basic maths is possible. But the payroll add-on is priced only as varying by business size, the Flexi event plan carries no figure, and we found no public information on minimum terms, terminal hardware, or how seasonal and inactive staff are counted. 2
The Frontline Employee
The headline maths is public: $5 per user per month for Lite, $6.50 for Core and $9 for Pro, in USD excluding all applicable taxes, billed monthly or annually with 10% off annual — that much I can check against my hours. But the payroll add-on's fee only "varies by business size", the Flexi plan for short-term events is described without a price, and we found no public information on how inactive or seasonal staff are counted or what the AI costs once "introductory free" ends. 2
The Skeptic
Three tiers carry public per-user prices — Lite "$5 per user per month", Core "$6.50 per user per month", Pro "$9 per user per month (USD excl. all applicable taxes)" — with a stated 10% annual discount and billing options, but the payroll add-on's fee "varies by business size", the AI is "introductory free" with no after-price, the Flexi plan carries no number, and I found no public information on how inactive or seasonal staff are counted or on any minimum term. The main tiers are computable; the real annual invoice is not. 2
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 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 | — | uncited 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 | 2 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. Paycor is named as a US-market payroll add-on rather than as core hosting or support infrastructure, and the Privacy Centre (S2) confirms unnamed other sub-processors whose locations are not given.
- 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.
- 23 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
- 20 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
- 19 integrations 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
- 15 legal 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
- 6 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
- 3 hosting 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 data 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 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
Sources (11)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.deputy.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.deputy.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy privacy.deputy.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Terms of service www.deputy.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service www.deputy.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 6 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap www.deputy.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap www.deputy.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Working-time law & collective agreements — found from sitemap www.deputy.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap www.deputy.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap www.deputy.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap www.deputy.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →