Employee Scheduling
Shyftplan
Provenance unknown Report an error0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by Shyftplan GmbH · www.shyftplan.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.
The panel's verdict
Shyftplan, a cloud-based employee-scheduling product from Shyftplan GmbH, is strongest on staff self-service, where scores sit at 4: native iOS and Android apps let employees apply for wish shifts and store preferences. Payroll and integrations runs 2 to 4, with judges crediting a certified SAP partnership covering APO, HCM, SuccessFactors and older SAP systems via SAP BTP/CPI, plus an API, while we found no public information on a payroll handoff or surcharge handling. The weakest findings are working time rules, at 0 with no public information on checks for daily hours, the eleven-hour rest period, breaks or Minijob limits, and codetermination and privacy at 1 with legal links but nothing published on visibility, logging or retention. Roster planning spans 2 to 4 and sovereignty 1 to 3, reflecting how far judges credited the advertised AI planning and the German-language imprint; the flagged splits flag none as significant. No sovereignty attributes are on record, and pricing is a link with no figures, routed to a conversation with the expert team.
Speaks for it
- Native iOS and Android apps where employees apply for wish shifts and store shift preferences
- Certified SAP partner with named connections to APO, HCM, SuccessFactors and older SAP systems via SAP BTP/CPI, plus an API
- Automated, AI-supported shift planning is advertised as cloud-based and scalable to thousands of employees
- Optional fully automatic backfill of short-notice absences
- The Fraunhofer IAO Future Work Lab uses the software to demonstrate digital shift planning
Held against it
- Working time rules scored 0, with no public information on daily maximum hours, the eleven-hour rest period, breaks or Minijob limits
- Codetermination and privacy scored 1: legal links (AGB, privacy, impressum) but no public information on visibility settings, logging or retention
- No public information on a payroll handoff such as DATEV, or on surcharge and absence handling in the handoff
- No sovereignty attributes are on record, and we found no public information on hosting region or subprocessors (sovereignty 1 to 3)
Best for
- You already run SAP — HCM, SuccessFactors, APO or older systems via SAP BTP/CPI — and want a scheduler that connects on the HR master-data side
- You want staff with real app access: wish-shift applications and stored preferences earned staff self-service scores of 4
- You schedule at scale and are prepared to verify the advertised AI planning and automatic backfill in a demo before committing
Avoid if
- You rely on the scheduler to flag rest periods, daily maximums or Minijob limits — working time rules scored 0
- You need published visibility, logging and retention terms to draft a works agreement — codetermination and privacy scored 1
- You need a documented payroll handoff with surcharge wage types — the payroll side of the connections is undescribed on the public pages
- You require published hosting-region or subprocessor commitments before signing — 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
The page promises automated, AI-supported shift planning scalable to thousands of employees, plus fully automatic re-staffing of short-notice dropouts — so the system draws the roster rather than just hosting a calendar. But we found no public information on templates, roles, qualifications or how many people a shift needs, and the AI label comes without any documented demand source or forecasting method. 1
The Operations Director
The captured pages claim automated, KI-supported shift planning and fully automatic replacement of short-notice absences, but I found no public information on templates, roles, qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, or any named demand source such as POS or occupancy data — and the KI claim comes with no documented method. For a thirty-site operator there is nothing here on labour cost against budget while planning or staff shared across sites. 1
The Payroll Officer
The captured pages claim automated, KI-supported shift planning scalable to thousands of employees, with optional fully automatic backfill of short-term absences — the system proposes rather than merely draws a plan. But we found no public information on templates, roles, qualifications or staffing requirements per shift, no demand source is ever named, and the KI method is a label rather than a documented forecast. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The captured pages advertise AI-supported, automated shift planning and fully automatic replacement of short-notice absences, so the product proposes rosters rather than only drawing one — but we found no public information on templates, qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, demand sources, coverage checks or labour cost against budget. An automatic engine whose method is only named as AI is a black box I must treat with caution before any works agreement. 1
The Frontline Employee
The vendor page claims automated, AI-supported shift planning and fully automatic backfill of short-term absences, but we found no public information on templates, roles and qualifications, staffing requirements per shift, locations, or the demand figures behind a plan. I cannot see from this how a fair roster would even be built. 1
The Skeptic
Automated, "KI-unterstützte" shift planning and a fully automatic backfill of short-notice absences are claimed, but the captured page names no data source behind the forecast and no roles, qualifications or staffing requirements per shift. Automation is asserted; which demand figure or rule drives a proposal is nowhere shown in what we captured, so I treat the mechanics as unevidenced rather than proven. 1
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
We found no public information on any working-time check — nothing on the 11-hour rest period, daily maximum hours, breaks, Minijob earnings limits or collective-agreement surcharges. The legal links shown are terms, privacy and impressum, which is not a rest-period warning I'd see before publishing a plan. 1
The Operations Director
I found no public information on any working-time rule handling: no named check on daily hours, breaks, the eleven-hour rest period, Minijob limits or collective-agreement surcharges. The legal links to terms, privacy and imprint are not a compliance feature. 1
The Payroll Officer
We found no public information on any working-time check — no ArbZG daily maximum, no 11-hour rest, no breaks, no Minijob earnings warning, no surcharges or collective-agreement handling of any kind. From my desk that means every rule and every night, Sunday and holiday supplement would live entirely outside the roster. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The captured pages describe no check on daily hours, breaks or rest periods, and no Minijob limit or collective-agreement surcharge is named anywhere — we found no public information on working-time rules being enforced or warned about. Fully automatic replacement of short-notice absences with nothing published about rest periods or qualification checks before assignment is exactly the automation a works agreement would have to constrain first. 1
The Frontline Employee
We found no public information on working-time rules of any kind — nothing on daily hour limits, the eleven-hour rest period, breaks, Minijob earnings limits or collective-agreement surcharges. As the one whose rest gets planned around, that silence decides it. 1
The Skeptic
The captured page describes no working-time check at all — no daily maximum, no 11-hour rest period, no breaks, no Minijob limit, and not even a generic "Arbeitszeitgesetz supported" claim I could test. We found no public information on whether the roster warns about, blocks, or simply exports a violation. 1
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
There are iOS and Android apps where employees apply for their desired shifts and save preferences, and short-notice absences can be re-staffed automatically — a real step past a read-only view. We found no public information on availability entry, absence requests, swap approvals, push notification of changes, or clocking in by app. 1
The Operations Director
There are iOS and Android apps where employees can apply for their preferred shifts and store preferences, which is a step past a read-only roster. I found no public information on availability entry, absence requests, shift swaps, push notification of changes or clock-in, so the picture stops short of what shop-floor staff in retail, hospitality or care actually need. 1
The Payroll Officer
Native iOS and Android apps are evidenced, where staff can apply for their preferred shifts and store preferences — more than a read-only view. We found no public information on availability entry, absence requests, swap flows with manager approval, push notifications or clocking in from the app. 1
The Works Council Advocate
iOS and Android apps exist, and employees can apply for their wish shifts and store preferences, which goes beyond a read-only roster view. We found no public information on shift swaps, absence requests, approval flows, push notification of changes, or clock-in, so I cannot call this full self-service for deskless staff. 1
The Frontline Employee
iOS and Android apps exist, and employees can apply for their wish shifts and set shift preferences in the app, which is more than a read-only view. But we found no public information on availability entry, absence requests, shift swaps, push notification of changes, clock-in or languages — and a swap without three phone calls is exactly what I need from an app. 1
The Skeptic
iOS and Android apps exist, and employees can store shift preferences and apply for their wish shifts — more than a read-only roster, which lifts it past minimal. But we found no public information on availability entry, absence requests, shift swaps with approval, open-shift claiming, push notifications or clock-in, so the app's working breadth rests on two features. 1
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
We found no public information on roles or visibility settings, on what is logged, or on how long availability and absence records are kept. A privacy page link exists, but we found no public information a works council could use for a works agreement, and nothing on whether any tracking functions can be switched off. 1
The Operations Director
A privacy page link exists, but the captured content shows no roles or visibility settings, no statement of what is logged or retained, and no documentation offered for works-council approval. I found no public information on GPS or activity tracking or on switching such functions off. 1
The Payroll Officer
A privacy-policy link and an Impressum are the only data-related traces on record; we found no public information on roles or visibility settings, what is logged, retention or deletion periods, switchable tracking, or a DPA. Nothing here that a works council could build a BetrVG § 87 agreement from. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The pages link to a privacy policy and AGB, but we found no public information on role-based visibility, what is logged, retention and deletion of availability and absence data, an audit trail, or whether monitoring functions can be switched off. AI-supported planning combined with fully automatic absence replacement, with nothing published on logging or deletion, is not something I could advise any council to sign. 1
The Frontline Employee
Privacy, terms and impressum pages are linked, but we found no public information on role-based visibility, what is logged, retention of availability and absence data, a data-processing agreement, or anything a works council could use. I cannot judge what my colleagues or managers would see about me. 1
The Skeptic
Links to a privacy statement, AGB and Impressum exist, which is a gesture, but the captures show no roles or visibility settings, no statement of what is stored, logged or retained, and no mention of GPS or monitoring at all. We found no public information aimed at a works council or a data inventory for a works agreement. 1
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
Shyftplan presents itself as a certified SAP partner with connections to HCM, SuccessFactors, APO and older systems via SAP BTP/CPI, and an API is mentioned — that is solid on the HR master-data side. We found no public information on a named payroll system, on surcharge handling, or on a POS connection. 1
The Operations Director
As a certified SAP partner the vendor names APO, HCM and SuccessFactors integrations plus older systems via SAP BTP/CPI, and an API link exists, which covers HR master data connections. I found no public information on any payroll path such as DATEV or Lohn und Gehalt, no surcharge handling, and no POS integration feeding forecasting. 1
The Payroll Officer
The vendor presents certified SAP integrations — HCM, SuccessFactors, APO and older systems via BTP/CPI — plus an API, which covers the HR master-data side. But we found no public information on any named payroll system, wage types per surcharge, a lock step before transmission, or retro corrections after the close; how the worked month reaches Lohn und Gehalt is unaddressed on public pages. 1
The Works Council Advocate
A documented API and a certified SAP partnership covering APO, HCM, SuccessFactors and older systems via SAP BTP/CPI give named HR and demand-planning connections. We found no public information on a payroll handoff — no DATEV, no Lohn und Gehalt, no surcharge wage types and no lock step before transmission. 1
The Frontline Employee
An API is offered, and as a certified SAP partner the product connects to APO, HCM, SuccessFactors and older SAP systems via SAP BTP/CPI. We found no public information on a payroll handoff such as DATEV, on surcharge handling, or on a POS connection. 1
The Skeptic
A certified SAP partnership with named APO, HCM, SuccessFactors and BTP/CPI connections plus an API is genuine HR-side connectivity. But we found no public information on a payroll system or export (DATEV or otherwise), on surcharge and absence handling in the handoff, or on which tier these integrations sit in — the payroll leg of this criterion is simply undescribed. 1
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 vendor trades as a German GmbH, so the contracting entity sits in the EU. We found no public information on where employee data is hosted, which subprocessors handle it, or any certification — and for a tool holding availability and absence data about people who never chose the vendor, that matters to me. 1
The Operations Director
The vendor trades as Shyftplan GmbH with a German-language site, but there are no sovereignty attributes on record and I found no public information on hosting region, data-centre provider or subprocessors, push notification included. The imprint and privacy links exist, yet their content is not captured. 1
The Payroll Officer
No sovereignty attributes are on record: hosting region, contracting entity and the subprocessor chain are all unstated, and only an Impressum link hints at an identifiable entity. For a tool holding shift and preference data on employees' own phones, where that data lives is unknown from public pages. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity appears to be a German GmbH with an Impressum, which is a start. We found no public information on the hosting region, the data-centre provider, or any subprocessor — for a tool holding employees' availability and absence data, that silence is a question the council will put before any signature. 1
The Frontline Employee
The vendor is named as Shyftplan GmbH, but we found no public information on hosting region, data-centre provider, subprocessors or certifications. My availability and absences would sit in this app on my own phone, and I cannot see who else handles that data or where. 1
The Skeptic
The sovereignty record is empty: hosting region, data-centre provider and the subprocessor chain (push, analytics, support) are unstated in the captures. A German-language site with an Impressum and AGB suggests an EU contracting entity, but I found no published subprocessor list or hosting statement to rest that on, and I weight that absence heavily for a tool holding availability and absence data. 1
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
Pricing appears on the page as a single word with no figures behind it, and the route forward is a booked demo with the expert team for an individual potential analysis. We found no public prices, tiers, per-employee rates or billing periods, so I cannot compute even a rough annual invoice. 1
The Operations Director
The pricing entry is a page link only with no prices stated, and the offered route is a conversation with the expert team for an individual potential analysis. A buyer cannot compute even a headline annual figure for any headcount from the public pages. 1
The Payroll Officer
The pricing item is a link that states no prices at all — 'Preisgestaltung' with nothing behind it — and the only route offered is a sales conversation for an 'individuelle Potenzialanalyse'. A buyer cannot compute any part of the annual invoice, let alone the add-ons, from public pages. 1
The Works Council Advocate
The captured pages show only a "Preisgestaltung" link with no figures, and the offered path is an individual potential analysis with the sales team. A buyer cannot compute any part of the annual invoice from what is public. 1
The Frontline Employee
The vendor page shows a pricing link but no prices are stated, and visitors are invited to talk to an expert team for an individual analysis. We found no public information on per-employee rates, tiers, billing periods, minimum terms or add-on modules. 1
The Skeptic
A "Preisgestaltung" page exists but states no figures — no per-employee price, no tiers, no modules, no counting rule for seasonal staff. The only pricing route in the captures is booking a demo for an "individuelle Potenzialanalyse", so a buyer cannot compute even a rough annual invoice. 1
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 | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined ⚠ unverified | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 29 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 — Data residency. 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.
- 36 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
- 10 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
- 6 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
- 4 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
- 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 pricing 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 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is 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 (12)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor page www.shyftplan.com Checked 29 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Legal notice — found from the homepage shyftplan.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Working-time law & collective agreements — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Working-time law & collective agreements — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Works council & employee data — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Works council & employee data — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap shyftplan.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →