Employee Scheduling
Skello
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 Skello SAS · www.skello.io
Compare with gastromatic → 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
Skello, a French scheduling tool for hospitality and retail teams, is strongest on roster planning at 6-7: Smart Planner proposes schedules from named constraints — daily amplitude, weekly rest days, overtime defaulting to the collective agreement — with priority rules down to lowest hourly rate and templates reappliable across up to ten weeks. Its weakest area is sovereignty, scored 2-3: the only concrete storage statement names Webflow, Inc. of San Francisco under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, the AWS region is not stated, the privacy policy offers only a preference for EU and EEA subcontractors, and we found no public information on EU hosting for the product itself. Payroll and integrations, scored 4-6, is divided evidence: a disciplined month-end — green padlock, red lock after sending, administrator-only unlock, one consolidated report — but not a single named payroll, POS or HR system. Public from-prices exist for the main plans and modules, though the pages never say what they scale with. The judges did not genuinely split: criterion scores sat one to two points apart, and no flagged split was flagged.
Speaks for it
- Smart Planner generates automatic roster proposals from named constraints, with overtime defaulting to the collective agreement.
- Schedule templates can be saved from filtered views and reapplied across up to ten weeks.
- The payroll period locks in stages — green padlock before, red lock after sending — with only the system administrator able to unlock.
- Permissions are granular: managers see only strictly lower levels, and read-only access exists for external accountants and CFOs.
- Employees get iOS and Android apps for schedules, availability, leave and shift-transfer requests, plus PIN clock-in.
Held against it
- Sovereignty is the lowest-scoring criterion at 2-3, with the only concrete storage statement naming Webflow, Inc. of San Francisco under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework.
- The AWS region is never stated, and we found no public information on an EU hosting option for the product itself.
- No payroll, POS or HR system is named anywhere, and we found no public information on a documented public API beyond a time-clock API.
- Staffing forecasts appear in the top tier with no named data source, and we found no public information on labour cost against budget while planning.
- Clock-in geolocation is presented as a feature with no statement that it can be switched off, and we found no public information on an audit log of data views.
Best for
- You run hospitality or retail sites in France and want planner rules defaulted from the collective agreement.
- Your payroll month depends on a locked, consolidated report that partner accounting firms can finalise.
- You manage multiple establishments and need hierarchical permissions with read-only access for accountants or CFOs.
- Your frontline teams need a mobile app for schedules, requests and PIN clock-in.
Avoid if
- You need documented EU hosting for employee data, with a stated region.
- You must confirm a named payroll or POS connection before signing.
- Your works council must govern clock-in geolocation or requires an audit log of data access.
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
Schedule templates I can save from filtered views and reapply across up to ten weeks, plus a Smart Planner that proposes schedules from named constraints (daily amplitude, weekly rest days, overtime defaults set from the collective agreement) and priority rules down to lowest hourly rate for equal skills. The staffing forecasts sit in the top tier with no named data source behind them, and we found no public information on labour cost shown against budget while planning or on sharing staff across locations. 2 5 6
The Operations Director
Smart Planner's automatic proposals are documented in method, not just marketing: constraints default from the collective agreement, daily amplitude and weekly rest are set, and assignment rules that favour the lowest hourly rate are published, with staffing forecasts in the top plan and multi-establishment management. But we found no public information tying the forecast to a named demand source such as POS revenue or footfall, none on labour cost against budget while the plan is still editable, and none on sharing the same staff across sites — the loop I plan by stays open. 2 5 6
The Payroll Officer
Templates saveable from filtered views and rolled over ten weeks, positions split into primary and secondary, and a Smart Planner that proposes schedules from configurable constraints with its priority rules documented — that is a real planner, not a drawing board. Staffing forecasts and a connection to cash-register tools appear in the top tier, but the captured pages never say the forecast draws on till revenue, and we found no public information on labour cost shown against budget while planning or on staff shared across locations. 2 5 6
The Works Council Advocate
Templates, positions with primary and secondary assignments, multi-site management and an automatic Smart Planner that proposes rosters under availability, daily amplitude and weekly-rest constraints are well documented, with staffing forecasts sold at the top tier. However, we found no public information tying the forecast to a named data source such as POS revenue or footfall, no labour-cost-against-budget display while planning, and no cross-location staff sharing. 2 5 6
The Frontline Employee
Templates, positions and teams, and multi-site management are documented, and Smart Planner genuinely proposes a roster from constraints you set — daily amplitude, weekly rest days, overtime rules defaulting to the collective agreement, with priority rules down to preferring the lowest hourly rate. The demand side stays thin in public pages: staffing forecasts appear as a plan feature and a cash-register connection is claimed, but we found no public information on a named data source feeding the forecast, labour cost against budget while planning, or staff sharing across locations. 2 5 6
The Skeptic
The Smart Planner method is unusually documented — constraints for availability, daily amplitude, weekly rest and overtime defaulting to the collective agreement, plus transparent assignment priorities like lowest hourly rate and schedule history — and templates and automatic proposals genuinely exist. But the staffing forecasts in the top plan are given no data source, and we found no public information on open-shift claiming, coverage gaps before publication, labour cost against budget, or cross-location staff sharing. 1 2 5 6
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
Named constraints exist — daily amplitude, weekly rest days always on Sundays unless pre-positioned, overtime defaults taken from the collective agreement, plus regulatory alerts in the planning module and automated hour tracking that accounts for legal requirements. But we found no public information on break checks, on whether a violation blocks publication or only warns, or on surcharge rule sets, youth or maternity protection — the rest-period warning I want before publishing is named as an alert, not shown working. 2 6 7
The Operations Director
The roster carries rules rather than leaving them to my memory: rules default from the collective agreement, daily amplitude and weekly rest days are named in the automatic planner, overtime is configurable against company policies and workplace agreements, and time accounts with TOIL, annualised hours and month-end compensation are handled. We found no public information on youth-protection limits, on named night, Sunday and holiday surcharge rule sets, or on whether a violation blocks publication or only warns. 2 6 7
The Payroll Officer
The planner works against named rule elements — daily amplitude, weekly rest days and an overtime system defaulted from the collective agreement — with regulatory alerts during planning and overtime configurable per workplace agreement, which is more than a generic compliance sticker. But the pages never name the supplements I bill every month — night, Sunday, holiday — only an automatic calculation of "variables de paie", and we found no public information on break rules, youth or maternity protection, a Minijob-style earnings warning, or whether an alert blocks the roster or merely warns. 2 6 7
The Works Council Advocate
The rules genuinely steer the plan rather than trailing it: daily amplitude, weekly rest days and an overtime system are set by default from the collective agreement, regulatory alerts are named, and overtime is configurable per company policies and workplace agreements with annualised hours, time-off-in-lieu counters and month-end compensation workflows. What we did not find: named night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, youth-protection limits, any statement whether a violated rule blocks publication or only warns, and no recorded, reasoned override. 2 6 7
The Frontline Employee
The planner is documented to respect named rules — daily amplitude, weekly rest days, an overtime system set from the collective agreement by default, regulatory alerts while scheduling, and overtime policies configurable per workplace agreement. We found no public information on checks for daily maximum hours or breaks, youth-protection limits, or whether a violated rule blocks publication or only warns. 2 6 7
The Skeptic
The rules are actually named — daily amplitude, weekly rest days, an overtime system set by collective agreement by default, workplace-agreement overtime policies, TOIL and annualised-hour counters, and regulatory alerts in scheduling. What the pages never say is whether a violation blocks publication or only warns, and we found no public information on night, Sunday or holiday surcharge rule sets, youth or maternity limits, or a recorded and reasoned planner override. 2 6 7
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
The mobile app gives staff their published roster, availability and leave requests, shift-transfer requests, their own hour tracker and clock-in with a personal PIN and geolocation. We found no public information on employees claiming open shifts themselves, push notification of changes, offline clock-in handling or interface languages; swap requests are evidenced but resolution without a manager is not. 2 9 11
The Operations Director
The employee app gives real actions, not a PDF: availability and leave requests, shift-transfer requests, own HR file and documents, the hour tracker, and clock-in from mobile or shared tablet with a personal PIN. We found no public information on push notification of changes, offline handling at the clock, interface languages, swaps resolved under the rule set without a manager, or employees seeing and exporting the data held about them. 2 9 11
The Payroll Officer
Employees get real apps on both stores with availability and leave requests, shift-transfer requests, their own HR file, their hour tracker and mobile clock-in with geolocation. We found no public information on open-shift claiming, push notification of changes, offline clock-in handling, or swap approvals checked against the rule set, so this stops short of the shop floor resolving its own cover. 2 9 11
The Works Council Advocate
Employees get a real app on iOS and Android — published schedules, availability and leave requests, shift-transfer requests, their own documents and hour tracker, and clock-in by phone or tablet with a personal PIN. We found no public information on push notification of changes, open-shift claiming, offline clock-in or language coverage, and the geolocation taken at each badge is exactly the kind of employee tracking a works agreement must govern before it ships. 2 9 10 11
The Frontline Employee
There is a real employee app on iOS and Android: I can see my published schedule, enter availability, request leave and shift transfers, check my leave and hour counters, and clock in with my own PIN. But it stops at requests — we found no public information on push notification when the roster changes, interface languages, offline or shared-device use, or swap flows that resolve without a manager. 2 9 11
The Skeptic
The employee app does schedules, availability, leave and shift-transfer requests, and staff clock in by phone or tablet with a personal PIN. The swap flows are described only as requests, with no statement that qualifications or rest rules are checked before approval, and we found no public information on open-shift claiming, push notifications of changes, offline clock-in, or language coverage of the interface. 2 9 11
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
Permission levels are genuinely granular — managers see only strictly lower levels, same-level managers are isolated from each other, sensitive employee data can be restricted for schedulers, and retention periods are published (user data 3 years after contract end, client data 6 years). But geolocation at badge-in is presented with no statement that it can be switched off, and we found no public information on an audit log of who viewed or changed an individual's data, configurable deletion periods, or documentation offered for works-council approval. 2 3 10 11
The Operations Director
The permission system is more than basic — four default levels plus further manager tiers, read-only access for external accountants and CFOs, strict hierarchical visibility, and restricted access possible for sensitive employee data — and retention is published (3 years for user data after contract end, 6 for client data, 10 for billing). Geolocation at the clock-in is presented as a feature, and we found no public information on whether it can be switched off, on an audit log of views and changes, on configurable deletion periods, or on works-council documentation. 2 3 10 11
The Payroll Officer
Four customizable permission levels with strict hierarchy — a scheduler's access to sensitive employee data can be restricted, managers see only strictly lower levels, and read-only access exists for accountants and CFOs — plus published retention figures, a named DPO and the vendor as processor under art. 28 GDPR. We found no public information on an audit log of who viewed or changed an individual's data, on configurable deletion periods, on whether the clock-in geolocation can be switched off, or on documentation the vendor offers for works-council approval. 2 3 10 11
The Works Council Advocate
The permission model is genuinely granular — four customizable levels, managers seeing only strictly lower levels, sensitive employee data access for schedulers restricted where needed, and read-only roles for accountants and CFOs — and retention periods for user, client and billing data are published. But geolocation at clock-in is presented with no statement that it can be switched off, we found no audit log of who viewed or changed an individual's data, no configurable deletion periods and no documentation offered for works-council approval, and with performance analytics sitting in the top tier I would want a feature-by-feature data inventory before signing anything. 2 3 10 11
The Frontline Employee
Permissions are genuinely configurable — eight named levels, managers seeing only strictly lower levels, sensitive employee data that can be restricted, read-only access for external accountants — and the privacy policy states retention periods and a no-sale commitment. We found no public information on whether badge geolocation can be switched off, an audit log of who viewed my data, configurable deletion periods, or documentation prepared for a works council. 2 3 10 11
The Skeptic
Permission levels are granular and well documented — managers see only strictly lower levels, sensitive employee data can be restricted, read-only access exists for external accountants and CFOs — and retention periods for employee data are published. But geolocation at the badge is presented as a feature with no statement that it can be switched off or is off by default, and we found no public information on an audit log of views and changes, configurable deletion periods, or materials supporting a works agreement. 2 3 10 11
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
The payroll handoff is worked through — a week locks for payroll with a green padlock, all payroll variables consolidate into one exportable report with a note for the accountant, and partner accounting firms can finalize payroll from a connection set up in the product. No payroll system, POS or HR tool is named anywhere (only "your tools" and "caisse tools"), and we found no public information on wage-type mapping per surcharge, retro corrections after the close, or documented public API detail beyond a named time-clock API. 2 12 13
The Operations Director
The handoff is documented end to end: variable pay calculated into a single report, the week locked for payroll with a green padlock, a red lock after the payrolls are sent, only the system administrator able to unlock, plus payroll-tool connections, an HR and payroll data sync, and partner accounting firms that finalise payroll. But we found no public information naming a single payroll or POS system, and no public API documentation beyond a mention of a time-clock API, so I cannot verify my own stack before a sales conversation. 2 12 13
The Payroll Officer
The month closes properly — weeks locked for payroll, a green padlock signalling data can no longer be changed, all payroll variables consolidated in one report, a red lock after sending and only the system administrator able to unlock — and variable pay elements, premiums, advances and meal allowances are calculated automatically. But the handoff is an exported report plus a generic "connect your payroll tool" set-up: we found no public information naming a single payroll system behind that, on wage-type mapping per supplement, on a documented payroll API, or on retro corrections after the close. 2 12 13
The Works Council Advocate
The handoff has discipline: the schedule locks for payroll with a green padlock, turns red once payrolls are sent, and only the system administrator can unlock, while variable pay elements, absences, bonuses, advances and meal allowances are consolidated into one exportable report and HR and payroll data sync is offered. But no payroll system and no POS tool is ever named — the connections stay generic — and we found no public API documentation beyond passing mentions of a time-clock and analytics API. 2 12 13
The Frontline Employee
The month-end path is documented: payroll variables calculated automatically into one report, the period locked with a padlock only a system administrator can open, plus an optional payroll service where partner accounting firms finalise payroll. No payroll system, POS or HR tool is ever named — connections to cash-register and payroll tools are generic — and we found no public information on a documented public API or wage-type mapping per surcharge. 2 12 13
The Skeptic
The month-end path is real and described in detail — payroll variables calculated, a consolidated report, a padlock-confirmed lock before and after transmission, an accountant note, partner accounting firms and payslip distribution. Yet not a single payroll system, POS or HR tool is named anywhere, the payroll connection is just "your payroll tool", and we found no public information on a documented API or on handling corrections after the close. 2 12 13
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 is Skello SAS in Paris and the privacy policy states a preference for EU and EEA subprocessors, but the only hosting statement names Webflow, Inc. of San Francisco under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, and the caveat notes it may cover only the marketing site. The privacy policy gives no region for the product's own servers, and we found no published subprocessor list — for a system holding availability, absence and geolocated clock-in data, that is not something I can hand a works council. 3 4
The Operations Director
The contracting entity is a French SAS with a named DPO and a stated preference for EU and EEA subcontractors, which is where the good news ends. The only concrete storage statement, in the legal notices, names Webflow, Inc. of San Francisco under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, the region of the AWS multi-AZ database is not stated, and we found no public information on a full subprocessor list for the product — thin comfort for a tool that geolocates employees at the clock. 3 4
The Payroll Officer
The contracting entity is Skello SAS in Paris and the privacy policy states a preference for EU and EEA subcontractors, yet the only concrete hosting statement names Webflow Inc of San Francisco under the EU–US Privacy Shield framework, with the noted caveat that it may cover only the marketing site. We found no public information on where the SaaS product's employee data is hosted, on an EU hosting option, or on a published subprocessor list beyond the vendor's own site and sales tooling. 3 4
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity is Skello SAS in Paris and the privacy policy names providers including AWS, Cloudflare and Salesforce while promising to prefer subcontractors located in the EU and EEA — a best-effort statement with no named data-centre region for the product. The captured pages give different pictures of hosting, with the legal notices describing storage by Webflow Inc. of San Francisco under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, and we found no published certification and no subprocessor list with legal bases; for employee availability, absence and badge-location data that is not enough to draft a works agreement on. 3 4
The Frontline Employee
The vendor is a French company with a DPO, but the captured pages give different signals on where my data sits: the legal notice names Webflow Inc of San Francisco as storing personal data under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, while the privacy policy only states a preference for EU/EEA subcontractors and leaves the AWS region unstated. We found no public information on EU hosting for the product itself or on safeguards for the US subprocessors named. 3 4
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is French and some subprocessors are named, which keeps this off the floor. But the only concrete storage statement names Webflow Inc of San Francisco under the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield, the AWS region is never stated, the preference for EU and EEA subcontractors names no provider, and we found no public information on an EU hosting option for the product itself. 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
Prices are public — Duo Standard "Dès 99€ /mois", Duo Max "Dès 129€ /mois", with priced add-ons (Service de paie "Dès 20€ /mois par employé", Recrutement "Dès 40€ /mois", RH Expert "Dès 20€ /mois"), a 14-day trial and "10% de réduction avec un engagement annuel". The "Dès/from" basis is never explained — per establishment, per employee, or what minimum — and we found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term or how seasonal and inactive staff are counted, so the real annual invoice cannot be computed from the public pages. 1 2 12
The Operations Director
Most of the bill is public: Duo Standard Dès 99€ /mois, Duo Max Dès 129€ /mois, the payroll service Dès 20€ /mois par employé, Recrutement Dès 40€ /mois, RH Expert Dès 20€ /mois, with a 10% annual commitment discount and a 14-day free trial. But the captured pages leave the basis of the "Dès" tiers unstated, and we found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term, or how inactive and seasonal staff are counted — so the annual invoice for thirty sites is not computable from public pages alone. 1 2
The Payroll Officer
Main tiers and every named module carry public figures — Duo Standard "Dès 99€ /mois", Duo Max "Dès 129€ /mois", the payroll service "Dès 20€ /mois par employé", recruitment and RH expert priced, ten percent off with annual commitment, and a fourteen-day trial. What blocks the invoice arithmetic is the basis of those "from" prices: the pages never say what headcount or location count the plan prices cover, and we found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term, or how inactive or seasonal staff are counted. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Monthly from-prices are public — "Duo Standard Dès 99€ /mois", "Duo Max Dès 129€ /mois", with the payroll module at "Dès 20€ /mois par employé", Recrutement at "Dès 40€ /mois" and RH Expert at "Dès 20€ /mois" — plus a 10% annual-commitment discount and a 14-day trial. But the basis of the main tiers' from-prices is never named as per employee or per location, and we found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term, or how inactive or seasonal staff are counted, so a buyer still cannot compute the real annual invoice. 1 2
The Frontline Employee
Module prices are public — "Dès 20€ /mois par employé" for the payroll service, "Dès 40€ /mois" for recruitment, "Dès 20€ /mois" for RH Expert, plans at "Dès 99€ /mois" and "Dès 129€ /mois" with 10% off an annual commitment — but the "Dès" prices never say what they scale with, so a buyer cannot compute the annual invoice for a given headcount. We found no public information on VAT treatment, minimum term, how seasonal staff are counted, or tablet hardware pricing. 1 2 12
The Skeptic
Tiers and add-ons carry public monthly from-prices with the feature split shown — clock-in sits in the standard plan, forecasts and the assistant in the top plan, payroll at a per-employee monthly rate. But every figure is a starting price, the per-employee or per-location basis of the main plans is never stated, the enterprise tier is custom, and we found no public information on how seasonal or inactive staff are counted, minimum term or VAT treatment. 1 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 | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | US by default ⚠ unverified | 0/3 pts | 4 Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 3 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 — Data residency. The statement sits in the website legal notices describing Webflow hosting and may only cover the marketing site rather than the SaaS product, and no EU hosting option is mentioned.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. The privacy policy does not state which AWS region is used, and the other listed providers (Cloudflare for DNS, Salesforce for CRM) appear to serve the vendor's own site and sales tooling rather than customer product data.
- 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.
- 16 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
- 6 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
- 4 support 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 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
- 1 compliance fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 1 legal 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 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
Sources (13)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Working-time law & collective agreements — found from sitemap www.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap www.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Works council & employee data — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Works council & employee data — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap www.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →