whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Employee Scheduling

Skello

EU-Made Report an error

Panel 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 Works Council Advocate

Weighted verdict

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

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

Scored by The Works Council Advocate

Roster building & demand planning

How this is scored

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

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

Report an error

Working-time law & collective agreements

How this is scored

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

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

Report an error

Mobile self-service for deskless staff

How this is scored

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

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

Report an error

Works council & employee data

How this is scored

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The 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

Report an error

Payroll handoff & integrations

How this is scored

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

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

Report an error

European sovereignty

How this is scored

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

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

Report an error

Pricing transparency not rated — the vendor publishes no price

How this is scored

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

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

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

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

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

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

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

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

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

2 of 4 dimensions proven

Built only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.

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

What we left out

A claim that does not survive our checks costs us the claim, not the page. This is what was taken off this one.

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

Sources (13)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing page www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Legal notice www.skello.io Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Roster building & demand planning — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Working-time law & collective agreements — found from sitemap www.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap www.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Mobile self-service for deskless staff — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Works council & employee data — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  11. 11 Works council & employee data — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  12. 12 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap www.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  13. 13 Payroll handoff & integrations — found from sitemap help.skello.io Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →