Recruiting
JOIN
EU-Made Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 3 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by JOIN Solutions AG · join.com
Compare with softgarden → 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
JOIN scores as a distribution-first recruiting tool. Job distribution earns the top band at 6-7: multiposting to 15 free and 250 paid boards, partner status with Indeed, LinkedIn and StepStone, the source board stored on every application, and a career-site builder in the employer's own design. AI screening control is the weakest area at 1-2 — the pages tell startups to 'screenen Sie mit KI' and ship a KI job-ad generator in every tier, yet we found no public information on what the AI evaluates, the model provider, or a switch to turn it off. Pricing transparency scores 5-6: 17 € pro Job/Monat and 34 € pro Job/Monat, annual billing, up to 15 active jobs, with Enterprise at Staffelpreise by contact and no posted price for the paid-multiposting add-on. Applicant data governance holds at 4 and candidate pipeline at 4-5; integrations and handover sit at 3-4. Sovereignty spans 3-4, the higher marks crediting the openly European corporate structure, the lower ones weighing Swiss governing law, exclusive Swiss venue and hosting described only as 'primär in der EU'.
Speaks for it
- Multiposting to 15 free and 250 paid boards with partner status as Indeed Platinum, LinkedIn Silver and StepStone Preferred Partner, sponsored placements bookable without markup
- Every application stores its source job board, with mobile-first applications and Quick Apply
- Published prices for Standard (17 € pro Job/Monat) and Advanced (34 € pro Job/Monat) on annual billing with 2 Monate gratis, up to 15 active jobs, unlimited users, VAT excluded, and notice periods of 30 days annual and 5 days monthly
- A 14-day trial of the Advanced tier with up to 5 active jobs and no credit card
- ISO 27001:2022 certification, a published data processing agreement, and GDPR rights built into every candidate profile
Held against it
- AI screening is marketed ('screenen Sie mit KI'; a KI job-ad generator in every tier) with no public information on what it evaluates, the model provider, or a switch to turn it off
- The storage period behind the promised deletion or anonymisation is not stated, and we found no public information on a consent step for the talent pool or on view/export logs
- Pipeline features appear as checkmarks, with no public information on per-vacancy configuration or a record of who moved a candidate and why
- API access, Zapier & Make and the Excel candidate export start only at Advanced, and we found no public information on a handover to a named HR or payroll system such as Personio or DATEV
- The contracting entity and governing law are Swiss with exclusive venue at JOIN's seat, hosting is described only as 'primär in der EU', and we found no published subprocessor list beyond the category 'Stellenportale'
Best for
- You need broad board reach at a published per-job price — 15 free and 250 paid boards under the 17 € and 34 € pro Job/Monat tiers suits small-volume hiring
- Your team works within the 15-active-job limit of the public tiers, uses Google or Outlook calendars, and benefits from unlimited users
- You want to evaluate before committing: the 14-day Advanced trial includes up to 5 active jobs with no credit card
- You need documented GDPR answer paths for candidates, from rights built into profiles to deletion of company content with the account
Avoid if
- You face works-council co-determination on AI screening: the captured pages state nothing about what it evaluates or who decides, and AI screening control scored 1-2
- You must hand hires to a named HR or payroll system without re-keying: we found no public information on such a handover, and API access begins only at Advanced
- You require an EU-contracting vendor or a visible subprocessor chain: the contract runs under Swiss law with exclusive venue at JOIN's seat, and subprocessors appear only as categories
- You must compute total spend before signing: the paid-multiposting add-on across 250+ boards carries no posted price, and Enterprise is Staffelpreise from 15 open jobs on request
The scores
Applicant management & hiring workflow
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The daily work of hiring: pipeline stages per job, collaboration with hiring managers, structured evaluation, interview scheduling and candidate communication — judged on whether a decision is documented rather than merely made.
0 — An inbox of applications with a status field; no stages per job, no shared evaluation and no record of who decided what.
3 — A fixed pipeline with drag-and-drop stages and email templates, but hiring managers see everything or nothing, and evaluation is free-text comments.
5 — Configurable pipelines per job, hiring-manager access limited to their own vacancies, structured scorecards, interview scheduling with calendar integration, and templated candidate emails in German.
8 — Approval workflows for requisitions and offers, role-based access per team and location, structured interview kits, bulk actions with automated but reviewable candidate communication, and a history on each candidate of every stage change and who made it.
10 — The pipeline is an auditable record of a fair process: every decision attributed and reasoned, evaluation criteria fixed before applications arrive, reporting on time-to-hire and drop-off per stage, and the full history exportable per candidate for an AGG dispute.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
Scorecards, interview scheduling with two-way Google and Outlook sync, roles and permissions, interviewer pools and automated candidate messaging are all listed — the daily core my team needs. But this is checkmark-level evidence: we found no public information on per-stage history with attribution, approval workflows for offers, or drop-off reporting, so a decision is documented to the level of a scorecard rather than an auditable record. 2 1
The Employer Branding Manager
Scorecards, interview scheduling with two-way Google and Outlook sync, roles and permissions, and automated candidate messages are all confirmed, which covers the daily hiring work. The pages do not show pipelines configurable per job or hiring managers limited to their own vacancies, and I found no public information on approval workflows or a record of who moved a candidate and why. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
The captured pages show a hiring pipeline, structured scorecards, screening questions, interviewer pools and interview scheduling with two-way Google and Outlook calendar sync, plus roles and permissions across tiers — but the depth stops at feature tick-marks. We found no public information on pipelines configured per vacancy, on a record of who moved a candidate and why, or on approval steps for offers, so the attributed decision history an AGG dispute would need is not evidenced. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Pipeline, scorecards, interview scheduling with two-way Google and Outlook sync, automated messages and roles and permissions are confirmed across the tiers. We found no public information on pipelines configured per vacancy, on hiring managers seeing only their own jobs, on approval steps for requisitions or offers, or on any record of who changed a candidate's stage and why — and that record is precisely what my colleagues and I need before we can agree to the tool. 1 2
The HR IT Integrator
The pricing page shows a hiring pipeline, scorecards, interview scheduling, roles and permissions and automated messages in every tier, plus two-way Google and Outlook sync and candidates booking their own slots. But these are tick marks, not depth: we found no public information on configurable stages per job, on restricting hiring managers to their own vacancies, or on any record of who moved a candidate and why — so I cannot treat it as a decision trail. 1 2
The Skeptic
The pricing page lists a hiring pipeline, scorecards, interview scheduling with two-way Google and Outlook sync, roles and permissions, and automated messages — but only as checkmarks. I found no public information on whether pipelines are configurable per job, whether hiring-manager access is limited to their own vacancies, or whether a record exists of who changed a candidate's stage. Structured evaluation and scheduling are real; the audit trail a fair-process claim needs is entirely unevidenced. 1 2
Multiposting, career page & candidate experience
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Getting a vacancy in front of the right people and letting them apply: job-board distribution for the German market, the career page, and an application process that does not lose candidates on a phone.
0 — No career page and no job-board distribution; vacancies are posted by hand elsewhere.
3 — A basic hosted job list and free aggregator feeds, with no named German boards, and an application form that requires an account or a desktop.
5 — A branded career page, multiposting to named boards including the Bundesagentur für Arbeit and at least one major German paid board, Google for Jobs markup, and mobile application without an account.
8 — Multiposting with booking and budget tracking per board from inside the system, source attribution per applicant, career page in several languages with an embeddable widget, accessibility stated, and an application form configurable per job.
10 — Distribution is measured, not only broadcast: cost and applicants per channel reported, the career page meets a stated accessibility standard, one-click or CV-parse application on mobile, and candidates can see their own status and withdraw themselves.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
Multiposting with StepStone as Preferred Partner, Indeed as Platinum and LinkedIn, 250+ paid boards, source attribution stored on every application, mobile-first applications and Quick Apply give me the German paid-board reach I judge on. We found no public information on Bundesagentur für Arbeit posting, Google for Jobs markup, career-page languages, accessibility, or budget tracking per board, which holds this below the top of the band. 1 2
The Employer Branding Manager
Multiposting to 250+ paid and 15 free boards with StepStone, Indeed and LinkedIn partner status, a career-site builder, mobile-first applications and a source board stored on every application give me most of a channel manager's wishlist. I found no public information on a Bundesagentur für Arbeit feed, Google for Jobs markup, budget tracking per board, cost per applicant per channel, or a career page in several languages. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
Distribution is the product's visible core: organic multiposting to 10+ boards, paid posting to 250+ as an add-on bookable without markup, partner status with StepStone, Indeed and LinkedIn, a career-page builder in the customer's own design, mobile-first application and source tracking per application. We found no public information on posting to the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, on Google for Jobs markup, on an accessibility statement, or on cost and applicants reported per channel, which holds this below the higher marks. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
Multiposting to 250+ paid boards with StepStone as a Preferred Partner, a career page 'im eigenen Design', quick apply on mobile and source attribution on every application are confirmed. We found no public information on a Bundesagentur für Arbeit feed, Google for Jobs markup, accessibility, career-page languages, budget tracking per board, or on candidates seeing their own status and withdrawing themselves. 1 2
The HR IT Integrator
Distribution is the strongest part: one click to 15 free and 250 paid boards, named partner status with Indeed, LinkedIn and StepStone, the source board stored on every application, mobile-first applications and a quick-apply flow, with sponsored bookings advertised without markup. We found no public information on posting to the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, Google for Jobs markup, career-page accessibility or multilingual career pages, and per-channel cost and applicant reporting appears only as the Enterprise tier's job-ad evaluation. 1 2
The Skeptic
Distribution is the best-documented area: 15 free and 250 paid boards in one click, named partner status with Indeed, LinkedIn and StepStone, the source board stored on every application, a career-site builder in the employer's own design, and mobile-first applications with Quick Apply. I found no public information on Google for Jobs markup, posting to the Bundesagentur für Arbeit, career-page languages, accessibility, or budget tracking per board; booking sponsored placements without markup is stated, but per-channel cost reporting is not. 1 2
Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
What happens to the data of people who were not hired: automatic deletion on a configurable deadline, talent-pool consent that expires, data-subject requests, and access logging — the criterion the employer is actually liable for.
0 — Nothing stated about retention or deletion; applicant data stays until someone removes it by hand.
3 — Manual deletion and an anonymise button exist, but no automatic deadline, and talent-pool storage has no stated consent step.
5 — Automatic deletion or anonymisation after a configurable period after rejection, talent-pool storage only with recorded consent, and a documented way to answer an access or erasure request.
8 — Retention rules per country or entity, consent with expiry and automated re-consent requests, candidate self-service for their own data, a log of who viewed or exported an applicant file, and permissions a works council can review.
10 — Governance that can be evidenced: deletion runs are logged and reportable, special-category data can be excluded or restricted by field, every export is recorded, and the vendor publishes how deletion propagates to backups and to the job boards and tools it syncs with.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
The privacy policy states deletion or full anonymisation once the storage period lapses, and GDPR rights are built into every candidate profile — but the period is not stated as configurable, and we found no public information on a consent or expiry step for the talent pool, on access logging, or on deletion-run reporting. That is a compliance posture, not governance I can evidence in an AGG dispute. 3 1 2
The Employer Branding Manager
The privacy policy states deletion or complete anonymisation once a storage period lapses, but the period itself is not stated and configurability is not mentioned; candidate profiles carry built-in GDPR rights, which helps with access requests. The talent pool is sold on the pricing page and I found no public information on a recorded consent step, access logging or deletion reports. 1 2 3
The Data Protection Officer
The privacy policy promises deletion or full anonymisation once the storage period ends, and GDPR rights are stated to be built into every candidate profile, which gives applicants a documented answer path for access and erasure. No retention period is stated anywhere, configurability after a rejection is not evidenced, and we found no public information on a consent step or expiry for the talent pool, on a log of who viewed or exported an applicant file, or on reportable deletion runs — exactly the points a works council will raise. 1 2 3 5
The Works Council Advocate
The privacy policy promises deletion or full anonymisation once a storage period expires, GDPR rights are said to be built into every candidate profile, and deleting the account removes all company content. A talent pool sits in every tier while we found no public information on a recorded consent step, its expiry, a log of who viewed or exported an applicant file, or how deletion propagates to the job boards and backups — for the criterion the employer is liable for, that silence decides the score. 1 2 3 5
The HR IT Integrator
The privacy policy states deletion or full anonymisation once a storage period expires, GDPR rights are described as built into every candidate profile, and deleting the account removes all company content. But no specific retention period or configurability is stated, the talent pool carries no recorded-consent statement, and we found no public information on view or export logs a works council could inspect. 1 2 3 5
The Skeptic
The privacy policy promises deletion or complete anonymisation once the storage period expires, but no period is stated and I found no public information on a configurable deadline. GDPR rights are said to be built into every candidate profile and account deletion removes the company's content, which covers the access- and erasure-request basics. The talent pool is a checkmark in every tier with nothing on a consent step, and I found no public information on logging of views or exports. 1 2 3 5
AI screening transparency & control
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether any automated ranking, matching, parsing or rejection is disclosed, explained and switchable — recruitment is a high-risk use under the EU AI Act, and an undisclosed score next to a candidate's name is a co-determination matter. A product without AI features is judged on stating so.
0 — AI matching or scoring is marketed with no statement of what it evaluates, where it runs, or whether it can be turned off.
3 — AI features are described as a benefit, with a general assurance that humans decide, but no documentation of inputs, no per-feature switch and no model or provider named.
5 — Each AI feature is described with its purpose and inputs, can be disabled per account, never rejects a candidate without a human action, and the model provider or subprocessor is named.
8 — AI outputs are shown with their reasoning to the recruiter, candidates are informed when AI is used, protected attributes are stated to be excluded, EU processing is available for the AI features, and the vendor publishes its EU AI Act position.
10 — The vendor treats recruitment AI as the high-risk system the law says it is: documentation a works council can base an agreement on, bias testing described and repeated, logs of every AI-assisted decision retained for audit, and every AI feature off by default until the customer enables it.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
AI is marketed as a benefit — a job-ad generator in every tier and "screenen Sie mit KI" on the startup page — and we found no public information on what the screening evaluates, a per-feature switch, the model or provider behind it, or even an assurance that humans decide. An unexplained AI screen next to a name is precisely what I cannot defend to a works council. 2 1
The Employer Branding Manager
The homepage advertises screening with KI and the pricing page a KI generator for job ads. I found no public information on what the screening evaluates, where the models run, who the provider is, whether features can be switched off, or any EU AI Act position — nothing a works council could base an agreement on. 1 2
The Data Protection Officer
An AI generator for job advertisements ships in every tier and the homepage tells startups to "screenen Sie mit KI", yet we found no public information on what the screening evaluates, its inputs, a per-feature switch, the model or provider, or the vendor's EU AI Act position. An AI feature applied to applicant screening with nothing published about inputs, human oversight or where it runs is precisely the co-determination gap I flag. 1 2
The Works Council Advocate
The homepage tells startups to 'screenen Sie mit KI' and every tier ships a KI-Stellenanzeigen-Generator. We found no public information on what the screening evaluates, its inputs, where it runs, the provider, whether it can be switched off, any assurance that a human decides, or any EU AI Act position — an unexplained machine verdict next to a name is a co-determination matter, and no answer means no agreement. 1 2
The HR IT Integrator
AI is marketed — a job-ad generator in every tier and a pitch to startups to screen with AI — while the captured pages state nothing about what the screening evaluates, which model or provider runs it, where it processes, or whether a customer can switch it off. For a use the EU AI Act treats as high-risk, that is a co-determination conversation I could not prepare a single document for. 1 2
The Skeptic
The startup segment page says candidates are screened "mit KI" and a KI generator for job ads sits in every tier, but nothing published says what the AI evaluates, where it runs, who the model provider is, or whether any of it can be switched off. Not even a general humans-decide assurance appears on the captured pages. 1 2
HR handover, integrations & API
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
The hire does not end in the ATS: handover to the HR system and payroll, identity and calendar integration, e-signature for contracts, and an API a team can build on.
0 — No integrations and no API; a hired candidate is retyped into the HR system.
3 — A CSV export and an email integration, with a partner marketplace that names no German HR or payroll systems.
5 — A documented API, calendar and video-interview integration, and a named handover to at least one HR system common in DACH (e.g. Personio, DATEV-connected systems, SAP SuccessFactors).
8 — Maintained integrations with several named HR systems carrying the hire's data without retyping, SSO and SCIM, e-signature for offers and contracts, webhooks, and an API with published limits.
10 — Integration is designed rather than bolted on: a versioned API with a deprecation policy, handover that carries documents and consent status into the HR record, deletion that propagates to connected systems, and the vendor maintaining the German integrations itself.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
API access and Zapier/Make from the Advanced tier up, two-way calendar sync, and an Excel candidate export give a small team a bridge to build on. We found no public information on a handover to a named DACH HR system such as Personio or DATEV, on e-signature, SSO or SCIM, or on published API limits and documentation. 2 1 3
The Employer Branding Manager
API access and Zapier and Make come with Advanced and above, two-way calendar sync with Google and Outlook is confirmed, and Enterprise offers custom integrations on request. The captured pages show no named HR or payroll system for handing a hire over, and I found no public information on SSO, e-signature, webhooks or published API limits. 1 2 3
The Data Protection Officer
An API, Zapier & Make connectors and a candidate export in Excel format appear from the Advanced tier up, custom integrations are reserved for Enterprise, and two-way Google and Outlook calendar sync is stated for all plans. We found no public information on published API documentation or limits, on a named handover to a DACH HR or payroll system such as Personio or DATEV-connected tools, on SSO or SCIM, or on e-signature for offers and contracts. 1 2 3
The Works Council Advocate
Excel export, two-way calendar sync with Google and Outlook, Zapier & Make and an API in Advanced and Enterprise are confirmed, with 'maßgeschneiderte Integrationen' promised only at Enterprise. We found no public information on a handover to any HR system common in DACH, on SSO or SCIM, e-signature for contracts, webhooks or published API limits; nothing in the captured pages shows the hire's data reaching the HR record without retyping. 1 2 3
The HR IT Integrator
API access and Zapier and Make arrive from the Advanced tier upward, two-way Google and Outlook calendar sync is confirmed, and Enterprise promises custom integrations on request — so everything below Advanced moves by hand. We found no public information on published API documentation or rate limits, SSO, SCIM, e-signature or webhooks, and no maintained handover to a named HR system such as Personio, DATEV or SAP; the evidenced candidate export is Excel format, and it too starts only in Advanced. 1 2 3
The Skeptic
An API and Zapier & Make are gated to Advanced and Enterprise, calendar sync with Google and Outlook runs two-way, and candidates can be exported in Excel. On the handover side — carrying a hire into a German HR or payroll system — I found no public information: no Personio, DATEV or SuccessFactors is named, and SSO, e-signature and webhooks are likewise unevidenced. 1 2 3
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where applicant data lives, who the contracting entity is, who the subprocessors are — including the job boards, CV parsers and AI providers the system passes CVs to. Independently sourced by the sovereignty pipeline; weighted higher here than in categories holding the customer's own data, because every record belongs to a third party who never chose the vendor.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting unstated, subprocessors unnamed, and CV parsing or AI processing of unclear location.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option while the contracting entity is non-EU, or the subprocessor list is absent, or CV parsing and AI features run outside the EU without saying so.
5 — EU hosting as standard and an EU contracting entity, but parts of the chain — parsing, AI, email delivery — are non-EU without an explained safeguard.
8 — EU hosting on named infrastructure, EU contracting entity, subprocessor list published including parsing and AI providers, and a DPA that covers applicant data as the customer's processing.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor European, certification published, and the AI and CV-parsing features run within the EU on providers the customer can see.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
A Swiss parent with Swiss governing law and exclusive Swiss venue operates the product alongside German and Spanish subsidiaries, and hosting is stated as "primär in der EU" — a qualifier that leaves parts of the chain unexplained. Subprocessors appear only as categories (job portals, LinkedIn) and we found no public information on a full list or on where CV parsing and the AI features run; ISO 27001:2022 and an Article 27 EU representative are real but do not answer those questions. 4 5 1 3
The Employer Branding Manager
A Swiss parent with German and Spanish subsidiaries, Swiss governing law and exclusive Swiss venue, hosting described as primarily in the EU, ISO 27001:2022 certification and a published data-processing agreement paint a European picture. Subprocessors appear only as categories such as job portals, and I found no public information on the hosting infrastructure or where the KI features process CVs. 1 3 4 5
The Data Protection Officer
Hosting is stated as "primär in der EU", and the corporate structure is openly European: a Swiss parent with German and Spanish subsidiaries, an Article 27 representative in Berlin, a published data-processing agreement and ISO 27001:2022. But the contracting entity and governing law are Swiss rather than EU, the hosting infrastructure is unnamed, and we found no published subprocessor list — providers appear only as categories such as job portals, with nothing naming a CV parser or AI provider or saying where their processing runs. 1 3 4 5
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity is the Swiss JOIN Solutions AG under Swiss material law with exclusive venue at JOIN's seat, and the English version of the terms governs; hosting is described only as 'primär in der EU', and we found no public information on the infrastructure behind it. We found no published subprocessor list beyond a category mention of Stellenportale, and the location of the AI screening and any CV parsing is unclear — the AG is European but not EU, and I cannot co-sign a chain I cannot see. 1 3 4 5
The HR IT Integrator
A Swiss parent jointly operates the product with German and Spanish subsidiaries, the German entity serves as the Article 27 EU representative, hosting is described as primarily in the EU, and ISO 27001:2022 and a data processing agreement are published. But no infrastructure is named, we found no public information on a subprocessor list covering the job boards or AI providers the CVs reach, the terms choose Swiss law with Swiss venue, and 'primarily in the EU' leaves the remainder unexplained. 1 3 4 5
The Skeptic
The contracting entity and exclusive venue are Swiss — JOIN Solutions AG in Pfäffikon under Swiss substantive law — with the Berlin GmbH serving only as the Article 27 representative, and hosting is described as "primär in der EU", which concedes non-EU parts without explaining them. I found no published subprocessor list; the privacy policy names only the category "Stellenportale". ISO 27001:2022 and a published DPA are genuine, but they leave the chain neither fully European nor visible. 1 3 4 5
Pricing transparency
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether a buyer can compute the real annual cost from public pages alone: the pricing model (per employee, per open job, per recruiter seat), job-board posting costs, add-ons for AI, career page or integrations, and the minimum term.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A starting price exists, but the pricing basis (employees, jobs, seats) or which features sit in which tier is unstated — the invoice is unknowable.
5 — Tier prices public with the pricing basis and main limits given, but at least one commonly needed piece (paid job-board postings, AI features, integrations, extra seats) is unpriced.
8 — Every tier priced publicly with its basis and limits, add-on prices listed, job-board posting costs or the booking model stated, minimum term and VAT treatment given.
10 — Complete price computability: annual invoice derivable for a given company size, number of open roles and recruiter seats, with every add-on, posting package and overage published.
The Talent Acquisition Lead
Standard at 17 € pro Job/Monat and Advanced at 34 € pro Job/Monat with annual billing, both up to 15 active jobs, plus VAT treatment, payment terms and notice periods are public and clear. But we found no public information on the cost of paid job-board postings, and Enterprise from 15 open roles is quoted only as "Staffelpreise" behind a contact prompt — at my volume, the invoice is a sales conversation. 2 5
The Employer Branding Manager
17 € pro Job/Monat for Standard and 34 € for Advanced, annual billing, up to 15 active jobs each, two months free, VAT treatment and 30-day annual notice are all public, so I can budget the software itself. What I cannot compute is the job-board spend: paid multiposting across 250+ boards is an add-on with no price list, only a claim of up to 50 % savings versus direct purchase, and Enterprise is volume prices on request. 1 2 5
The Data Protection Officer
Standard at 17 € pro Job/Monat and Advanced at 34 € pro Job/Monat with annual billing are public, together with their pricing basis, the 15-active-job limits, unlimited users, per-tier feature lists, and VAT treatment, prepaid payment terms and notice periods are all stated. Paid multiposting appears only as an add-on without a price, Enterprise is "Staffelpreise" behind a contact request, and posting costs per board are not published, so a complete annual invoice is not computable from the public pages. 2 5
The Works Council Advocate
Standard and Advanced are priced at '17 € pro Job/Monat' and '34 € pro Job/Monat' with annual billing, limits of up to 15 active jobs, VAT expressly excluded, and notice periods of 30 days annual and 5 days monthly. Enterprise is 'Staffelpreise' from 15 open jobs behind a contact request, and we found no public information on the cost of the paid job-board postings — the invoice is computable only for small volumes on the public tiers. 2 5
The HR IT Integrator
Both paid tiers publish a per-job monthly price (17 € Standard, 34 € Advanced, annual billing, up to 15 active jobs, unlimited users), VAT treatment and notice periods are stated, and sponsored placements are advertised without markup. But the paid-multiposting add-on carries no published price, per-board posting costs are absent, and Enterprise is volume prices by contact — the job-board spend, which is the real invoice, is not computable from the public pages. 1 2 5
The Skeptic
Standard and Advanced carry public prices with their basis and limits — 17 € and 34 € pro Job/Monat, jährliche Abrechnung, up to 15 active jobs, unlimited users — plus VAT treatment, notice periods, prepaid invoicing and a 14-day trial without credit card. Enterprise is "Staffelpreise — Kontaktieren Sie uns", and for the paid-multiposting add-on, the item a job pushed to three paid boards runs through, I found no posted price. A buyer can compute most of the annual invoice, but not all of it. 2 5
European sovereignty — proven facts
3 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Incorporated in CH ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 4 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | EU only ⚠ unverified | 3/3 pts | 6 Report an error |
| Subprocessors | US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified | 0/2 pts | 6 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 — Legal entity. Die Schweizer Muttergesellschaft ist die vertragschließende Partei der AGB, aber Deutschland (GmbH) und Spanien (Pirates S.L.U.) Tochtergesellschaften betreiben das Produkt mit; die Schweiz liegt außerhalb der EU.
- Weak sourcing — Data residency. Das Hosting wird nur als 'primär' in der EU beschrieben, die AVV erlaubt als Standardort auch die Schweiz, und die Datenschutzerklärung nennt die USA als möglichen Übermittlungsort durch Dienstleister – keine strikte Nur-EU-Garantie.
- Weak sourcing — Subprocessors. Google Cloud wird als US-Anbieter mit EU-Region genannt; die detaillierte Unterauftragsverarbeiterliste (AVV Anhang 2 / Trust Center) ist in den Auszügen nicht enthalten, und die Datenschutzerklärung bestätigt mögliche Verarbeitungen durch Dienstleister in den USA.
- 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.
- 18 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
- 18 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
- 11 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
- 3 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
- 3 pricing facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 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
- 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 (17)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage join.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 2 Pricing page join.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Privacy policy join.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 4 Legal notice join.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 5 Terms of service join.com Checked 22 Sep 2026 Details →
- 6 Security / trust page join.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 7 Data processing agreement (dpa) join.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
- 8 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap help.join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Applicant management & hiring workflow — found from sitemap help.join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Multiposting, career page & candidate experience — found from sitemap join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 11 Multiposting, career page & candidate experience — found from sitemap help.join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 12 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 13 Retention, deletion & talent-pool consent — found from sitemap help.join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 14 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 15 AI screening transparency & control — found from sitemap join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 16 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap help.join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 17 HR handover, integrations & API — found from sitemap join.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →