Time Tracking & Attendance
ATOSS
EU-Made Report an errorPanel rating · 6 judges · How to read the stars
Category median
Sovereignty: 1 of 4 dimensions proven
0–5 in half steps. 5 means the rubric's top anchor is met on the evidence.
by ATOSS Software SE · www.atoss.com
Compare with GFOS → 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
ATOSS Software SE, a Munich workforce management vendor, scores highest on payroll export, 6-7: a named DATEV technology partnership for ATOSS Time Control and the Staff Efficiency Suite, direct transfer to the payroll system, discrepancies flagged before the run, and retro corrections after processing. Time capture scores 5-6, covering terminal, smartphone, tablet, PC and till, with group bookings for mobile crews and no public information on offline or geofenced capture. Working time law sits at 4-5: EuGH compliance is asserted and rest periods and overtime thresholds named, but break rules, retention and inspection exports are not shown. Project and billing is weakest, 3-4, showing booking to projects, orders and cost centres but no rates or invoice-ready export. Absence and planning shows the widest spread among criteria, 4 to 6: judges crediting the absence workflows, shift-exchange board and staffing analysis versus those held back by unshown entitlement, carry-over and sickness mechanics. Sovereignty scores 3-4 — German entity, register entry, cloud or on-premises deployment, but no public information on hosting region or subprocessors. No price appears; the only stated step is a demo.
Speaks for it
- Named DATEV technology partnership for ATOSS Time Control and the Staff Efficiency Suite, with all data said to transfer directly to the payroll system
- Pay rules applied automatically, discrepancies flagged before the payroll run, approvals escalated ahead of deadlines, and corrections handled after initial processing
- Capture via terminal, smartphone, tablet, PC and till system, plus group bookings for mobile work crews
- Corrections to recorded time are said to be quickly possible and traceably documented
- German contracting entity with register entry and VAT ID, a DPA linked in the footer, and a choice of cloud or on-premises deployment
Held against it
- We found no public information on offline capture or GPS/geofenced check-in with stated limits
- We found no public information on configurable break rules, warnings at the daily maximum, retention of records, or an export built for an inspection
- We found no public information on rates, a billable flag, per-project reporting, budgets or an invoice-ready export
- We found no public information on automatic entitlement calculation, carry-over or sickness recording
- We found no public information on hosting region or subprocessors — data residency and subprocessor exposure are listed as unknown
Best for
- You run payroll on DATEV and want a named partner path with pre-payroll validation and documented correction handling after the close
- You need capture across terminals, smartphones, tablets, PCs and tills for mixed desk, deskless and field staff
- You prioritise scheduling breadth — shift exchange, replacements, last-minute changes, staffing-level analysis — over leave-entitlement mechanics
- You want a German contracting entity with the option of on-premises deployment
Avoid if
- You bill clients from tracked time — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- Your crews clock in where there is no network — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
- You must show an auditor specifics now — ask the vendor: the public pages we read do not show it
The scores
Capture in the real workplace
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How time actually gets recorded across the workforces a buyer has — desk staff, field and site crews, shift and deskless workers — and what happens when the network is not there.
0 — One browser timer and nothing else; anyone away from a desk records nothing.
3 — Web plus a mobile app, but no offline capture, no shared terminal, and corrections are an admin task rather than a workflow.
5 — Web, mobile and at least one shared capture point (kiosk, terminal or badge), with offline capture that syncs, and a correction workflow with approval.
8 — Several capture paths including hardware terminals or badge readers, reliable offline handling, GPS or geofenced check-in where the vendor states its limits, and bulk correction with an audit trail of who changed what.
10 — Capture fits the workforce rather than the reverse: desk, deskless, field and shift models all first-class, offline as a designed state rather than a failure mode, and every correction attributable, reasoned and reversible.
The Operations Lead
Booking runs via terminal, smartphone, tablet, PC and even the till system, which covers my desk, workshop and field crews — including group bookings for mobile work teams and corrections that are traceably documented. I found no public information on offline capture or GPS/geofenced check-in, which my site crews would rely on, so it stops short of the stronger marks. 3 4 6
The Payroll Officer
Terminals, smartphones, tablets, PCs and even POS systems are all named capture channels, plus a mobile app with group bookings for mobile work crews and corrections that are traceably documented. But we found no public information on offline capture or geofenced check-in, which is what a field crew actually needs when the site has no signal. 3 4 6
The Works Council Advocate
Terminal, smartphone, tablet, PC and even the till are all named as capture paths, with group bookings for mobile crews and corrections said to be quickly possible and traceably documented. But I found no public information on offline capture, on any approval step for a correction, or on what a location-based booking actually stores and who may read an individual's day — questions a works council must have answered before co-determining such a system. Several paths, thin answers. 3 4 6
The Agency Owner
Terminals, smartphones, tablets, PCs and till systems as capture channels, group bookings for mobile work crews, and corrections that are quickly possible and traceably documented cover desk, deskless and field staff well. We found no public information on offline capture or GPS and geofenced check-in, which keeps it short of the top band. 3 4 6
The Field Supervisor
Terminals, smartphones, tablets, PCs and till systems are all named capture channels, group bookings cover mobile work crews, and corrections are said to be quickly possible and traceably documented. On what decides a basement at 6am we found no public information: nothing on offline capture that syncs and nothing on GPS or geofenced check-in with stated limits. Real terminal hardware and documented corrections carry it past the middle; the absence of any offline word holds it there. 3 4 6
The Skeptic
Terminal, smartphone, tablet, PC and even POS capture are all named, group bookings for mobile crews exist, and corrections are said to be traceably documented — a wide net. What no page says is what happens when the network is gone: offline capture and sync are never mentioned, nor GPS or geofenced check-in with stated limits. Correction approval and bulk handling are also not described; only that corrections are quickly possible and documented. 3 4 6
Working-time law & audit record
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether the record satisfies the German recording duty (BAG 2022, § 3 ArbSchG) and the ArbZG rules around it — breaks, maximum hours, rest periods, retention — and whether it survives being inspected.
0 — Hours are summed and nothing else; no break handling, no limits, no retention statement.
3 — Break deduction exists but is a flat rule; no daily maximum or rest-period checks, and no stated retention period.
5 — Configurable break rules, warnings on the 8/10-hour daily maximum and the 11-hour rest period, and per-employee reports covering the recording duty.
8 — The ArbZG rules are modelled rather than approximated: break and rest enforcement with documented exceptions, overtime and time-account rules, the two-year retention handled by the system, and an export built for an inspection.
10 — The vendor treats the record as evidence: tamper-evident entries with full change history, retention and deletion executed per statute, documented handling of on-call, standby and travel time, and published guidance mapping features to the ArbZG sections they serve.
The Operations Lead
The pages state fulfilment of all EuGH requirements with lawful capture and documentation of working hours, automated evaluation under defined parameters, enforcement of rest-period and overtime rules, and traceably documented corrections. I found no public information on break rules, warnings at the daily maximum, record retention, or an export laid out for an inspection — all things a German audit will ask me for. 5 6 10
The Payroll Officer
The pages claim legally compliant, EuGH-conform recording and even explain the BAG confirmation, and rest-period requirements appear in the pay-rule description. But we found no public information on break rules, daily maximum hours, a retention period, or an export built for an inspection. 5 6 10
The Works Council Advocate
The pages claim lawful capture and EuGH-conforming documentation of working time, acknowledge the BAG confirmation of the ruling, and describe corrections as traceably documented and records as audit-ready. Rest periods and overtime thresholds appear only in the payroll specialists' context, and I found no public information on configurable break rules, on warnings for the daily maximum and the eleven-hour rest period, or on any retention period. For a record that must survive an inspection, that is more assurance than arithmetic. 5 6 10
The Agency Owner
Gesetzkonforme Erfassung and EuGH-compliant documentation are stated plainly, time evaluation runs automatically by defined parameters, and rest period requirements and overtime thresholds are applied, with approvals and correction tracking claimed for audit readiness. We found no public information on configurable break rules, warnings on the daily hour maximum, a retention period, or an export built for an inspection. 5 6 10
The Field Supervisor
They claim law-conform capture and ECJ-conform documentation of working hours, evaluation runs automatically against defined parameters, and rest periods and overtime thresholds appear in their compliance description. Beyond the claims we found no public information on break-rule configuration, warnings on the daily maximum, a retention period, or an export built for an inspection. Credible promise, thin on the specifics an inspector asks for. 5 6 10
The Skeptic
"Erfüllung aller EuGH Anforderungen" is asserted in one line, and the vendor candidly notes the BAG has confirmed the EU ruling while German law has not caught up — but no page shows the feature that makes the claim true. Rest period requirements and overtime limits appear once, in a description of what payroll specialists apply, and time evaluation runs by defined parameters. We found no public information on break rules, warnings on the daily maximum or the 11-hour rest period, retention of records, or an export built for an inspection. 5 6 10
Absence & shift planning
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Vacation, sickness and the shift or duty roster — the half of attendance that decides whether the time data means anything.
0 — No absence handling; vacation lives in a separate calendar or spreadsheet.
3 — Vacation requests with approval, but entitlement is manual, carry-over is not handled and there is no rostering.
5 — Automatic entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, an absence calendar, and basic shift planning with availability.
8 — Public-holiday calendars per location, pro-rata entitlement, substitution and swap workflows, shift templates with qualification and rest-period checks, and coverage warnings before publication.
10 — Planning and recording are one system: rosters that respect statutory rest and the works agreement, absence that reflows the plan automatically, and forecast-versus-actual reporting a team lead can act on.
The Operations Lead
Absence runs from request through electronic approval to live leave calendars and trend reporting, and rostering is genuinely present: staffing analysis from real-time data, short-notice changes, replacements, a shift-exchange board and work-time wishes from the app. I found no public information on automatic entitlement, carry-over or sickness recording, which keeps it below the stronger marks. 3 7 8
The Payroll Officer
Absence runs from request submission through electronic approval to tracking, with leave calendars and self-service balances, and scheduling covers replacements, shift swaps via the exchange board and manager-side plan changes on the go. We found no public information on automatic entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, or public-holiday calendars per location. 3 7 8
The Works Council Advocate
Absence requests run from submission through electronic approval to tracking, leave calendars are visible in real time, and a shift-exchange marketplace with replacements is evidenced — planning is even said to comply with local laws and union agreements, which my side of the table reads with approval. But I found no public information on automatic entitlement and carry-over, on sickness recording, or on public-holiday calendars per location. 3 7 8
The Agency Owner
Absence requests through defined electronic approval workflows with self-service balances, a shift exchange marketplace, replacements and last-minute plan changes, plus real-time staffing level determination, go beyond basic planning. We found no public information on automatic entitlement and carry-over, sickness recording, per-location holiday calendars, or coverage warnings before a plan is published. 3 7 8
The Field Supervisor
A shift-exchange marketplace, working-time wishes, replacements and last-minute changes are evidenced, scheduling is said to comply with local laws and union agreements, and leave calendars are visible in real time. On the entitlement side we found no public information on automatic entitlement, carry-over, sickness recording or per-location public-holiday calendars. The plan and the swap are real; the vacation bookkeeping is not on the captured pages. 3 7 8
The Skeptic
Absence requests run through electronic workflows with employee self-service, leave calendars show in real time, and scheduling handles replacements, an integrated shift-exchange board, and staffing-level analysis — with a claim that plans comply with local laws and union agreements, though no page names the check that performs this. We found no public information on automatic entitlement calculation, carry-over, sickness recording, per-location holiday calendars, or qualification and rest checks before publication. Planning breadth is real; the entitlement mechanics behind it are not shown. 3 7 8
Project, cost-centre & billing
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Whether recorded time can carry the allocation an agency, workshop or professional-services firm needs — project, task, cost centre, billable status — through to an invoice or a client report.
0 — Attendance only; no project, task or cost-centre dimension at all.
3 — A free-text note or a single project field, with no rates, no billable flag and no per-project reporting.
5 — Projects and tasks with a billable flag and per-project reports, plus a rate per person or per project.
8 — Multi-level structure (client, project, task, cost centre), rate cards by person, role and project, budget tracking with warnings, and an invoice-ready export.
10 — Time becomes revenue without re-entry: approval before billing, rate rules that survive a rate change mid-project, client-facing reports, and a maintained handoff into named accounting or invoicing systems.
The Operations Lead
On the go, staff can record project times and book directly onto cost centres, with allocation of working time to orders and projects — enough for job costing in my workshop. I found no public information on rates, billable status, budgets, per-project reports or any invoice-ready export. 3
The Payroll Officer
Project times and direct booking to cost centres are shown, including from the customer site or the construction site, which is enough for payroll-side allocation. But we found no public information on rates, a billable flag, per-project reporting, or any handoff to invoicing. 3
The Works Council Advocate
Working time can be booked to projects, orders and cost centres, including on the road at a customer site or on a construction site, which is more allocation than a single project field. I found no public information on rates, on a billable flag, on per-project reporting or any invoice-ready export. 3
The Agency Owner
Project times and direct booking to cost centres on the go is genuine allocation structure, slightly more than a single project field. But for an agency billing forty people this is the whole story: we found no public information on rates, a billable flag, per-project reporting, budget warnings, or an export the invoicing system would take. 3 6
The Field Supervisor
Booking time to orders, projects and cost centres is evidenced, including on the road and as group bookings for crews. The captured pages show allocation and stop there: we found no public information on rates, a billable flag, per-project reporting, budgets or an invoice-ready export. The time gets coded; nothing shown takes it to an invoice. 3
The Skeptic
Times can be booked to orders and projects and directly to cost centres, even from a customer site or construction site — allocation exists. Beyond that the captured pages show nothing: no billable flag, no rates, no per-project reporting, no budgets, no invoice-ready export, and the published module list contains no project or billing entry. We found no public information on rates or any path from recorded time to an invoice. 3 10
Payroll handoff
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
How the recorded month reaches payroll — DATEV, Lohn und Gehalt, an in-house system or the tax adviser — and how much of it is automated rather than retyped.
0 — No payroll path stated; the month leaves as a spreadsheet someone retypes.
3 — Generic CSV said to be usable for payroll, with no named system, no defined format and no handling of surcharges.
5 — A named payroll integration or a documented export format for at least one major system, covering hours, absences and overtime.
8 — Vendor-maintained integration with a named provider, covering night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, time accounts and mid-month changes, with a lock step before transmission.
10 — Payroll is designed for, not exported to: several named systems maintained, an auditable approval and lock, retro handling for corrections after the close, and the tax adviser given their own scoped access.
The Operations Lead
DATEV is named as a technology partner alongside ATOSS Time Control and the Staff Efficiency Suite, all data is said to go straight to the payroll system, pay rules apply automatically, discrepancies surface before the run, and corrections after the close are handled. I found no public information on named night, Sunday and holiday surcharge handling, time accounts, or a formal lock before transmission. 6 9 10
The Payroll Officer
A DATEV technology partnership is published for Time Control and the Staff Efficiency Suite, all data is said to transfer directly to the payroll system, and pay rules, premiums and overtime are applied automatically with discrepancies flagged before the run and corrections handled after initial processing — retro handling named in public, which I rarely see. We found no public information on night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, time accounts, or a lock step before transmission. 6 9 10
The Works Council Advocate
A technology partnership with DATEV is named for specific products, data is said to transfer directly to the payroll system validated and payroll-ready, approval backlogs are escalated before payroll deadlines, and corrections after the close are explicitly handled. I found no public information on night, Sunday and holiday surcharges in the transfer, nor on a formal lock step before transmission. 6 9 10
The Agency Owner
A named DATEV technology partnership covering ATOSS Time Control and the Staff Efficiency Suite, automatic transfer of all data to the payroll system, automatic pay rule application with discrepancies flagged before payroll, approval escalation ahead of deadlines, and corrections handled after initial processing amount to a maintained integration with retro handling. We found no public information on night, Sunday and holiday surcharge detail, time accounts, or a formal lock step before transmission. 6 9 10
The Field Supervisor
DATEV is named as a technology partner for ATOSS Time Control and the Staff Efficiency Suite, all data is said to go directly to the payroll system, pay rules apply automatically, discrepancies surface before the payroll run, and corrections after initial processing are handled. Against the top of the scale we found no public information on night, Sunday and holiday surcharges, time accounts, or an explicit lock before transmission. A named partner path with real pre-payroll control; the surcharge detail is not published. 6 9 10
The Skeptic
A DATEV technology partnership is named for two specific products, data is said to transfer directly to the payroll system, and the payroll flow shows validation before transfer, approval monitoring with escalation before payroll deadlines, and corrections after initial processing — retro handling that most vendors never document. Night, Sunday and holiday surcharges are not named, only generic premiums, and time accounts and mid-month changes go unmentioned. This is the most concretely evidenced capability the vendor publishes. 6 9 10
European sovereignty
panel opinion
Show reasoningHide reasoning
How this is scored
Where the 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; scored here as this buyer weighs it.
0 — Non-EU vendor and contracting entity, hosting region unstated or non-EU, subprocessors not named.
3 — EU hosting offered as an option, but 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 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 named with its legal basis.
10 — Sovereign end to end and evidenced: vendor, entity, hosting and every subprocessor in the EU, data-centre certification published, and an on-premises or private-cloud option for buyers who need it.
The Operations Lead
The contracting entity is ATOSS Software SE of Munich with a German commercial register entry, deployment can be Cloud or On Premises, and a data-processing agreement is linked in the site footer. I found no public information on where cloud data is hosted or who the subprocessors are, so the chain above the German entity is unverified. 2 5
The Payroll Officer
A German SE with a published imprint, register and VAT number, a DPA linked in the footer, and a choice of cloud or on-premises deployment. But we found no public information on where the data is hosted or who the subprocessors are, so the chain is assumed rather than documented. 2 4 6
The Works Council Advocate
The contracting entity is ATOSS Software SE in Munich with a German commercial register entry, an on-premises deployment is offered alongside the cloud, and a data processing agreement is linked in the footer. I found no public information on where the cloud data is hosted or on any subprocessor list — for a workforce record, that silence is not a basis for final approval. 2 3
The Agency Owner
A German contracting entity, ATOSS Software SE in Munich with the register entry to prove it, a DPA linked in the footer, and a choice of cloud or on-premises deployment give me a European counterparty I can name. We found no public information on where cloud data is hosted and no subprocessor list, so the chain above that German entity stays unevidenced. 2 3 5
The Field Supervisor
The contracting entity is unambiguous — ATOSS Software SE of Munich with a commercial register entry and German VAT ID — and deployment is offered in the cloud or on premises. For the rest we found no public information: no statement on where cloud data is hosted and no published subprocessor list, only a data processing agreement link in the footer. German entity documented, the chain behind it assumed. 2 5
The Skeptic
The contracting entity is ATOSS Software SE of Munich with a German register entry and VAT ID, a DPA is linked in the footer, and cloud or on-premises deployment is offered — the on-premises option is real. But we found no public information on hosting region or data residency, and no subprocessor list anywhere; the chain is documented only down to the front door. The German entity alone does not tell a buyer where the time data sleeps. 2 3 10
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 — including terminals, modules and minimums — from public pages alone.
0 — No public prices at all; every tier is a sales conversation.
3 — A per-user headline exists, but hardware, modules or a minimum seat count are unpriced or unmentioned.
5 — Per-user prices public for the main tiers with the billing period stated, but at least one commonly needed piece (terminal hardware, planning module, payroll export) sits in an unpriced bundle.
8 — Every tier and module priced publicly with per-user maths, billing period, 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 and module selection, including hardware, setup and renewal terms.
The Operations Lead
I found no public price information at all — no per-user fee, no module or terminal pricing, no billing period, minimum or VAT treatment; the only commercial step on the pages is scheduling a demo. A buyer with 200 heads cannot compute any part of the annual invoice from what is published. 4
The Payroll Officer
No public prices anywhere in the captured pages — the only stated path is scheduling a demo. A buyer cannot compute an annual invoice for their headcount from what is published. 4
The Works Council Advocate
The captured pages name modules and invite a demo, but I found no public prices for any tier or module. A buyer cannot compute any part of the annual invoice from what is published. 4 10
The Agency Owner
Nothing on the captured pages carries a price: no per-user figure, no module price, no billing period or minimum, only named modules and an invitation to schedule a demo. A forty-seat buyer has no way to compute an annual invoice from public information. 4 10
The Field Supervisor
No price appears anywhere in the captured material — not per user, not per tier, not for terminals or modules. The only commercial path shown is scheduling a demo. A buyer cannot compute their annual invoice from these pages at all. 4
The Skeptic
No price appears anywhere in the captured material: no per-user figure, no tiers, no billing period, no minimum term, no VAT treatment, and no price for the terminals named among the capture channels. The only published step toward buying is "Schedule a demo now." For an enterprise vendor this may be convention, but a buyer cannot compute any part of the annual invoice from these pages. 4 6
European sovereignty — proven facts
1 of 4 dimensions provenBuilt only from facts shown on the vendor's own pages. A dimension we could not prove is left open, not scored as zero.
| Legal entity | Incorporated in DE | 3/3 pts | 2 Report an error |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Data residency | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
| Subprocessors | Not determined | — | uncited Report an error |
Where this could be wrong
- Evidence ages. The oldest capture behind this page is from 30 Aug 2026. Vendors change pricing and policies without notice; every fact reflects its source as of the capture date shown in the registry.
- 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.
- We could not confirm any pricing information on the vendor’s own pages as captured, so this page shows none rather than a statement we cannot stand behind. Know more? Tell us
- 40 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
- 8 legal facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
- 2 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
- 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 support fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
Sources (10)
The pages every claim on this page was read from — each one checked, dated, and kept verifiable.
- 1 Vendor homepage www.atoss.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
- 2 Imprint www.atoss.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
- 3 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 4 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 5 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 6 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 7 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 8 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 9 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
- 10 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.atoss.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →