whats-best.ai
Search Sign in

Time Tracking & Attendance

Harvest

Rest of world Report an error

Panel 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 Harvest Inc. · www.getharvest.com

Report an error on this page Is this your product? →

Read this page as one judge. Each weighs the same scores by what they care about.

The Works Council Advocate

Weighted verdict

Has co-determination over how working time is recorded (BetrVG §87 (1) 6) and will not approve a system that watches more than it measures. Asks what GPS actually stores, who can read an individual's day, what is logged and what can be switched off. Reads "productivity 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

Capture in the real workplace

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.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Capture is broad for office work — one-click timers from browser, desktop and mobile, offline tracking that syncs when the connection returns, and timesheet submissions with approval — but we found no public information on any kiosk or terminal for shift and deskless crews, or on bulk corrections with an attributable change history. GPS tracking and geofencing are marketed to "verify employee locations" with no stated limits on what is stored, who may read a person's day, or how it can be switched off; under my co-determination that omission costs it. 1 5 6 9

Report an error

Working-time law & audit record

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.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Every compliance claim on these pages points at the US Fair Labor Standards Act; we found no public information on the German recording duty, break rules, warnings on the 8/10-hour daily maximum or the 11-hour rest period. The published retention figures — backups up to 180 days, application logs up to 90 days, activity logs up to 1 year — concern system operation, not the working-time record an inspector would demand. Submissions and approval before export give it more structure than a raw hour sum, but on the German rules the captured pages are silent. 1 4 9 10

Report an error

Absence & shift planning

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.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Harvest Forecast schedules teams across projects, but we found no public information on vacation requests or entitlement, carry-over, sickness recording, an absence calendar, or any duty roster with rest-period checks. Vacation would have to live in another system, which is precisely the split that makes recorded hours useless for staffing decisions. 1 2

Report an error

Project, cost-centre & billing

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.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

This is the product's centre of gravity: projects and tasks with billable and non-billable flags, rates by person, project or task type selected automatically, budget alerts, recurring hour banks with real-time consumption, approval before timesheets leave the system, and invoices through to client payment. We found no public information on cost centres or on how a rate change mid-project is treated. One caution from my side of the table: "profitability and utilization metrics" with breakdowns by team is exactly the evaluation of individuals that a works agreement must govern before rollout. 1 2 7 9 10

Report an error

Payroll handoff

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.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The export path is genuinely structured — approval before export, payroll-period date ranges, field mapping to payroll categories, batch export, and a step that marks timesheets as exported to prevent re-export — and QuickBooks is named as an integration. We found no public information on night, Sunday or holiday surcharges, time accounts, mid-month changes, or any German payroll system, and we found no public information on absence handling that could travel with the hours. That leaves our tax adviser re-keying the German parts. 1 5 9 10

Report an error

European sovereignty

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.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

The vendor is a US company, hosting sits on Google Cloud with no region stated, and the privacy policy itself names Google Analytics and US payment providers in the chain. An Italian controller, published standard contractual clauses and a referenced sub-processor list are worth something, but contracting entity, ownership and data residency are unconfirmed, and the same policy states that personal data may be shared with advertising partners and that aggregated or de-identified data may be used to train AI models. For a system that measures working time, this would not clear our data-protection committee. 3 4

Report an error

Pricing transparency

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.

Report an error

The Works Council Advocate

Headline per-seat prices are public with the billing period — a free single-seat tier, Teams "starting from $9 seat/month", Enterprise "starting from $14 seat/month", all in USD with a stated annual 20% discount — but the Enterprise Plus tier carries no number, and usage-based billing for additional invoices, projects, clients and tasks has no public unit rates, so the true annual invoice cannot be computed. We found no public information on VAT treatment or a minimum term. 2

Report an error

European sovereignty — proven facts

1 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 Not determined — uncited Report an error
Subprocessors US CLOUD Act reach ⚠ unverified 0/2 pts 4 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 Harvest? Tell us Report an error on this page

Sources (10)

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

  1. 1 Vendor homepage www.getharvest.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  2. 2 Pricing www.getharvest.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  3. 3 Privacy policy www.getharvest.com Checked 15 Sep 2026 Details →
  4. 4 Security / trust page www.getharvest.com Checked 30 Sep 2026 Details →
  5. 5 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.getharvest.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  6. 6 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.getharvest.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  7. 7 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap www.getharvest.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  8. 8 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap www.getharvest.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  9. 9 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.getharvest.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →
  10. 10 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.getharvest.com Checked 1 Oct 2026 Details →