Time Tracking & Attendance

Papershift

EU-Made 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.

An AI-assisted analysis of public evidence — not a hands-on test.

Every score, rationale and verdict on this page is AI-generated. Every claim cites the source it was read from. Nothing here is a human star review — and no score can be bought. How scores are made →

Method and versions

The Operations Lead v1.0 · The Payroll Officer v1.0 · The Works Council Advocate v1.0 · The Agency Owner v1.0 · The Field Supervisor v1.0 · The Skeptic v1.0 · rubric v1 · evaluated 5 Oct 2026

Compare with TimeTac → 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 Skeptic

Weighted verdict

Has read a great many pages claiming to be "BAG-konform" and wants to know which feature makes that true. Reads compliance claims for what they do not say: which module, at which tier, and whether the terminal in the photograph costs extra.

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

Scored by The Skeptic

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 Skeptic

App, browser and a tablet-based terminal are all offered, offline use is claimed with real-time cloud sync, and employees identify by PIN or signature, edit their own records and have them approved online. The stationary terminal is a tablet setup rather than vendor hardware or badge readers, the GPS geofencing claim states no limits, and the change history that would make corrections attributable sits in the Professional plan — we found no public information on bulk correction. 3 6 7 2 8

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 Skeptic

The vendor names the 2022 Federal Labour Court decision and claims start, end and pauses are documented revision-secure, with employee-specific break rules and a change history in the Professional plan. We found no public information on daily maximum-hour or rest-period checks, the deletion clause names no retention period, and the lexicon working-time article is a generic definition rather than a mapping of features to the working-hours statute. 3 2 5 8

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 Skeptic

Leave entitlement, residual leave and carry-over are calculated automatically, sickness and other absences run through approval paths and a team calendar, and absences feed directly into shift planning with automatic schedule adjustment. Digital shift planning, employee-specific public holidays and automatic scheduling sit in the Professional or Premium plans, and we found no public information on pro-rata entitlement, substitution or swap workflows, or rest-period checks when a roster is published. 10 9 2 8

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 Skeptic

Project times can be assigned to an employee, an order or a customer, carry tags and notes, feed individual reports, and a tasks add-in and a sevdesk connector exist in the marketplace. We found no public information on a billable flag, rate cards by role or project, budget tracking with warnings, or an invoice-ready export — the per-person hourly wage shown is a payroll setting rather than project billing. 11 8 1 12

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 Skeptic

DATEV is a named integration with a "DATEV Detail" export to the tax office, LODAS and SAGE are further named formats, and night, Sunday and holiday surcharges are calculated with payrolls generated automatically at a chosen cutoff date plus a red warning when time or absence data arrives after generation. The DATEV and LODAS export and the individual surcharge wage types are Professional-plan features with payroll priced separately per employee, and we found no public information on a lock or approval step before transmission or on retroactive correction after the close. 13 14 2 12

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 Skeptic

The contracting entity is verifiably German — Karlsruhe address, Mannheim commercial register, German VAT identification — and a public processing register plus downloadable agreement annexes for subcontractors and technical measures exist. EU hosting appears as a pricing-page bullet with no server location, data-centre provider or certification named, and the subcontractor names sit behind a download annex rather than a published list; we found no public information on the composition of the subprocessor chain or on any on-premises option. 4 5 2 11

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 Skeptic

Three plan prices, a stated 39,00 € per month base fee plus VAT, a 10 % annual-payment discount, a starting price of 3,50 EUR per employee and month, and payroll priced separately at 4 € monthly or 3 € annually per employee give a buyer most of the annual invoice. Marketplace add-ons such as the reports module and the full-service payroll carry no published price, terminal hardware is unpriced, and we found no public information on a minimum term or on what seat quantity the plan prices assume. 2 11 14

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.

Legal entity	Not determined ⚠ unverified	—	uncited Report an error
Ownership	Not determined	—	uncited Report an error
Data residency	EU only ⚠ unverified	3/3 pts	2 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.
Weak sourcing — Legal entity. Not confirmed on the vendor’s own pages as captured.
Weak sourcing — Data residency. The statement is a feature bullet on the pricing page rather than a contractual commitment, and the privacy/security page names no server location or hosting provider.
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.

41 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
14 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
9 support facts could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and were left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
6 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
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
2 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
1 hosting fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
1 subprocessors fact could not be confirmed on the vendor’s page as captured and was left out of this page and of the panel’s material. Know more? Tell us
1 sovereignty dimension could not be confirmed on the vendor’s own pages and is shown as unknown. Know more? Tell us

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

Sources (14)

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

1 Vendor homepage www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 11 Sep 2026 Details →
2 Pricing www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
3 Time recording www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 30 Aug 2026 Details →
4 Imprint www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
5 Privacy policy www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 +1 earlier capture: 15 Sep 2026 Details →
6 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
7 Capture in the real workplace — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
8 Working-time law & audit record — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
9 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
10 Absence & shift planning — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
11 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
12 Project, cost-centre & billing — found from sitemap help.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
13 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →
14 Payroll handoff — found from sitemap www.papershift.com Checked 5 Oct 2026 Details →