FirstHR

Staffing Agency Scheduling Software: 12 Compared

Staffing agency scheduling software compared on price, ATS and job orders, client billing, and pay and bill, plus when a general shift tool is enough.

Staffing Agency Scheduling Software Compared

A staffing agency schedules people it employs into shifts a client controls, then pays the worker and bills the client from the same timesheet, which is why general shift scheduling tools break here and why the platforms that handle it cost an order of magnitude more

A staffing agency does something no ordinary employer does: it schedules people it employs into shifts that somebody else controls, at a site it does not own, then pays the worker at one rate and bills the client at another from the same timesheet.

That single sentence explains why general employee scheduling software fails agencies, and why the platforms built for this cost several times more. Ordinary scheduling assumes one employer, one set of locations, and one pay rule. An agency runs many clients at once, each with its own site, bill rate, pay rate, overtime treatment, and compliance requirements, and the same worker may move between three of them in a week.

This comparison sorts twelve platforms into three groups: full-stack staffing systems that carry a placement from candidate to invoice, scheduling-first platforms built for shift demand at volume, and general tools that appear in these searches because a vendor built a staffing landing page. It also covers the case where the general tool is genuinely the right answer.

TL;DR
Agency scheduling is defined by a three-way relationship between worker, job order, and client that general tools have no concept of. Full-stack platforms carry a placement from candidate through to invoice: Bullhorn publishes $99 per user for Starter and $165 for Core, TempWorks starts at $49 per user, and Zoho Workerly lists around $45.65 per month. Most others quote individually. Pricing is almost always per internal recruiter, not per temporary worker placed. General tools such as When I Work at $2.50 per user work until you need pay and bill on one timesheet, which is usually somewhere between 50 and 100 placed workers.

Why agency scheduling is a different problem

Before comparing products it is worth being precise about the workflow, because the price differences follow directly from it.

StageWhat happensWhat general tools do
Client requestA client raises a job order with role, site, and ratesNo equivalent object exists
Shift demandThe job order generates shifts that need fillingShifts are created manually by a manager
MatchingAvailable, qualified, credentialed workers are foundA manager picks from one staff list
DispatchThe worker is assigned and notified with site detailsAssignment works, site context does not
TimesheetHours are captured and approved, often by the clientHours are captured and approved internally
Pay and billOne timesheet pays the worker and invoices the clientPayroll export only, no invoicing

Read the last row carefully, because it is where agencies lose money rather than time. The worker is paid at a pay rate and the client is invoiced at a bill rate, and the gap between them is the agency's gross margin. When those two numbers live in different systems, hours get re-keyed twice and margin leaks through transcription errors and unbilled overtime that nobody catches until month end.

The three-way relationship is the whole distinction
In a normal business, a schedule connects an employee to a shift. In an agency, it connects a worker to a job order to a client, and every one of those links carries data the others need: the client sets the site and bill rate, the job order sets required credentials, and the worker carries availability and qualifications. A tool that models only the worker-to-shift link will handle your first few clients and then quietly become a spreadsheet with extra steps.

There is a second reason the categories diverge. Agencies place workers into environments they do not control, which makes credential expiry an assignment blocker rather than an HR report. A lapsed certification or an expired background check can void a placement and breach a client contract. Our guide to contingent workforce management covers how that obligation differs from managing direct employees.

The platforms compared

The four capability columns below are the ones that separate the categories. Read them together rather than individually: the pattern tells you which group a platform belongs to far more reliably than its marketing does.

PlatformBuilt ForEntry PriceShift SchedulingATS and Job OrdersClient BillingPay and BillTrial
BullhornAgencies wanting the category standard$99/user/moDemo only
TempWorksLight industrial and clerical staffing$49/user/moDemo
AvionteFront and back office in one systemQuoteDemo
Zoho WorkerlySmall agencies on a published price$45.65/moFree trial
UbeyaEvent and hospitality staffingQuoteDemo
WorkstaffEvent staffing with a client portalQuoteFree trial
EnginehireNiche staffing such as childcareQuoteDemo
ShiftboardHigh-volume shift demand planningQuoteDemo
Workforce.comLabor cost against client budgetQuoteDemo
ConnecteamSmall agencies needing a free tierFree to 10Free plan
DeputyCompliance-heavy shift scheduling$5/user/moFree trial
When I WorkCheapest per-user shift scheduling$2.50/user/moFree trial
Pricing verified as of July 2026 from vendor pricing pages, with the Zoho Workerly figure from its Capterra listing. ATS and Job Orders means the platform holds a candidate database and creates client job orders that generate shift demand. Client Billing means generating invoices to the companies you place workers with. Pay and Bill means running both worker pay and client invoicing from the same timesheet. Avionte, Ubeya, Workstaff, Enginehire, Shiftboard, and Workforce.com do not publish list pricing. TempWorks publishes an entry rate only. Deputy carries a $30 monthly minimum spend. Connecteam pricing is per hub and sources differ on exact tier rates.
Still Using Spreadsheets for Onboarding?
Automate documents, training assignments, task management, and track onboarding progress in real time.
See How It Works

Full-stack staffing platforms

These carry a placement from candidate through to invoice in one system. If you run temp or contract placements at any real volume, this is the category, and the scheduling is only one component of what you are buying.

Bullhorn

The category standard, with an ATS and CRM built as one system around placements, job orders, and client accounts rather than a CRM bolted onto a recruiting tool. Published pricing is $99 per user per month for Starter, which covers 1 to 2 users, and $165 per user per month for Core from 3 users upward, with Pro quoted individually and no setup fees stated. There is no self-serve free trial; evaluation is by demo.

The honest caveat is that the base licence is the start rather than the end. Back office pay-and-bill, automation, and analytics are separately quoted modules, and third-party reports consistently put all-in cost well above the headline seat price once implementation and data migration are counted.

Pros
Deepest staffing-specific data model in the category
Large integration marketplace covering job boards and back office tools
Handles multi-office, multi-desk, contract and permanent placement together
Publishes two of its three tiers, which is unusual here
Cons
Back office, automation, and analytics are separately quoted add-ons
No self-serve trial; every evaluation goes through sales
Implementation and data migration are reported in the thousands
Reviewers consistently rate value for money below its other scores

TempWorks

A long-established staffing platform covering ATS, CRM, onboarding, time, billing, and payroll, aimed particularly at light industrial, clerical, and IT staffing. It publishes an entry rate of $49 per user per month for its Core offering, with enterprise configurations quoted individually, which makes it one of the more transparent full-stack options.

Pros
Publishes an entry rate, unusual among full-stack platforms
Covers front and back office including payroll and billing
Strong fit for light industrial and clerical placement volume
Payroll funding services available alongside the software
Cons
Only the entry tier is published; larger configurations are quoted
Interface is widely described as functional rather than modern
Full deployment is an implementation project, not a signup
More platform than a very small agency needs

Avionte

Avionte positions as an end-to-end front and back office platform for clerical, light industrial, IT, and professional staffing, with payroll, billing, VMS support, and a mobile talent app. Pricing is quote-based; third-party listings report figures well above the published entry rates of its competitors, and those should be treated as estimates rather than list prices.

Pros
Genuinely end-to-end, reducing the number of systems to integrate
Mobile talent app supports worker self-service on assignment
Established partner ecosystem across the staffing stack
Suits agencies running several staffing verticals at once
Cons
No published pricing at any tier
Third-party reported rates sit above published competitors
Built for established agencies rather than new operations
Implementation is a multi-week project

Zoho Workerly

Purpose-built for temporary staffing, covering a temp and client database, job scheduling against client requirements, timesheet generation, and invoicing. Its Capterra listing puts the starting price around $45.65 per month with a free trial available, which makes it the cheapest published entry into a genuinely staffing-specific product.

Pros
Lowest published entry price among staffing-specific platforms
Free trial rather than demo-only evaluation
Timesheets flow through to client invoicing natively
Fits into the wider Zoho suite if you already use it
Cons
Less depth than Bullhorn or Avionte on complex placement models
Best value depends on adopting other Zoho products
Reported pricing varies by source and configuration
Smaller staffing-specific partner ecosystem

Ubeya, Workstaff, and Enginehire

Three vertical specialists worth naming together because the selection logic is the same. Ubeya and Workstaff both target event, hospitality, and catering staffing, where shift volume is high, workers are casual, and clients expect a portal showing who is turning up. Enginehire targets niche verticals such as childcare, healthcare, and domestic staffing, where credentialing is the dominant constraint. All three are quote-based.

In a vertical with unusual requirements, a specialist frequently beats a generalist. Event staffing needs same-day fill and mass shift broadcast; childcare placement needs credential expiry blocking assignment. Those are product decisions a general platform makes generically and a specialist makes correctly.

Pros
Workflows match a specific vertical rather than staffing in general
Client portals are standard rather than an upgrade
Mobile-first worker apps suited to casual and shift workforces
Typically faster to implement than full-stack incumbents
Cons
None publishes list pricing
Narrower fit if you place across several unrelated verticals
Smaller vendors mean smaller integration ecosystems
Less proven at large multi-office scale

Scheduling-first staffing platforms

These solve shift demand at volume without trying to be the whole business system. They suit agencies that already have an ATS or accounting stack and need the scheduling layer to be better than what they have.

Shiftboard

Shiftboard focuses on dynamic hourly workforces where demand changes constantly: demand planning, qualification-based filtering, and worker self-service for shift claiming. It is aimed at operations with substantial headcount, and reported minimums put it out of reach for the smallest agencies. Pricing is quoted.

Pros
Strong demand planning for volatile shift requirements
Qualification filtering prevents unqualified assignment
Worker self-service reduces coordinator load at volume
Deep scheduling engine without full platform overhead
Cons
No ATS, client billing, or pay and bill
Reported headcount minimums exclude small agencies
No published pricing
You will still need billing and payroll elsewhere

Workforce.com

Workforce.com approaches scheduling from labor cost control, with demand-driven scheduling and the ability to compare labor cost against a client budget. For agencies managing fixed-price contracts where overspend erodes margin directly, that framing is genuinely useful. Pricing is quoted.

Pros
Labor cost tracking against client budget is unusual and useful
Demand-driven scheduling rather than manual shift building
Solid time and attendance with award interpretation
Works alongside an existing ATS rather than replacing it
Cons
No candidate pipeline or job order management
No published pricing
Client invoicing is not a full back office replacement
Positioned for operations teams broadly, not agencies only

General scheduling tools and where they break

These rank for agency searches because each vendor built a staffing landing page, not because they were designed for the workflow. That does not make them wrong, and for a small agency the economics are hard to ignore.

ToolPublished pricePricing model
When I Work$2.50 per user per month for EssentialsPer user, Pro $5 and Premium $8
Deputy$5.00 per user per month for LitePer user, Core $6.50 and Pro $9, $30 monthly minimum
ConnecteamFree for up to 10 usersFlat for the first 30 users per hub, then tiered
HomebaseFrom roughly $20 per location per monthPer location rather than per user

The economics are stark: a general tool costs single-digit dollars per user against $49 to $165 for a staffing platform. If your operation genuinely fits, that is a real saving rather than a false economy. Our comparison of staffing and scheduling covers the general scheduling category in more depth.

Four signs you have outgrown a general scheduling tool
First, you maintain a separate spreadsheet of client requests because the scheduler has nowhere to put a job order. Second, you enter hours twice, once for payroll and once for invoicing, because the tool exports pay data but knows nothing about bill rates. Third, you check certifications manually before assigning because the tool cannot block an expired credential. Fourth, clients ask for visibility into who is attending and you answer by email. Any two of those together mean the tool is now costing you coordinator hours worth more than the licence difference.

Worth noting: general tools price per user, and in agency use the temporary workers usually count as users. That flips the economics once your placed workforce grows, and it is the calculation most agencies run too late. Our guide to shift coverage covers the operational side of filling shifts reliably.

Companies Using FirstHR Onboard 3x Faster
Join hundreds of small businesses who transformed their new hire experience.
See It in Action

What each option costs an agency

The table models internal staff rather than placed workers, because that is how staffing platforms bill. An agency with 6 coordinators placing 400 temps pays for 6 seats.

Platform5 internal staff10 internal staffHow the number is built
When I Work$12.50$25Per user, workers not counted as users
Deputy$32.50$65Per user, $30 monthly minimum applies
Connecteam$29$29Flat for first 30 users on one hub
Zoho Workerly$46+$46+Published entry rate, tiers scale with usage
TempWorks$245$490$49 per user, internal staff only
Bullhorn Starter$495Not available$99 per user, capped at 1 to 2 users
Bullhorn Core$825$1,650$165 per user from 3 users upward
Monthly cost modeled at 5 and 10 internal staff using published list rates verified July 2026, and excluding the temporary workers those staff place. Bullhorn Starter is capped at 1 to 2 users, so a 10-seat figure is not available on that tier. Excludes implementation, data migration, and add-on modules, which for full-stack staffing platforms are frequently the larger cost: back office and automation modules are quoted separately and third-party reports place staffing platform implementation in the thousands. Quote-only platforms are omitted because no list price exists to model.

Two things stand out. Bullhorn Starter is capped at 1 to 2 users, so the moment you hire a third coordinator you move to Core at $165 per seat, which is a step change rather than an increment. And general tools look dramatically cheaper on this table precisely because it counts internal staff only; add your placed workers as users and the comparison narrows or inverts.

Ask what is excluded before comparing seat prices
Seat price is the most visible number and rarely the largest. For full-stack platforms, back office pay-and-bill, automation, and analytics are typically quoted as separate modules, and implementation with data migration is a one-time cost reported in the thousands for staffing systems. Before comparing $49 against $165, get each vendor to quote the same scope: licences, the modules you actually need, implementation, migration of your existing candidate database, and the renewal increase. The ranking often changes once those are on the same page.

How to choose

Does one approved timesheet produce both a paycheck and an invoice?
This is the question that separates a staffing platform from a scheduling tool, and it is worth asking first. Ask the vendor to demonstrate a worker on a $22 pay rate placed at a $34 bill rate, and show where each number lives and what happens when overtime applies. If pay and bill are separate processes touching the same hours twice, you will re-key and you will lose margin to transcription. If it is a separately quoted module, get that price now rather than after signing.
Are you paying per recruiter or per placed worker?
Staffing platforms almost always price per internal user, so your cost scales with back office headcount rather than placement volume. General scheduling tools usually count every worker as a user, which scales with placements. Those two models diverge sharply as you grow: an agency of 6 coordinators placing 400 workers pays for 6 seats on one model and 406 on the other. Establish which you are being quoted before comparing any two prices.
Can it block an assignment on an expired credential?
There is a real difference between reporting that a certification lapsed and preventing the assignment that relies on it. In regulated placement, the second is what protects the client contract. Ask to see what happens when a coordinator tries to assign a worker whose background check expired yesterday, and whether the rule can differ by client, since one site may require an induction another does not.
What do clients see, and does it reduce your inbox?
Client portals sound like a nice-to-have and behave like a coordinator-hour saver. If clients can see who is scheduled, approve timesheets, and raise requests themselves, a meaningful share of daily email disappears. If they cannot, that work stays with your team regardless of how good the internal scheduling is. Ask specifically whether timesheet approval by the client is supported, because that is the step that most often delays invoicing.
What is the first-year total, including migration?
Full-stack platforms involve implementation and candidate database migration, both reported in the thousands for staffing systems, and add-on modules are quoted separately from the seat price. Ask for a first-year figure covering licences, required modules, implementation, migration, and training, then ask what the renewal increase is. Comparing that number against a competitor is meaningful in a way that comparing seat prices is not.

Before you choose

FirstHR is not a staffing platform and does not belong in the comparison above. It has no applicant tracking, no job orders, no client CRM, no shift dispatch to client sites, no client invoicing, and no pay and bill. If you run a staffing agency, every product on this page does something for you that we do not, and the right answer is on that list rather than here.

We build onboarding and HR software for US businesses of 5 to 50 people who employ their staff directly: onboarding workflows, e-signature, training modules with completion tracking, document management, employee records, and an HRIS with self-service, at a flat $98 per month up to 10 employees and $198 for 11 and above. The overlap with agency operations is close to zero, and the reason to say so plainly is that a staffing operator reading this page needs a platform that carries a placement from job order to invoice, which is a category we do not compete in.

Key Takeaways
The defining feature is a three-way relationship between worker, job order, and client. A client raises a job order, the order generates shift demand, and the agency fills it from its worker pool. General scheduling tools model only the worker-to-shift link, which is why they hold up for a few clients and then stop.
Pay and bill on one timesheet is where the money is. The worker is paid at a pay rate and the client invoiced at a bill rate, and the gap is gross margin. Split those across two systems and hours get re-keyed twice, which leaks margin through transcription errors and unbilled overtime.
Pricing is per internal recruiter, not per placed worker, on staffing platforms. Bullhorn publishes $99 per user for Starter covering 1 to 2 users and $165 for Core from 3 users; TempWorks starts at $49 per user; Zoho Workerly lists around $45.65 per month. General tools count placed workers as users, which inverts the comparison as you grow.
Most of this category does not publish pricing. Avionte, Ubeya, Workstaff, Enginehire, Shiftboard, and Workforce.com all quote individually, and even published platforms quote back office, automation, and analytics separately. Implementation and candidate database migration are reported in the thousands.
A general tool at $2.50 to $5 per user is a legitimate answer for a small agency with a stable roster, a few clients, and invoicing handled in accounting software. Four signals mean you have outgrown it: a separate spreadsheet of client requests, double entry of hours, manual credential checks, and clients asking for visibility by email.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is staffing agency scheduling software?

Software that assigns temporary workers an agency employs to shifts at client companies, then carries the assignment through to timesheets, worker pay, and client invoicing. Shift demand originates outside the business: a client raises a job order, the order generates shifts, and the agency fills them from its worker pool.

How is it different from regular employee scheduling software?

Regular tools assume one employer, one set of locations, and one pay rule. An agency runs many clients, each with its own site, bill rate, pay rate, and compliance requirements, with workers moving between them. General tools also stop at the timesheet, while an agency needs that timesheet to produce both a paycheck and a client invoice. Our guide to time and labor management covers the general category.

What does pay and bill mean in staffing software?

One approved timesheet drives two outcomes: the worker is paid at their pay rate and the client is invoiced at the bill rate, with the difference being gross margin. Platforms advertising back office or middle office functionality are describing this, and it is usually a separately quoted module rather than part of the base licence.

How much does staffing agency software cost?

Published entry rates run from roughly $45 to $99. Bullhorn publishes $99 per user per month for Starter covering 1 to 2 users and $165 for Core from 3 users, TempWorks publishes $49 per user per month, and Zoho Workerly lists around $45.65 per month. Avionte, Ubeya, Workstaff, Enginehire, Shiftboard, and Workforce.com quote individually. Implementation, migration, and back office modules are additional.

Are staffing platforms priced per recruiter or per temporary worker?

Almost always per internal user, meaning recruiters and coordinators rather than placed workers. An agency with 6 internal staff placing 400 workers pays for 6 seats. General scheduling tools usually count every worker as a user instead, which is the calculation that flips the comparison as placement volume grows.

Can a small staffing agency use general scheduling software?

Sometimes. If you place a stable roster into recurring shifts at a few clients and invoice from accounting software, a general tool at $2.50 to $5 per user works. It stops working when you need bill rates separate from pay rates on one timesheet, credential expiry blocking assignment, or a candidate pipeline feeding coverage.

What is a job order in staffing software?

The record of a client's request for workers: role, site, rates, required credentials, and number of shifts. It connects the client to the work and generates the shift demand that scheduling fills. General scheduling tools have no equivalent, which is why agencies using them track client requests in a separate spreadsheet.

Does staffing software handle credential and compliance tracking?

Staffing-specific platforms generally do, and it matters more here than in ordinary scheduling because a lapsed certification can void an assignment and breach a client contract. The useful implementation blocks assignment rather than reporting the lapse afterwards. Our guide to misclassification covers a related classification risk for agencies placing contract workers.

What should a small agency prioritize when choosing?

Work backwards from where hours leak. Coordinators re-keying timesheets into payroll and again into invoicing means prioritize pay and bill. Unfilled shifts because nobody knows who is available and qualified means prioritize the worker pool and matching. Client complaints about visibility mean prioritize a portal. Buying a full front and back office platform before knowing the bottleneck usually produces a system used at a fraction of its capability.

Ready to transform your onboarding?

7-day free trial No credit card required
Start Your Free Trial