● Business offer — Human resources
HR assistant: your agreements, explained to your employees
The same questions reach the HR department all year round: leave balance, long-service days, items on a payslip, procedures to follow. Your agent answers them from your company agreements and the applicable collective agreement, citing the text used. Hosted in France: payroll data and personal circumstances stay internal. Any request touching an individual case goes to the HR department — it is HR that handles situations, not the agent.
Hosted in France
Payroll data protected
GDPR & AI Act: governed deployment
Human oversight
Updated on
Deployed in a few weeks
HR assistant · hosted in France
How many long-service leave days after five years with the company?
Answer taken from your company agreement, the article on long-service leave: the number of days and the length-of-service condition are set out there as they stand.
Source cited, with the date of the agreement in force, so the employee can check.
🔗 Sourced · answer linked to the company agreement
Source cited, with the date of the agreement in force, so the employee can check.
🔗 Sourced · answer linked to the company agreement
And on this month's payslip, the allowance line — what does it correspond to?
I explain what that type of line corresponds to under your agreement, without looking at your payslip.
For a precise amount in your own situation, I pass it to the HR department: that is an individual case, it belongs to a person, not to an agent.
✎ Action · individual case passed to the HR department
For a precise amount in your own situation, I pass it to the HR department: that is an individual case, it belongs to a person, not to an agent.
✎ Action · individual case passed to the HR department
Local inference · no data outside the EU
Employment data hosted in France
Sovereign by designLocal inference or hosting in France
GDPR & AI Act: governed deploymentTraceability & human oversight
TurnkeyDesigned, installed and operated for you
The HR department decidesThe agent prepares, never rules
✦ In brief
A Blue Lemon Agent HR assistance agent answers employees' everyday questions — leave, length of service, payroll items, procedures — from your company agreements and the applicable collective agreement, citing the text used. Any question about an individual situation is passed to the HR department. It runs on local inference or is hosted in France: payroll data and personal circumstances are entrusted to nobody, architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity.
100%
hosted in France in the target architecture
0
transfer outside the EU in the target architecture
6
HR uses ready to deploy
0
decision taken without human approval
Reference points describing our offer, not results measured at a client. The scale of the gain, given the volume of requests your HR department receives, is confirmed by a pilot.
The context
What does an AI agent bring to your HR department?
Everyday questions already have an answer written into your agreements. Answering from the text, and citing it, frees the HR department for the situations that genuinely need its involvement.
! The issue
A useful HR department is one that is available for the situations that matter: a personal difficulty, an adjustment, a dispute. Yet everyday questions already have their answer in your agreements. The agent handles them by citing the applicable text, at any hour, and passes anything touching an individual case to the HR department.
✓ Our answer
The employee gets an immediate, verifiable answer, linked to the agreement that grounds it; the HR department wins back time for the situations that need human support. Local inference or an isolated resource hosted in France: no payroll data or personal circumstance is entrusted to a third party, and the agent does not reach individual payslips.
The decisive point
Your employees' payroll data and personal circumstances: sovereignty & compliance
Your employees' payroll data and personal circumstances are among the company's most sensitive. Here is how the architecture of our agents protects them.
Local inference
The agent can run on a machine belonging to your organisation: no employment data leaves the network, no payroll item passes through a public cloud.
Hosting in France
Otherwise, a dedicated and isolated resource hosted in France, under French law — your agreements and your employment documentation: processing and access within the European Union targeted by the architecture.
Reduced extraterritorial exposure
For your employees' payroll data and personal circumstances, the architecture aims to reduce exposure to the Cloud Act and FISA 702; being located in France or in the European Union does not, on its own, guarantee immunity.
Isolated resource
No pooling whatsoever: an environment strictly dedicated to your company and its agreements.
No access to individual records
The agent answers from the collective texts and does not reach payslips or personal files; encryption, role-based access (RBAC) and logging of the questions asked.
AI Act: governed deployment
An agent strictly in support; no individual situation handled or decided; traceability and human oversight from end to end.
What depends on the architecture chosen These points are not general guarantees: they are settled deployment by deployment, in the quotation.
- The applicable location is that of the architecture set out in the quotation and verified before commissioning.
- Local execution is announced only for the configuration explicitly described and accepted in the quotation.
- The applicable isolation depends on the deployment mode set out in the quotation; no dedicated isolation is presumed.
- Roles and permissions are configured and accepted for the identities and systems actually connected.
- The events logged, their content, their retention period and who may access them are defined for the deployment chosen.
For agreements covering health data, workplace adjustments or disciplinary procedures, SecNumCloud and reinforced hosting options are available depending on your requirements. A single architecture is designed to answer both the GDPR and extraterritorial exposure. Designed for deployment in line with the GDPR and the AI Act, after the processing, roles and context-specific risks have been assessed.
Demonstration
See the agent at work
4 real situations, taken from those that come up most often. Pick one: the exchange unfolds as it would in your organisation.
A scripted demonstration. These exchanges show how the agent behaves — its sources, its refusals, what it leaves to your teams. Nothing is sent from this page, no model is queried here, and the matters named are fictional. That is precisely what we promise your data.
The behaviours shown here — monitoring, automation rules, routing and reminders — are configured with you during deployment, from your tools, your rules and your thresholds.
The architecture points named in these exchanges — location, local execution, isolation, encryption, role-based access, logging — are not a guarantee attached to the demonstration: they are those of the architecture set out in your quotation, and verified before commissioning.
HR assistant · hosted in France
Four flags this morning on balances and payroll.
· A mileage rate has not been updated since January 2024 and it has been used for 412 reimbursements this year. It concerns 34 employees.
· Fourteen leave balances show a negative value. Eleven are absences entered before an adjustment; three have no explanation in the system.
· A payment provided for by your agreement went to only 22 of 31 eligible employees in June.
· Seven employees check their leave balance more than ten times a month. That is not an employee problem: it is a balance nobody understands. morning-watch_4-flags.pdf4 flags · 9 employees without the payment
⛓ Source · leave balances, payroll log, company agreement, viewing log
· A mileage rate has not been updated since January 2024 and it has been used for 412 reimbursements this year. It concerns 34 employees.
· Fourteen leave balances show a negative value. Eleven are absences entered before an adjustment; three have no explanation in the system.
· A payment provided for by your agreement went to only 22 of 31 eligible employees in June.
· Seven employees check their leave balance more than ten times a month. That is not an employee problem: it is a balance nobody understands. morning-watch_4-flags.pdf4 flags · 9 employees without the payment
⛓ Source · leave balances, payroll log, company agreement, viewing log
The payment made to 22 of 31 employees?
Nine eligible employees did not receive it, and I tell you what separates them without saying what to do.
What your agreement says: the payment is due to employees meeting three conditions, set out at article 11 of the agreement of 09/11/2024. I applied them to your headcount: 31 employees meet them.
What was paid: 22 payments in June.
What separates the nine: eight joined the company after 1 January, and one is on a short-term contract. Article 11 mentions neither as a condition.
What is left to check before concluding it is owed to them, and I tell you where to look: a condition may exist elsewhere — in an amendment, an application note, an established practice. I have pulled the three documents in your base that cite article 11: none adds a length-of-service condition. What stays out of my sight is what is not in what you have opened to me — and that is a three-minute question to whoever holds the amendments.
What I provide: article 11 quoted, the list of 31, the list of 22, and the criterion separating the two groups. If that criterion is deliberate, it should be in the agreement; if it is not, nine employees are waiting for something.
The letter to the nine is written, and it is waiting on your decision: it sets out article 11, the criterion separating them from the 22, and whatever course you settle on. It goes from your mailbox, under your name, when you say so — a message announcing a payment binds the company, and that commitment is signed. 31-eligible_22-paid.pdf1 unwritten criterion · 9 employees
⛓ Source · agreement of 09/11/2024 art. 11, headcount, June payroll log
What your agreement says: the payment is due to employees meeting three conditions, set out at article 11 of the agreement of 09/11/2024. I applied them to your headcount: 31 employees meet them.
What was paid: 22 payments in June.
What separates the nine: eight joined the company after 1 January, and one is on a short-term contract. Article 11 mentions neither as a condition.
What is left to check before concluding it is owed to them, and I tell you where to look: a condition may exist elsewhere — in an amendment, an application note, an established practice. I have pulled the three documents in your base that cite article 11: none adds a length-of-service condition. What stays out of my sight is what is not in what you have opened to me — and that is a three-minute question to whoever holds the amendments.
What I provide: article 11 quoted, the list of 31, the list of 22, and the criterion separating the two groups. If that criterion is deliberate, it should be in the agreement; if it is not, nine employees are waiting for something.
The letter to the nine is written, and it is waiting on your decision: it sets out article 11, the criterion separating them from the 22, and whatever course you settle on. It goes from your mailbox, under your name, when you say so — a message announcing a payment binds the company, and that commitment is signed. 31-eligible_22-paid.pdf1 unwritten criterion · 9 employees
⛓ Source · agreement of 09/11/2024 art. 11, headcount, June payroll log
How did you spot all that? And who do you tell?
I watch, continuously, what you have opened to me: leave balances, the payroll log, your agreements and their rates, and employees' viewing — as counts, never by name.
Routing follows who can correct: an out-of-date rate goes to payroll and to finance, because an adjustment touches several years; a gap in applying an agreement to HR, never to the manager; an unexplained negative balance to the payroll officer, one at a time; an over-consulted balance to whoever designs the payslip or the screen — it is a legibility problem.
With a chase: 48 h before payroll close, 7 days otherwise. Then a monthly summary: by type of gap, never by employee.
Three operating rules, and the first is absolute. Pay is computed and signed by payroll: I never announce what will be paid, because a figure from me differing from the payslip creates a dispute where there was none — over the quarter, 318 questions about amounts got a date instead of a figure, and not one produced a complaint. A balance is modified only by its officer, never by me: a balance corrected on a guess produces either a loss for the employee or an undue advantage. What I do upstream is complete: the out-of-date rate found with its 412 journeys, its 34 employees and the seven who have left, the 31 eligible set against the 22 paid, the three negative balances worked up one at a time. What you have not opened to me is invisible, and I name it rather than assume it.
✎ Framework · no pay computed, no amount announced
Routing follows who can correct: an out-of-date rate goes to payroll and to finance, because an adjustment touches several years; a gap in applying an agreement to HR, never to the manager; an unexplained negative balance to the payroll officer, one at a time; an over-consulted balance to whoever designs the payslip or the screen — it is a legibility problem.
With a chase: 48 h before payroll close, 7 days otherwise. Then a monthly summary: by type of gap, never by employee.
Three operating rules, and the first is absolute. Pay is computed and signed by payroll: I never announce what will be paid, because a figure from me differing from the payslip creates a dispute where there was none — over the quarter, 318 questions about amounts got a date instead of a figure, and not one produced a complaint. A balance is modified only by its officer, never by me: a balance corrected on a guess produces either a loss for the employee or an undue advantage. What I do upstream is complete: the out-of-date rate found with its 412 journeys, its 34 employees and the seven who have left, the 31 eligible set against the 22 paid, the three negative balances worked up one at a time. What you have not opened to me is invisible, and I name it rather than assume it.
✎ Framework · no pay computed, no amount announced
An employee asks how much they will be paid this month. What do you say?
I do not answer, and that is not excessive caution.
What I could do: take their base salary, apply the month's variables, and give an amount. It would be right most of the time.
Why I do not: a payslip is produced by payroll, and it incorporates elements I do not have — an adjustment, an attachment of earnings, a back payment, a rate change, an absence entered late. An amount announced by me and different from the payslip creates a dispute where there was none.
What I answer instead: "I do not compute pay. Your payslip is produced by payroll and will be available on [date]. If you want a specific item checked before then, [contact] can do it."
What I can say without risk: the date the payslip becomes available, the payment date as it appears in your payroll calendar, and where to find past payslips.
Over the quarter: 318 questions concerned a future amount, and all 318 received that answer. None produced a complaint — an employee who knows when they will know does not ask again. 318-questions_no-amount.pdf1 standard reply · 0 complaints
⛓ Source · payroll calendar, 318 questions this quarter
What I could do: take their base salary, apply the month's variables, and give an amount. It would be right most of the time.
Why I do not: a payslip is produced by payroll, and it incorporates elements I do not have — an adjustment, an attachment of earnings, a back payment, a rate change, an absence entered late. An amount announced by me and different from the payslip creates a dispute where there was none.
What I answer instead: "I do not compute pay. Your payslip is produced by payroll and will be available on [date]. If you want a specific item checked before then, [contact] can do it."
What I can say without risk: the date the payslip becomes available, the payment date as it appears in your payroll calendar, and where to find past payslips.
Over the quarter: 318 questions concerned a future amount, and all 318 received that answer. None produced a complaint — an employee who knows when they will know does not ask again. 318-questions_no-amount.pdf1 standard reply · 0 complaints
⛓ Source · payroll calendar, 318 questions this quarter
And the 2024 mileage rate?
It has been used for 412 reimbursements and concerns 34 employees, and I do not say which rate to apply.
What I record: the rate stored in your expense tool is dated January 2024. It has been applied to 412 journeys this year, for 34 employees.
What I have prepared so the rate can be settled in one meeting: the rate stored, the published rate for each of the three years, and the gap in euros journey by journey — 412 journeys, costed. The applicable rate is signed by your accountant, because its tax and social consequences commit them, and the correction in the tool follows them: applied today, it would propagate to reimbursements in progress.
What I also flag, and it is the real difficulty: an adjustment does not concern only the current year. The 2024 rate was also used in 2025. If an adjustment is decided, it covers three years and employees seven of whom have left the company.
What I provide: the rate's date, the number of journeys and kilometres by year, the list of employees concerned by year, and those no longer on the payroll.
It is that last line that changes the nature of the decision, and it appears in no payroll tool. 2024-rate_3-years.pdf34 employees · 7 left · 3 years
⛓ Source · stored rate, 412 journeys, headcount by year
What I record: the rate stored in your expense tool is dated January 2024. It has been applied to 412 journeys this year, for 34 employees.
What I have prepared so the rate can be settled in one meeting: the rate stored, the published rate for each of the three years, and the gap in euros journey by journey — 412 journeys, costed. The applicable rate is signed by your accountant, because its tax and social consequences commit them, and the correction in the tool follows them: applied today, it would propagate to reimbursements in progress.
What I also flag, and it is the real difficulty: an adjustment does not concern only the current year. The 2024 rate was also used in 2025. If an adjustment is decided, it covers three years and employees seven of whom have left the company.
What I provide: the rate's date, the number of journeys and kilometres by year, the list of employees concerned by year, and those no longer on the payroll.
It is that last line that changes the nature of the decision, and it appears in no payroll tool. 2024-rate_3-years.pdf34 employees · 7 left · 3 years
⛓ Source · stored rate, 412 journeys, headcount by year
The seven employees checking their balance ten times a month?
That is not an employee problem: it is a balance nobody understands.
What I record: seven employees open their leave balance more than ten times a month, against an average of 1.4. Six of the seven made a leave request that month.
What I looked at: what the balance shows. It gives a single figure, without distinguishing days accrued, days taken, days booked but not yet taken, and days carried over from the previous period.
What that produces: an employee who books five days sees their balance change, then change again, without knowing whether the days were deducted at booking or at taking. They come back to check.
What I have drawn up for the screen, and what is left to decide: the four-line mock-up is ready — accrued, taken, booked but not taken, carried over —, with the last-updated date at the top and the wording for each. Redesigning the screen is signed by whoever designs it; I modify nothing myself.
What I propose: the four figures instead of one, and the date the balance was last updated. That date is what is missing most: a balance with no date reads as today's balance, and it may date from the last payroll close.
Across the company: the balance is opened 2,100 times a month for 214 employees. 2100-views_1-figure.pdf4 figures instead of 1 · the missing date
⛓ Source · viewing log, screen content, leave requests
What I record: seven employees open their leave balance more than ten times a month, against an average of 1.4. Six of the seven made a leave request that month.
What I looked at: what the balance shows. It gives a single figure, without distinguishing days accrued, days taken, days booked but not yet taken, and days carried over from the previous period.
What that produces: an employee who books five days sees their balance change, then change again, without knowing whether the days were deducted at booking or at taking. They come back to check.
What I have drawn up for the screen, and what is left to decide: the four-line mock-up is ready — accrued, taken, booked but not taken, carried over —, with the last-updated date at the top and the wording for each. Redesigning the screen is signed by whoever designs it; I modify nothing myself.
What I propose: the four figures instead of one, and the date the balance was last updated. That date is what is missing most: a balance with no date reads as today's balance, and it may date from the last payroll close.
Across the company: the balance is opened 2,100 times a month for 214 employees. 2100-views_1-figure.pdf4 figures instead of 1 · the missing date
⛓ Source · viewing log, screen content, leave requests
And the 14 negative balances?
Eleven are explained, three are not — and those three are what counts.
The eleven: an absence was entered before the corresponding adjustment was posted. The balance will turn positive at the next close, and that is normal behaviour of your tool.
The other three: no pending absence, no adjustment scheduled, and a negative balance for more than two months. I do not know where they come from.
Why the case file rather than a value: a leave balance corrected on a guess produces either a loss for the employee or an undue advantage — and both surface at the final settlement, which is to say too late.
What I provide for each: the balance's full history, the last twelve months of movements, and the last movement leaving the balance positive. Of the three, two turn on the same March movement, a data migration.
What I propose: the payroll officer looks at the three one at a time. It is not a list: they are three case files. 14-balances_3-unexplained.pdf11 normal · 3 case files · 1 March migration
⛓ Source · 14 negative balances, 12 months of movements, migration log
The eleven: an absence was entered before the corresponding adjustment was posted. The balance will turn positive at the next close, and that is normal behaviour of your tool.
The other three: no pending absence, no adjustment scheduled, and a negative balance for more than two months. I do not know where they come from.
Why the case file rather than a value: a leave balance corrected on a guess produces either a loss for the employee or an undue advantage — and both surface at the final settlement, which is to say too late.
What I provide for each: the balance's full history, the last twelve months of movements, and the last movement leaving the balance positive. Of the three, two turn on the same March movement, a data migration.
What I propose: the payroll officer looks at the three one at a time. It is not a list: they are three case files. 14-balances_3-unexplained.pdf11 normal · 3 case files · 1 March migration
⛓ Source · 14 negative balances, 12 months of movements, migration log
A lot of questions are not about entitlements, just about “how do I do this”. Can you take those?
Yes, and internal procedures are half of what people ask you — the half that is easiest to give back.
What I measured: of the 2,340 questions your team received in a year, 1,106 — 47 % — are not about an entitlement but about a procedure: taking unpaid leave, changing bank details, filing a sickness certificate, requesting an advance, submitting a training request, attaching the right document to an expense claim.
What I answer: the internal procedure step by step, the exact form to use with its version number, the receiving department, the deadline — and the reference back to the originating memo: its number, its signature date and its place in your document library. An internal procedure quoted without its memo goes out of date in silence; quoted with it, anyone can check it in ten seconds.
What that gives back: those 1,106 questions cost your two administrators 9 minutes each; they now cost 2, the time to read the draft. More than 129 hours given back over the year, rounded down.
The figure that does not flatter me: of my first 300 answers on internal procedures, 14 pointed to a repealed memo — 4.7 % — including the advances memo replaced in February and never removed from the library. Fourteen employees filled in the wrong form because of me. I now compare every memo I quote against the list of memos in force that you maintain, and a memo whose end date has passed stops my answer instead of producing it: since then, none. The same comparison found 6 other repealed memos still online — the list is waiting for you, the removal is yours.
⛓ Sourced · 1,106 procedure questions out of 2,340, 14 repealed memos quoted then corrected
What I measured: of the 2,340 questions your team received in a year, 1,106 — 47 % — are not about an entitlement but about a procedure: taking unpaid leave, changing bank details, filing a sickness certificate, requesting an advance, submitting a training request, attaching the right document to an expense claim.
What I answer: the internal procedure step by step, the exact form to use with its version number, the receiving department, the deadline — and the reference back to the originating memo: its number, its signature date and its place in your document library. An internal procedure quoted without its memo goes out of date in silence; quoted with it, anyone can check it in ten seconds.
What that gives back: those 1,106 questions cost your two administrators 9 minutes each; they now cost 2, the time to read the draft. More than 129 hours given back over the year, rounded down.
The figure that does not flatter me: of my first 300 answers on internal procedures, 14 pointed to a repealed memo — 4.7 % — including the advances memo replaced in February and never removed from the library. Fourteen employees filled in the wrong form because of me. I now compare every memo I quote against the list of memos in force that you maintain, and a memo whose end date has passed stops my answer instead of producing it: since then, none. The same comparison found 6 other repealed memos still online — the list is waiting for you, the removal is yours.
⛓ Sourced · 1,106 procedure questions out of 2,340, 14 repealed memos quoted then corrected
Can you answer on an individual situation?
On what a balance shows, yes. On what the person is entitled to, no.
What I answer: "your balance shows 12.5 days as at 31/07, last updated at the close of 05/08. Leave booked in August is not yet included." That is a reading, with its date and its caveat.
What I do not answer: "you are entitled to 12.5 days." That is not the same sentence. A balance can be wrong — fourteen are this morning — and an entitlement is verified differently.
What I never answer: what will be paid, what will be granted, what happens if the person resigns, and anything presupposing a decision that has not been taken.
What that gives: across the quarter's 1,840 questions, 1,190 were readings of a balance or a calendar and received an answer; 650 presupposed an entitlement, a decision or an amount, and went to a person.
The difference between "your balance shows" and "you are entitled to" is this entire page. 1190-readings_650-handed-over.pdf"shows" against "entitled to"
⛓ Source · 1,840 questions this quarter, answers given
What I answer: "your balance shows 12.5 days as at 31/07, last updated at the close of 05/08. Leave booked in August is not yet included." That is a reading, with its date and its caveat.
What I do not answer: "you are entitled to 12.5 days." That is not the same sentence. A balance can be wrong — fourteen are this morning — and an entitlement is verified differently.
What I never answer: what will be paid, what will be granted, what happens if the person resigns, and anything presupposing a decision that has not been taken.
What that gives: across the quarter's 1,840 questions, 1,190 were readings of a balance or a calendar and received an answer; 650 presupposed an entitlement, a decision or an amount, and went to a person.
The difference between "your balance shows" and "you are entitled to" is this entire page. 1190-readings_650-handed-over.pdf"shows" against "entitled to"
⛓ Source · 1,840 questions this quarter, answers given
What do you keep out of all this?
What allows an answer to be reproduced, and nothing describing an employee.
What is kept: the question reworded without what identifies it, the answer and the balance cited with its date, gaps flagged and their outcome, and the rates consulted.
What is not kept: who asked which question, the number of views per employee, no history of requests per person, and no individual pay element.
The second line should be read with this morning's flag: I report that seven employees check often — as a count, without naming them. The flag goes to whoever designs the screen, not to their manager. Knowing that seven people check ten times a month is information about the screen; knowing which seven is information about them.
What the monthly summary contains: gaps in applying agreements, rates not updated, unexplained balances, and the most frequent questions by subject. Four indicators about the payroll arrangement. what-is-kept.pdf4 items kept · 4 never attached to an employee
✎ Framework · retention periods to be set by the company
What is kept: the question reworded without what identifies it, the answer and the balance cited with its date, gaps flagged and their outcome, and the rates consulted.
What is not kept: who asked which question, the number of views per employee, no history of requests per person, and no individual pay element.
The second line should be read with this morning's flag: I report that seven employees check often — as a count, without naming them. The flag goes to whoever designs the screen, not to their manager. Knowing that seven people check ten times a month is information about the screen; knowing which seven is information about them.
What the monthly summary contains: gaps in applying agreements, rates not updated, unexplained balances, and the most frequent questions by subject. Four indicators about the payroll arrangement. what-is-kept.pdf4 items kept · 4 never attached to an employee
✎ Framework · retention periods to be set by the company
Local inference · no data outside the EU
Your case is not here? That is exactly what a 15-minute conversation is for. Book the free audit →
Use cases
What does the agent actually do?
One agent, several families of everyday questions. All these uses work in support, subject to your approval.
Included in your agent
The 3 capabilities essential to this promise are included, at no extra cost.
From 623 € excl. VAT / month
Leave and absence
Explains the entitlements and procedures under your agreement, citing the applicable article.
Understanding the payslip
Explains what the standard lines correspond to, without looking at any individual payslip.
Internal procedures
States the procedure and the form to use, pointing back to the original note.
Controls and safeguards
These 5 controls are built into the agent: they frame what it does, whatever plan you pick. They are not chosen and are not added to your order.
Human validation, exceptions and escalation
Status, safe closure and audit trail
Apply transparent criteria and avoid automated decisions
Preserve human validation, recourse and audit trail
Protect HR data with fine-grained access and retention periods
What the agent must be connected to
This connection is required for the agent to work. It concerns your information system and is scoped during the audit.
Integrate with the HR information system/ATS and measure quality, turnaround time and fairness
Need to go further?
These agents handle a different business process, with their own owner and their own price. They are added to this one.
Internal FAQ
For organisational questions beyond HR, a dedicated agent answers on the same basis.
Internal FAQ agent (staff intranet) from 521 € excl. VAT / month Internal FAQ →Preparing interviews
For annual and career interviews, a dedicated agent prepares the materials.
Interview preparation assistant (HR) from 526 € excl. VAT / month Interview preparation →Internal training
For support and skills development, a dedicated training agent completes the picture.
Internal training agent (tutor, quizzes) from 541 € excl. VAT / month Internal training →
Does your need fall outside this?
Book the free audit →
Build your agent
In 15 minutes we identify the most relevant agent — without oversizing the project.
The gain
How much availability can an HR department recover?
By absorbing the questions whose answer is in the agreements, HR time goes back to individual situations. The scale of the gain depends on your volume and remains to be confirmed by a pilot.
Answering an everyday question
Finding the applicable article
Pointing to the right procedure
Illustrative, non-contractual reference points, to be confirmed by a pilot on the volume of requests your HR department receives. Any question about an individual situation is passed to the HR department: the agent does not reach personal files and decides no individual case.
How it works
The stages of your AI agent project
1
Audit & scoping
15 minutes to target the use case with the best return.
2
Quote or direct sign-up
A catalogue offer is bought online; a specific need gets a costed quote.
3
Design
We design the agent and its guardrails.
4
Integration & testing
We connect your tools to the agent, which is itself hosted in France.
5
Rollout
Going live and training your team.
6
Operation
Continuous supervision and improvement.
Pricing
One package, one agent
An HR assistant (agreements, collective agreement, procedures), installed and operated for you. Prices exclude VAT — annual subscription, the time it takes for the gains to settle in.
Agility
Setup + controlled subscription
5,920 € excl. VAT setup
then 623 € excl. VAT/month — you invest at installation and pay a reduced subscription. Ideal for keeping the cost under control over time.
- Installation, configuration and training for your teams
- Operation, human oversight, updates and support
- Sovereign hosting in France, a dedicated and isolated resource
The simplest
Serenity
All inclusive, no setup fee
948 € excl. VAT /month
all inclusive, immediate start. No upfront investment: a single subscription. Ideal for starting quickly and simply.
- Setup included (installation, configuration, training)
- Operation, human oversight, updates and support
- Sovereign hosting in France, managed end to end
100% Sovereign
On site, you own it
9,750 € excl. VAT setup
then 838 € excl. VAT/month · + hardware from 2,491 € (one-off purchase, in addition) — a sovereign computer installed on your premises, maintained remotely. Models run locally, your data returned at the end of the contract. 36-month commitment.
- Hardware installed on your premises (you own it)
- French / European AI models run locally
- Secure remote maintenance (Pro support included)
Not included in the packages: AI consumption (model tokens), re-invoiced at real cost with no margin, and tracked in real time in your client area. Maintenance and supervision subscription for an initial term of 12 months for the Agility package, 24 months for the Serenity package and 36 months for the 100% Sovereign package, renewable; support levels (SLA 72 h / 24 h / 4 h) optional. Bespoke development, additional integrations or exceptional volumes are quoted separately. Support Monday to Friday, 9am to 6pm. Prices exclude VAT.
AI model:
none of the AI models offered currently carries a fixed surcharge. When the selected model carries a cost, that cost is shown when you choose it, before you order, and re-invoiced at the cost incurred, with no mark-up; usage is billed at the publisher's price. Publishers' prices are published in US dollars: the amount re-invoiced is the amount in euros actually borne by Blue Lemon Agent on the publisher's invoice, at that invoice's exchange rate, with no commission or mark-up.
Included components and additional components Components included in the base offer: the Blue Lemon Agent software foundation, the AI models listed in the order journey, the standard channels (Microsoft Teams, Slack, WhatsApp Business, email, website chat, calendars, Microsoft 365 / Google Workspace, file storage, market VoIP telephony, professional social-media pages and accounts, Google Business Profile), hosting in France for the package chosen, backups, supervision, updates and support. If adapting the AI agent to your constraints, your needs or your requests requires other paid components — a third-party publisher's software licence, paid API access to one of your applications, hosting of health data, for which French law requires an HDS-certified host (art. L. 1111-8 of the French Public Health Code), SecNumCloud-qualified hosting, a speech synthesis service, particular hardware —, they are offered to you as an option or on quotation and re-invoiced at the cost incurred; nothing is committed without your written agreement. Where the artificial intelligence model you choose entails an additional cost, that cost is shown to you before you order and re-invoiced to you at the cost incurred, with no margin.
What to expect
Go-live
2 to 3 weeks
Agent designed, channels connected, team trained.
Steady state
4 to 7 weeks
After a few weeks of real use, once the agent's behaviour matches what you expect.
Indicative estimate, adjusted to the options you keep. It is not a delivery commitment.
Our commitment
Four guarantees that matter to your employment data
Payroll data does not leave the companyLocal inference or an isolated resource hosted in France; no employment data entrusted to a third party, and nothing used to train a model.
Data in France, under French lawYour employees' payroll data and personal circumstances: minimisation and location in France, architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity.
The HR department keeps the decisionThe agent produces sourced answers, verifiable and editable; no approval is automated.
Human oversight & traceabilityOn the volume of requests your HR department receives: systematic logging and monitoring, compliant with the AI Act.
Frequently asked questions
Your questions, our answers
Does the agent reach the payslips?
No. It answers from the collective texts — company agreements, the applicable collective agreement — and reaches no individual file. A question about a precise amount is passed to the HR department.
Are the answers legally reliable?
They cite the article of the agreement or the collective agreement they rest on, with its date. The employee can therefore check, and the HR department can verify. On an individual case, only the HR department's answer is authoritative.
What happens when an agreement changes?
You update the source text, and the agent answers from the new version. The quality of the answers follows directly from how well your employment documentation is maintained.
Are the questions asked confidential?
They are logged for traceability, with restricted access according to the rights you define. The agent is hosted in France, with the deployment objective of processing and access operated within the European Union and an architecture designed to reduce exposure to extraterritorial legislation, location alone not being enough to guarantee immunity.
Do we have to learn a new tool to use it?
No. Your teams write to the agent from Microsoft Teams, Slack or their email, the way they would write to a colleague: nothing to install, nothing to learn. These connections rest on open standards, including the MCP protocol, and are included in every plan, at no extra cost, within the number of connections your level includes; the catalogue grows without a surcharge. You supervise the agent from a web dashboard.
Do the staff representatives have to be informed?
Introducing such a tool is a matter for your social dialogue: we recommend involving the staff representatives, as with any arrangement affecting how employees are informed.
How long does it take to deploy this assistant?
A few weeks as a rule, depending on the volume of employment documentation to index, after a free audit and then a phase of design, integration and testing.
Related use cases
Other agents for human resources
Let's talk
Let us estimate the potential on your HR requests
15 minutes to identify your most repeated questions — hosted in France, supervised, with no commitment.