What Is The Payroll Register In Jde E1 R073012

• #1

Has anyone got the payroll register to not print employees that weren't paid for the pay period?

i.e. We setup a version of R07200 with data selection for employee pay condition, pay form, and locality. We key in time for 5 people, at that place are 400 at the institute. When we run the payroll, all 400 show up, merely pay info for only the 5 that we keyed time in. We don't want this, we want simply the 5 people with fourth dimension keyed to show up on the register.

TIA

Jeremey Garcia
Greenville, SC, The states
Xe SP14; ES - AS/400; CO - Every bit/400; Deploy - NT Citrix - NT SP6; Report Distribution - Formscape;

• #2

Jeremey,

We have not had that trouble since moving from B7331 to Xe-SP16. Do you take auto pay turned on for this payroll ID?

Of the 400 other employees, do they accept time keyed periodically or are they never paid through the payroll arrangement? If the other 400 are never paid through the payroll organisation, yous could gear up a new category code and employ information technology to exclude these excess employees from the payroll ID. This would non be practical if the employees with time cards changes frequently.

Ken

XE SP 16
Win2000/Oracle 8.1.6.

• #4

All employees are paid when the plants run. When we idle a plant for a week, but essential hourly employees are paid. For this particular payroll there isn't any auto pay (my understanding is auto pay is salary employees)

Talking with JDE, they seem to think an ESU we put on corrupted what was working prior. Still waiting on confirmation on that though.

Jeremey Garcia
Greenville, SC, USA
Xe SP14; ES - AS/400; CO - AS/400; Deploy - NT Citrix - NT SP6; Study Distribution - Formscape;

• #5

We use arreage(sp?)...where nosotros accept deductions (ins, medical, etc.) whenever a payroll is run, and if they don't take plenty money to cover so it is carried over and pulled from their side by side check.

I mentioned this to JDE, and the gal said that it shouldn't matter that we do this because there was no fourth dimension keyed, then the employee wasn't paid. Therefor, shouldn't be on the register.

Jeremey Garcia
Greenville, SC, The states
Xe SP14; ES - AS/400; CO - AS/400; Deploy - NT Citrix - NT SP6; Report Distribution - Formscape;

• #7

Do y'all have auto pay selected? If you lot don't accept autopay selected information technology should even so bring in the other employees but without pay. Just a thought.

• #8

They are saying to put ESU on b/c our code is non upwards to theirs. We are still investigating it. Got up with this gal Patricia Fredrico, who seems knowledgeable and is working difficult to figure out the trouble. They are comparing BSNF B0700005, considering as she so eloquently put it:

(we are) getting a record in the F07350 for an employee that has no gross but has an F0709 tape because they have a "calc if no gross" DBA. And they are showing up on the payroll annals which is incorrect. I call up the problem is that the F07350 is existence updated.

But, you are correct you can't cutting a negative bank check so it goes to arrears, however, if information technology is arreared and they DO Not have time and so it should not keep the annals, just if they DO HAVE time and zero net corporeality it should go on register. Brand sense?

Our trouble is the employee name, employee number, and SSN are actualization on the register but zip else. Here'southward how I put it to JDE in my concluding email to them:

What it looks similar is happening:

1. pulling employees from the F060116 tabular array going through the Practise Section on the "Process Payroll Stub Details"
2. Processing the LBF and LBH for the "Process Payroll Stub Details" including the conditional section "Show Check Control Number" when it doesn't find a record in the F06116 file.

I hope I am not confusing anyone, I am still trying to understand this procedure myself.

(sorry nearly the caps, but I want to emphasize those split phrases)
Sorry about the long post. I'm but trying not misfile anyone.

Jeremey Garcia
Greenville, SC, Usa
Xe SP14; ES - AS/400; CO - AS/400; Deploy - NT Citrix - NT SP6; Written report Distribution - Formscape;

• #10

Jeremey,

Just ran a partial payroll in our PY surround. Imported time cards for simply about a third of the employees in the information selection and just employees with fourth dimension cards are printing on the PR register. I need to cheque our DBA set-upwardly to see if we have any "Calc if no gross". I think we should, but I'm not positive. I'll allow you lot know what I find tomorrow.

Peace.

Ken

XE SP 16
Win2000/Oracle eight.i.6.

• #xi

Thank you lot for your input.

Jeremey Garcia
Greenville, SC, USA
Xe SP14; ES - As/400; CO - AS/400; Deploy - NT Citrix - NT SP6; Report Distribution - Formscape;

• #12

Jeremey,

Here is what I have found. Much to my surprise, we did non have any active "calc if no gross" DBA's. When I added one to one of our employees who had NO time, judge what? He printed on the PR register.

Here is an thought for a work around. Add a new category code to the employee master identifying employees who are and are not function of your close down workforce. (Blank = non office of shut down WF, Y = Part of close down WF) And so set up-up ii new Payroll ID'due south or Versions. Use one to procedure the close-down payroll and the other to calc your DBA arrearages. And then you tin can trash the register that is blank.

Also, your best bet to become this resolved with JD Edwards is to ask for a processing pick that would allow you the selection of not printing these employees with a "calc if no gross" DBA. I'thou betting it was originally ready up this way because some other client insisted that all employees with DBAs calculating exist printed on the PR annals. Unfortunately, fifty-fifty if they hold to add the processing option, it probably won't exist bachelor until B9.

Good luck.

Ken

XE SP 16
Win2000/Oracle 8.1.half dozen.

• #13

Got a phone call from JDE yesterday (13March2002)tardily afternoon. Here's the result.

In that location is a trouble with the lawmaking. Specifically, with the B0700005.c code (at least that was the last one they asked for.) They will get dorsum to me with either a code fix, workaround that doesn't pertain to having ii payroll id'due south - (Adept idea merely not a feasible one for the states), or a SAR number. I'll inform the list of the result.

What's intersting, is when I was talking to JDE yesterday, the gal said that she had simply got some other call dealing with the aforementioned issue. Looks like I started a bad trend? (joke)

Thanks for all the input/ideas/suggestions.

Jeremey Garcia
Greenville, SC, USA
Xe SP14; ES - AS/400; CO - Every bit/400; Deploy - NT Citrix - NT SP6; Written report Distribution - Formscape;<P ID="edit"><FONT SIZE=-ane>Edited by jeremey_garcia on 3/14/02 05:39 AM.</FONT></P>

• #fourteen

Aye, please keep us posted. This hasn't been an issue for us nevertheless, but yous never know when the PR manager is going to add new "calc w/ no gross" dba'southward.

Thanks.

Ken

XE SP xvi
Win2000/Oracle 8.one.half-dozen.

• #15

Ok, every bit of Friday 15MARCH2002:

From Patricia Fredrico at JDE:

Aaaaah! They changed the functionality. I working to get it changed back or at least give the customer a choice. We have a meeting to hash out information technology on Wednesday.

I'll update the results when I become them. Thanks for all your suggestions/advise.

Jeremey Garcia
Greenville, SC, USA
Xe SP14; ES - AS/400; CO - Every bit/400; Deploy - NT Citrix - NT SP6; Study Distribution - Formscape;

Source: https://www.jdelist.com/community/threads/r073012.7339/

Posted by: wheelersuchancessim1968.blogspot.com

Share this post