Skip to Content
author's profile photo Former Member
Former Member



I have used ELIMI Y to remove the splits in wage type due to absence. Please help clear two doubts:

1. After the eliminate split, i have done some calculation in another rule. Is it possible to revert the wage type back to as it was before (with splits)? I am just worried that some logic further down in the schema may require the splits.

2. On what basis does ELIMI Y actually remove the splits? What i am getting in the OT is all records of 2 absence types grouped together, whereas some other splits of another absnence type remain separate.

The below tables show the splits due to 4 absence records. 1 absence is 'half pay' whereas the other 3 are fully unpaid.


Value in IT

3 5000 Basic Sala 01 01 010 0.03 1.00 155.92-


3 5000 Basic Sala 01 02 010 0.03 1.00 155.92-


3 5000 Basic Sala 01 03 010 0.02 0.50 77.96-


3 5000 Basic Sala 02 04 010 0.03 1.00 155.92-



5000 Basic Salary Deduction




Value in OT

3 5000 Basic Sala 01 010 0.08 2.50 389.80-


3 5000 Basic Sala 02 010 0.03 1.00 155.92-

Add comment
10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

2 Answers

  • Posted on Sep 01, 2009 at 09:11 AM

    Can i know for wht purpose the PCR is written and another thing the absences might be different but the valuation Group for those absence will remain same and identical Right

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded

    • Former Member


      You have asked for the purpose of rule so i will explain the scenario in detail.

      We have 'deduction during unpaid absence' configured through V_T554C.

      However, it appears that the initial design choice was not the best one as each wage type was entered and calculated individually instead of through /846. (E.g., Basic Salary 5000, its corresponding deduction wage type is 5000 and so on for all allowances and each on them was entered in V_T554C)

      Then there is a rule '2ABS' in payroll which calculates the amount to be reduced under each allowance and stores it in the corresponding deduction wage type. The rule is copied below.

      Now that i have a few new wage types (allowances) to configure, i wanted to configure their deduction as well; but found that V_T554C cannot accept more than 15 entries, which we have already utilized. So as a work around, i decided to add another rule after 2ABS in which i calculate the deduction only for the new wage types. This one is called 3ABS and also copied below.However, 3ABS was not processing all records from the split wage types. So i added another rule before this to eliminate all the splits based on absence i.e. ELIMI Y

      With this explanation, could someone please help with my original questions.


      Rule - 2ABS


      5000 Basic Salary Ded

      AMT= 1000 Set

      AMT?0 Comparison



      RTE=TKDIVI Set

      NUM*KGENAU Multiplication

      DIVID NRR Division amt/no/rate

      MULTI ARA Multipl.amt/no/rate

      RTE/KGENAU Division

      AMT/KGENAU Division

      NUM/KGENAU Division

      AMT*-1 Multiplication

      ADDWT * OT Output table

      RESET Set time period ID

      Rule - 3ABS


      1585 Cost of Living Allowance

      AMT= 1585 Set

      ADDWT * OT Output table

      AMT/TKDIVI Division

      NUM= 5000 Set

      MULTI ANA Multipl.amt/no/rate

      AMT*-1 Multiplication

      ADDWT 5585 OT Output table

  • author's profile photo Former Member
    Former Member
    Posted on Sep 21, 2010 at 12:12 PM

    Did not matter in the end

    Add comment
    10|10000 characters needed characters exceeded