on 03-31-2011 11:32 AM
Hi,
I required a solution for my scenario.
I have two absence quota type QA1 and QA2, if a employee has the basic pay less than 8000 then he will get assigned with QA1 and if a employee has a basic pay is equal to or greater than 8000 then he get assigned to QA2.
Similarly leave carry forward, QA1 employee has 120 days and QA2 has 240days.
I am using RPTIME00 to generate my Quota QA1 and QA2.
I need to create a custom functions and operation(PE04) for my requirement, can u help me for the same
Sughy,
If for some reason, you cannot do what Antoine suggested here's another idea.
Is your basic salary based on a pay scale structure? If it is may be you can query the pay scale group and level by using OUTWPxxxx opertation (TRFAR, TRFGB, TRFGR, TRFST). However you have to first configure generation rules for the quota buckets correctly esp for the base entitlement to be a day balance time type. Then you can write a PCR to add this time type during time evaluation by looking up the values in pay scale structure of individual employees.
There are probably several other ways to group these employees together like having the same additional time ID indicator in 0007 or having a different Daily DWS class indicator etc. The concept is to have a unique identifier if a simple grouping as mentioned by Antoine is not possible. You can seperate them and write your own PCR for both accruals as well as limiting the carry forward balances.
Hope this helps.
Good Luck.
Regards,
Raj.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
See
After Generation of Time Evaluation we run payroll so how can we the basic salary the employee
Do you want to read the employee Earned salary or Actual Salary please let us know
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
would it not simply be way easier to separate employee with basic pay +/- 8000 into subgroups? this way you have it available in WPBP structure for decision making at rule level.
just an idea passing by! good luck.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
107 | |
12 | |
11 | |
6 | |
6 | |
4 | |
4 | |
3 | |
3 | |
3 |
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.