on 06-15-2011 12:19 PM
Hi experts!!
I have filled the infotype 2011 of an employee (101800) with records similars to this:
Date, Time, Time event type, Short description,, TID, O
01.07.2011 08:00:00 P01 Clock-in/-out 0001 M
01.07.2011 15:00:00 P01 Clock-in/-out 0001 M
04.07.2011 08:00:00 P01 Clock-in/-out 0001 M
04.07.2011 15:00:00 P01 Clock-in/-out 0001 M
05.07.2011 08:00:00 P01 Clock-in/-out 0001 M
05.07.2011 15:00:00 P01 Clock-in/-out 0001 M
06.07.2011 08:00:00 P01 Clock-in/-out 0001 M
more ...
After, I'm traying to execute the standar report RPTIME00 with the next params:
Personnel Number: 101800
Evaluation schema: TM00
Time Statement variant: SAP&TEDT
Layout for log: <empty>
Forced recalculation as of: <empty>
Evaluation up to: 04.07.2011
I also have tried "Time Statement variant" with all the values:
SAP&TEDT Report Tree: Time Statement
SAP&TELU Report Tree: Time Balances
SAP_1 Employee time balance
SAP_2 Time balance overview
SAP_REV Variant for reporting review
SAP_TELU Time balance overview
But always the result is the same, no result. I get this statistics:
Statistics
Selected personnel numbers 0
Successful runs for 0
including with errors 0
Processing not completed for 0
Rejected 0
Total number of messages and error messages 0
What I'm doing wrong?
Kind regards,
Julian.
Hi,
There may be many different options of why it is not showing up, like the modifiers. But for a start check IT0007 and you should have there time management status "1". Check that everything in IT0007 is correctly, as in there is most common mistake (also check the dates of any relevant infotype for time management)
Regards,
Edoardo
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi,
You should if you want to use schema TM00 in time evaluation. It depends on your needs! Are you on productive system? Or just doing tests? It has always work with that status? Just asking because if you are on productive and have always use 7 then you have to be more careful, but is not, change it and you should be able to use TM00.
Regards.
Edoardo
Well! If you use Time Management Status 1 is because you are entering the every day time data as well. Since you mentioned me that your payroll is working as you wish then you may not want to change to status number 1, but then you shouldn't be using standard time schema TM00, as this schema is use with record of every day work (I mean using time clocks or any other way to tell the system that the employee is entereing and leaving the company on a particular day). So, the question would be what is what you want to do? Probably you may use other schema and make some change to adapt it to your needs.
Regards,
Edoardo
Hi,
I just read another post of you and I think you should change to Satus 1 and use TM00 (probably better to do a copy to ZM00 foe example as you may need some change). If you are reading time events from IT2011 then you'll probably be good with this. It is not the only think you have to think about, but if you have daily information in IT2011 it will work.
Regards,
Edoardo
Thanks Edoardo,
The employees will have a work schedule.
We need to know the days where the employee has not worked but it should, also we want know the known absences like vacations, illness, ...., and attendance like formation or travel.
For instance, we have a week where the initial work schedule for this employee is from day 1 to day 5 working day, and 6 and 7 days off. After, the real situation for this employee is that works from day 1 to day 3 (this information will be in infotype 2011, the input/output records), the day 5 is a vacation day (this information will be in infotype 2001) and the 6 and 7 are days off. So the employee has the day 4 not justified
Initial Schedule:
1-W, 2-W, 3-W, 4-W, 5-W, 6-O, 7-O
After time processing:
1-W, 2-W, 3-W, 4-?, 5-V, 6-O, 7-O
Where: W-Work Day, O-Day Off, V-Vacation Day
So, the responsable can see day 4 that this employee has not worked because in infotype 2011 it is not the entry and output record.
Then I undestand that I can get this behavior with schema TM00 and some modifications.
Am I going in the right way?
Kind regards,
Julian.
Well! There are a few thing to consider and I am pretty sure you are going to need to make some change in any schema you end up using as from what I can get you have some particular requirements no standard schemas would fulfill on its own.
For start, most of thing you mentioned would be cover with TM00 or TM01.
With TM01 you will follow the work schedule from IT0007 and you will get all your absences (2001), presences (2002) among other things. The thing if that IT2011 is not read in this schema. So if you are processing data from IT2011, it's not going to work without any change.
This is the reason why I consider a better option to use TM00. Just one thing confused a little bit with your requirements. When you use schema TM00 you read every day information comparing it to your work schedule. So in IT2011 you will have to get every day information, like saying the employee got in to work and then got out in any day he should have work according the work schedule (not saturday and sunday). IT2011 works with Time events type. Each time event will indicate what the employee did. Depending on how are you filling IT2011 it could very easy to mantain. But if only one person is doing it manually for all employes is not the best thing to do, as you are not going to record only the unnormal behaviour, but the regular daily behaviour.
To sum up, If the days the employee hasn´t worked can be record as an absence in IT2001, you don't need IT2011 and can use schema TM01, but if you are using IT2011, then you should use schema TM00, but there must be always a logical record for the day the employee should have worked.
Regards,
Edoardo
Check the PDC recalculation date in IT0003. and select Display log in the selection screen
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
User | Count |
---|---|
98 | |
12 | |
10 | |
6 | |
6 | |
4 | |
3 | |
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.