on 12-29-2014 5:15 PM
Hello Guys,
If I have a negative earning in payroll period 01.2015 and I have an employee deduction in IT169 where I have defined priorities of deductions for arrear processing is defined as 5 (deduct everything or nothing) in table T51P6.
Now, whats happening is....the negative gross is going to claims wagetype, which I am fine with.
But IT169 employee deduction is also coming in RT with an oppositse sign. Which in turn is coming in payslip and is being interfaced to the Benefits vendor.
I have a work around for this, which I have done but how do I stop this wagetype from coming in RT.
Can I do anything with the priorities or any processing class in particular??
Regards,
Thomas
Hi Thomas,
Please check any custom rules that may be causing the issue that may be placed after the table T51P6 is being read in schema.
If there is nothing as such being read than please examine the below.
Can you please let me know the current priority of wage types being generated from IT0169.
You will need to check priority in table T51P6 and reduce it as suitable.
Also, make sure that the IT1069 deductions aren't from retro changes as then you will need to consider looking at retroactive characteristics of the wage type in table T51P6.
Thanks,
Ameet
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hello Ameet,
We don't have any custom rules pertaining to PRDNT.
Though I have changed the priorities of deduction but it still doesn't work.
After exploring all the possible options, this is what I am going to do put my PCR to see if the gross on which benfits deduction is calculated in P0169 is -ve, delete the deduction wagetype.
With my priorities set for deduction wagetype in table t51p6 as:
Arrears: 5 (Deduct all or nothing) Retro:1 (Take old amount, write difference to arrears table)
I think it should work in reto scenarios as well.
Looking forward to your inputs.
Regards,
Thomas
These are the possible scenarios which I am exploring with my custom pcr and deduction priorities.
1) CUrrent pay -ve gross
2) +ve retro
R --20$
C---100$
3) R----- -ve 20$
C-----100$
4) C----- -ve gross
R------ +ve gross
if it works fine in above mentioned scenarios, I think it should suffice my requirement.
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
Hi can you check any rule for limits has been assigned to the savings plan WT? Also check Infotype 165. Vinoli
You must be a registered user to add a comment. If you've already registered, sign in. Otherwise, register and sign in.
1. Please check was there any retro change happened for the plan and payment is happening? ( since you have mentioned, deduction with opposite sign) 2. Priority in table V_51P6_B ( B and 5) 3. Also compare the deduction WT with standard IT169 wagetype ( like BA31 ) the processing class.
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 | |
5 | |
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.