We don't have any breaks set up. Unfortunately someone corrected the
hours for the person so I will need to wait for it to happen again to do
more testing. I spent 1/2 in a webex with Epicor and they couldn't seem
to figure out what was happening either.
Now I have other weird stuff happening and will try doing another webex
with them:
An employee clocked out of a job at 14.25 and clocked into another job.
He told his supervisor that he should have actually switched jobs right
after lunch at 12.50 instead. When we try to change the hours (both the
end of job #1 and start of job #2), the labor and burden hours for job
#2 are calculated incorrectly. If I do this change in the "Detail"
screen it works fine but if we do it in List mode it appears to be
taking the 1/2 for lunch out of both jobs. If we change it from 12.50
to 12.51 it calculates it correctly.
Maybe I need to finish getting rid of my windows 2k machines and get
upgraded to 8.03.4x and some of these problem will be fixed.
________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of bpbuechler
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 11:44 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: 8.03.305k MES Adding Excessive Idle Time
One thing to note...Breaks are lumped into IDLE TIME.
1. Verify the Shift the person clocked into.
DO NOT make the mistake and pull the shift the shop employee is assigned
into. Be sure you verify the shift for the specific Payroll
Date/LaborHed as they do have the option of changing when they clock in.
2. Does the shift they clocked into have Breaks?
3. Open Labor Entry for the Person and Payroll Date in Question.
4. Expand the Labor Detail...looking for 0.00 in the tree view.
5. What do the Labor Notes? Should be something like "Break-Time"
I would surprise me if the 'Consider Grace' company config has anything
to do with a mysterious IDLE TIME showing up.
Thanks
Patty Buechler
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Mark Tellefson" <mtellefson@...> wrote:
Behalf
hours for the person so I will need to wait for it to happen again to do
more testing. I spent 1/2 in a webex with Epicor and they couldn't seem
to figure out what was happening either.
Now I have other weird stuff happening and will try doing another webex
with them:
An employee clocked out of a job at 14.25 and clocked into another job.
He told his supervisor that he should have actually switched jobs right
after lunch at 12.50 instead. When we try to change the hours (both the
end of job #1 and start of job #2), the labor and burden hours for job
#2 are calculated incorrectly. If I do this change in the "Detail"
screen it works fine but if we do it in List mode it appears to be
taking the 1/2 for lunch out of both jobs. If we change it from 12.50
to 12.51 it calculates it correctly.
Maybe I need to finish getting rid of my windows 2k machines and get
upgraded to 8.03.4x and some of these problem will be fixed.
________________________________
From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of bpbuechler
Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 11:44 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Re: 8.03.305k MES Adding Excessive Idle Time
One thing to note...Breaks are lumped into IDLE TIME.
1. Verify the Shift the person clocked into.
DO NOT make the mistake and pull the shift the shop employee is assigned
into. Be sure you verify the shift for the specific Payroll
Date/LaborHed as they do have the option of changing when they clock in.
2. Does the shift they clocked into have Breaks?
3. Open Labor Entry for the Person and Payroll Date in Question.
4. Expand the Labor Detail...looking for 0.00 in the tree view.
5. What do the Labor Notes? Should be something like "Break-Time"
I would surprise me if the 'Consider Grace' company config has anything
to do with a mysterious IDLE TIME showing up.
Thanks
Patty Buechler
--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
"Mark Tellefson" <mtellefson@...> wrote:
>to
> I do have the change log turned on and there were no adjustments made
> his record.[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
>
> I am hoping that turning on the "Consider Grace" will take care of the
> problem. Here are the details of his record for that day:
>
> Clock in: 06.00
> clock out: 15.50
> Lunch: 12.00 to 12.50
> Pay Hours: 9.00
>
> Idle Time: 0.00 to 2.03 Labor Hours: 2.03
> Job #1: 5.98 to 8.03 Labor Hours: 2.05
> Job #2: 8.03 to 15.50 Labor Hours: 6.97
>
> Total Labor Hours: 11.05
>
> there was no reason to add any idle time and that is what really
> confuses me.
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Behalf
> Of saab_barracudaIt
> Sent: Tuesday, April 14, 2009 10:09 AM
> To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> Subject: [Vantage] Re: 8.03.305k MES Adding Excessive Idle Time
>
>
>
>
>
> One more IMPORTANT question...Were there any adjustments made in Labor
> Entry? Do you have a change log setup for the LaborHed and LaborDtl?
> seems any time there are issues with our time entry, it's been aperson
> that mucked it up, not Vantage.<mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ,
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
> "rapat_mark" <mtellefson@> wrote:shift
> >
> > This has happened for a handful of employees but happens quite often
> for one. On Wednesday he clocked in at 5:58 and out at 15:30. His
> is from 6 to 3:30 with a half hour lunch. He worked 2 jobs during thatidle
> time and the detail records for those look fine. His "Pay Hours" are
> 9.00 which is correct. The problem is that the system generated an
> time record from 0.00 to 2.03 giving him an extra 2.03 hours ofindirect
> labor.with
> >
> > Until today we did not have the "Consider Grace for Labor Detail"
> setting turned on. I don't see anywhere that the 2.03 would come from.
> >
> > I did a webex with support and they haven't been able to come up
> an answer. Has anyone else run into this?[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
> >
>
>
>
>
>
>
> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
>