Crew size not a factor with burden calculations?

Yahoo Archive
1
What version are you referring to? In 6.1, Burden=Labor does affect actuals.

Per Vantage Help, if you usually have multiple people working on a machine, you may want to set the WC up with the Split Burden check box checked.

Split Burden controls the distribution of labor and burden hours during direct labor entry in the Data Collection module. Use this option only if you use Data Collection. If multiple employees work on the same job operation at the same time, and you normally want to split the burden (machine) hours among those labor entries to more accurately reflect the actual machine usage, check this option.

--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "saab_barracuda" <chris.clunn@...> wrote:
>
> It all depends on how you have your burden applied whether this makes sense. But nevertheless, Vantage looks at Burden hours as "machine hours" so actuals will charge burden once per resource no matter the crew size. You can check the "Labor hours = Burden hours" in the resource or resource group but that is only for the estimate calculations, not actuals. This never made sense to me either but there it is.
>
> For the work around, what I've done is set all my resources to crew size of 1 and multiplied the standards by the number of operators. So my standards are in man hours instead of machine hours and the crew size feature is useless. We don't use the scheduling in Vantage so there may be some side effects I don't know about.
>
>
> --- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "brucewbrannan" <bruce.brannan@> wrote:
> >
> > We've been working with job estimates and found that the crew size is not a factor when considering burden. The formula to get an operation's cost is:
> >
> > [SetUpCrewSize]*[EstSetHours]*[SetupLabRate]+[EstSetHours]*[SetupBurRate] +
> > [ProdCrewSize]*[EstProdHours]*[ProdLabRate]+[EstProdHours]*[ProdBurRate]
> >
> > Notice the crew size is only a factor with labor but not burden. It seems to me that if you would would want more burden per more crew. Am I thinking right? Has anybody else come across this?
> >
>
2
We've been working with job estimates and found that the crew size is not a factor when considering burden. The formula to get an operation's cost is:

[SetUpCrewSize]*[EstSetHours]*[SetupLabRate]+[EstSetHours]*[SetupBurRate] +
[ProdCrewSize]*[EstProdHours]*[ProdLabRate]+[EstProdHours]*[ProdBurRate]

Notice the crew size is only a factor with labor but not burden. It seems to me that if you would would want more burden per more crew. Am I thinking right? Has anybody else come across this?
3
It all depends on how you have your burden applied whether this makes sense. But nevertheless, Vantage looks at Burden hours as "machine hours" so actuals will charge burden once per resource no matter the crew size. You can check the "Labor hours = Burden hours" in the resource or resource group but that is only for the estimate calculations, not actuals. This never made sense to me either but there it is.

For the work around, what I've done is set all my resources to crew size of 1 and multiplied the standards by the number of operators. So my standards are in man hours instead of machine hours and the crew size feature is useless. We don't use the scheduling in Vantage so there may be some side effects I don't know about.


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "brucewbrannan" <bruce.brannan@...> wrote:
>
> We've been working with job estimates and found that the crew size is not a factor when considering burden. The formula to get an operation's cost is:
>
> [SetUpCrewSize]*[EstSetHours]*[SetupLabRate]+[EstSetHours]*[SetupBurRate] +
> [ProdCrewSize]*[EstProdHours]*[ProdLabRate]+[EstProdHours]*[ProdBurRate]
>
> Notice the crew size is only a factor with labor but not burden. It seems to me that if you would would want more burden per more crew. Am I thinking right? Has anybody else come across this?
>