I’m trying to determine the total standard labor hours embedded in parts sold during 2025.
I can run the Sales Gross Margin report for specific product groups and it provides a cost breakdown for labor, burden, material, and outside processing. However, when the sold item is an assembly, the labor from lower-level parts and subassemblies is rolled up and presented as material cost, so the true standard labor hours are not visible.
I also attempted to use the BOM Cost Report to explode the assemblies and capture standard labor, but the report does not complete when exporting to CSV—either when running multiple product codes together or individually.
My goal is to calculate:
Shipped quantity × standard labor hours from the full BOM/routing (including subassemblies)
Nah, I’m referring to customizing an out-of-the-box report.
You can copy the report style and do whatever you want to the report, so if you want the data from the BOM cost report in a table format, just take the data and put it into the table like you want it so that when you export it, it is in the format you need.
Don’t quote me, but doesn’t the BOM cost report already do this? It already breaks out the costs like you want, right? If so, then yeah you don’t need to touch anything at the company config level. However, if accounting is looking to report the costs like that on the GL you may wish to look into this setting.
I recently made a BAQ that summarizes burden hours by resource group for each customer (could be by part also). There are some assumptions that must be made if your MFG parts are made for stock like ours are. I chose to calculate the average resource hours per closed job over the time frame and multiply that by the parts sold. If this sounds useful, I can share any details you would find useful.
FFT_machinehourbyresourcepart.baq (196.3 KB)
Certainly, the attached should be easy to modify for your needs if you would like to use actual jobs hour averages. You would need to change the machine hour logic to labor hour logic in the jobs subquery. This could be said to be better than standard since it includes job quantity variance for setup time…