Evaluation of contability

Hi all,
I'm a functional consultant and I'm working on SAP HR module, especially about the integration between SAP HR module and SAP FIC.CO module.
I have problem with a retro calculation wage type: /551 (this wage type is created when there are changement on other wage types. For example, in the first time a wage type is considerated on the net cumulartion; in the second time not more).
So, if I insert in the table V_T52EL_COMP this wage type nothing change. The result, when I run report RPCIPE00, isn't zero.
are a method that I can use to solve this problem from SAP HR spro?
Please help me.
Thanks.

Synbolic Account Acts the Bridge between Wage types and General Ledger Accout
kindly check ... without that we cannot post
Experts
correct me if iam wrong

Similar Messages

Time Evaluation Re Run in Mid Month & Mid Mont Initialization !

Hi There,
i was trying to run Time evaluation for the period 01.04.2011 to 31/12/2011.
from April, that is 01.04.4011 to 30.06.2011 Time evaluation was good, now time evaluation has to run from 01.07.2011 but time evaluation has repeated from 12.06.2011 to 11.07.2011 as Initialization period 07/2011, and the same scenario is repeated for the rest of the year..all periods are initiated on 12th of each month from 6th month that is 12.06.2011.
i was been trying to rectify this issue but was not bale to solve it, could any one please look in to it and let me know how to solve it?
your help is appreciated.
Thanks
Kumar

Can you please regenerate Period Parameters for 2011 year in T-Code for OG00 for period parameter 01 and then give the hire date in the field Forced Recalculation as of run in PT60 and run the time evaluation.
Best Regards,

Classic report - Condition evaluated for every row

APEX 4.2.2
I am seeing something strange in a classic report region. A report started to fail at run-time with a strange error about bad syntax. When I run the page in debug mode, I see the following
print column headings
rows loop: 30 row(s)
...Execute Statement: begin wwv_flow.g_boolean := '' is not null;
end;
......Result = false
...Execute Statement: begin wwv_flow.g_boolean := '' is not null;
end;
......Result = false
...Execute Statement: begin wwv_flow.g_boolean := 'string with a embedded ' single quote' is not null;
end;
......Result = true
Looks like the APEX engine is evaluating a boolean expression after rendering and each and every row in the report. And for some strange reason, it is using a piece of data from my query's resultset and failing because of the bad syntax introduced due to the single-quote in the string.
I have never seen this before. Any idea what is going on?
Thanks

Howdy Paul, sorry should have provided all the details. No, this is a standard generic column template. Ah, you are right, drat I should have looked closer. The template has use a condition to show either a highlighted row or normal one. Sorry for the false alarm, I can take it from here. Enjoy your flight :-)

Use of Time Evaluation to generate Absence Quota

Hi,
We are planning to use time evaluation to generate absence quota. At the moment we are using RPTQTA00 report to generate Absence Quota. We have negative time management and since, the project has already gone live i have very limited scope to change the basic settings for example we do not have any employee subgroup to identify part time employees, PT & FT are in one employee sub-groups. We have only one ESG & PSG for time recording, time quota etc. The base entitlement is defined for the FT employees and it is reduced propertionately based on the employement percentage in IT0007. Now we are going to adopt a change in design, and planning to have specific work-schedule for PT employees. In that case, we will not have the scope to maintain %age in IT0007 for part time employees but exact no of working hours will be used. It means that system will treat the PT emploees as FT while generating absence quota and output the FT absence entitlement. As i said earlier we can not differentiate PT employees from FT employees based on ESG or PSG, i can not create a separate quota selection rule for part time employees. Hence, we are moving from running RPTQTA00 report to time evaluation for absence quota generation purpose.
Now can anybody please help finding a alternate solution for the above, if it is possible to do it through report RPTQTA00 or we have to adopt the time evaluation. In case we are going to generate absence quota through time evaluation, can we only generate absence quota and skip anything that is related to payroll.
Any comments/suggestion/advise will be very helpful to us.
Thanks.
Sujit

We are not able to generate absence quota for part-time employees as when we do that, system is treating PT employees as FT employees and the FT base entitlement is referred while calculating absence quota. i can not define separate absence entitlement for PT employees as we have only one ESG and PSG, and based on this quota selection group is defined. The QUOMO feature is defined based on work contract - employee sub-group (there is no separate emp sub-group for PT employees) - Pay Scale Group. We are having this problem as we have specific work schedule for PT employees now (Ex. we create 3 days work schedule with 15 hours: 4.5,4.5, 6 hours) and we are not maintaining employement percentage for them. So system is treating PT employee as FT employee with 100% employement percentage. Please let me know if you need any specific info to understand my issue.
Thank you so much for the response.

Perform VENDOR EVALUATION for MORE THAN ONE VENDORS at a time

Hello all,
Please guide for any process where i can perform Vendor Evaluation for MORE THAN ONE vendors AT A TIME.
At my location there are around thousand vendors, which are to be evaluated, and difficult to perform the evaluation process one-by-one.
(ME61/ME62/ME63)
Detailed replies with various possibilities would be highly appreciated.
Thanks & Regards,
Joy Ghosh

The vendor evaluation for some thousand vendors at the same time has already been in SAP long before they developed LSMW. The purpose of LSMW is to load data from a legacy system, of course you can (mis-)use it for a lot other things.
But you should not always use LSMW if you are to lazy to go thru the SAP standard menu to find a transaction like ME6G
There you define a job that runs RM06LBAT report.
You first have to define a selection variant for this report. this can be done in SE38 by entering the report name, select variant, clicking display, then entering a name for the variant and clicking Create.

[OIM 9.1.0.2] Access Policy being evaluated to an OIM user disabled.

Hi Gurus,
I have an Access Policy being evaluated and provisioning resource (AD) to an OIM user disabled.
Any tip on what I should take a look?
Thanks in advance.

Hi all,
I have configured out the XL.EvaluateMembershipForInactiveUser System Property as TRUE, but the membership rule does not get evaluated for disabled users. So the user still remain into the group. I have restarted the OIM.
I need to active the Evaluate User Policies schedule task for this configuration be effective. Or should I do something more?
Thanks a lot.

Error " In case of evaluated receipt settlement, please maintain tax code", during VI01

Dear Team
We have a scenario in our environment where for a delivery made for STO Purchase Order, we are trying to post shipping cost document for Shipping document.
When we try to save the document, the system returns the error " In case of evaluated receipt settlement, please maintain tax code".
We have checked in the system. The vendor to whom the PO has been raised is not maintained for Evaluated Receipt Settlement, and as this is a STO , no vendor info record has been maintained for the same.
The issue has started to come for a new plant and transportation route, for other routes and plants we are still able to proceed successfully for creation of shipment costs
Can this be an issue of master data maintanence that we may have missed during plant creation or transportation route creation
Else, Kindly guide.

Hi Tarunveer,
Which Vendor are you mentioning: Plant Vendor of STO or Forwarding Agent.
I am suggesting to check in LFM2 for Forwarding Agent.
Same way, in the case of Invoice Tab in PO, (Which PO are you mentioning: STO or PO for Forwarding Agent?)
Regards,
MJ.

Evaluated Receipt Settelement - Automatic PO creation in GR

Dear Experts,
Please answer my querry -
here in my scenario,
Purchase order is created automatically, at the time of Goods receipt Posting.
Now i want post invoices automatically (ERS) with the reference of Purchase Order/Goods receipt.
settings made -
1) XK01 - ERS Check Box
now, in our case we are not creating PO, it is created automatically. but in display mode of PO it shows ERS check box is selected.
But system is not posting an invoice.
Please give me solution.
Thanks in advance -

Hi,
Try ERS in MRRL not in MIRO
In MRM1, mainatin condition record for Message Type "ERS"
Also check in SPRO > MM > LIV > Evaluated Receipt Settlement (ERS) > ERS Invoice Numbering
> Create Number Groups "XXXXX"
> Assign ERS Invoice Number Ranges to Company Codes -> Here fo to "Addiitonal Data" of company code and maintain No. range as "01" in SAPERS field.
> Create ERS Invoice Number Ranges -> Here for No. Range Group "XXXXX" mainatin No. Range for code "01"

Best practice for Logical OR pre-condition evaluation

Greetings,
I'm finding TS doesn't have basic features for decision making (imp) for execution. Any recommendations are welcomed and appreciated. Please see below scenario.
I'd like to execute setup steps (custom step types) for a signal generator based upon the user selected "Test".
To keep it simple for the signal generator let's say we have the following steps:
Set Freq | Set PWR lvl | Set Modulation Type | Set Modulation ON/OFF | Set RF Power ON/OFF
For User Selected Tests let's say we have Test A(0) | Test B(1) | Test C(2) (Test A & C requires Modulation, B does not)
Here's my issue:
I can't get SET Freq | SET PWR lvl | Set RF Power ON/OFF to execute a pre-condition setup for evaluating Logical OR's. (i.e. locals.TestSelected ==0||1||2)
Same for Set Modulation Type | Set Modulation ON/OFF (i.e locals.TestSelected ==0||2)
Thanks in advance for any guidance provided.
Chazzzmd78
Solved!
Go to Solution.

Just want to clarify, there seems to be a misunderstanding about the difference between bitwise OR (i.e. the | operator) and logical OR (i.e. the || operator). Bitwise OR results in the combination of all of the bits which represent an integer stored as binary, while logical OR (i.e. what you really want in this case) results in a True, non-zero, value (usually 1) if either operand is non-zero.
Also, the == operator has a higher precedence than either the bitwise OR or logical OR operators.
So what this means:
locals.TestSelected ==0||1||2
is to give a result of True (i.e. 1) if either locals.TestSelected ==0, 1 is non-zero, or 2 is non-zero. Since 1 and 2 are always non-zero that expression will actually always result in a True value.
Similarly, although the following will likely give you the behavior you want:
(locals.TestSelected == 0) | (locals.TestSelected == 1) | (locals.TestSelected == 3)
That's not really doing what you are probably thinking it does. It's actually getting the value True (i.e. 1) for each of the sub-expressions in parethesis and then bitwise OR'ing them together. Since the result for the == operand is always either 0 or 1, this ends up giving the same result as logical OR (i.e. the || operator), but what you really want in this case is logical OR and for other expressions using bitwise OR when you mean logical OR might give you incorrect results. So, you should really be using something like the following:
Locals.TestSelected == 0 || locals.TestSelected == 1 || locals.TestSelected == 3
The parenthesis don't really matter in this case (so can be left out, but also doesn't hurt anything so you can leave them in if you prefer) because the == operator has a higher precedence than the || operator so all of the == operations will be done first.
Hope this helps clarify things,
-Doug

[svn] 3045: Fix FB-13900: Expression Evaluator: 'is' and 'as' expressions return 'Target player does not support function calls'

Revision: 3045
Author: [email protected]
Date: 2008-08-29 10:59:25 -0700 (Fri, 29 Aug 2008)
Log Message:
Fix FB-13900: Expression Evaluator: 'is' and 'as' expressions return 'Target player does not support function calls'
Ticket Links:
http://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FB-13900
Modified Paths:
flex/sdk/trunk/modules/debugger/src/java/flash/tools/debugger/concrete/BinaryOp.java
flex/sdk/trunk/modules/debugger/src/java/flash/tools/debugger/concrete/PlayerSession.java

Revision: 3045
Author: [email protected]
Date: 2008-08-29 10:59:25 -0700 (Fri, 29 Aug 2008)
Log Message:
Fix FB-13900: Expression Evaluator: 'is' and 'as' expressions return 'Target player does not support function calls'
Ticket Links:
http://bugs.adobe.com/jira/browse/FB-13900
Modified Paths:
flex/sdk/trunk/modules/debugger/src/java/flash/tools/debugger/concrete/BinaryOp.java
flex/sdk/trunk/modules/debugger/src/java/flash/tools/debugger/concrete/PlayerSession.java

Service Desk Enhancement with Forms & Survey - no data evaluation possible

Hello,
I implemented an additional form in the service desk (using the survey functionality)
See details here: http://www.solutionmanagerexpert.com/article_printable.cfm?id=5621
Creation was fine, I am able to see the additional form as extra tab in Service Desk Support Messages (transaction type SLFN).
But evaluting the data does not work.
According to the survey suite, no data is available - but I answered to the survey/provided input to the form.
I saved the values, and looking into the appropriate tables (mentioned here: CRM Survey Evaluation Data Storage) give the impression that answers are there.
But I cannot evaluate them...
Does anybody have experience with this kind of service desk enhancement and knows how to get the data for evaluation?
Regards,
Jan

Hi Shilpi,
Could you please share how did you achieve this..
Regards.,
Franklin.

Quota updation upon accural in no time evalution(TMSTA=0)

Dear Team,
We went go live on one and half year back and using no time evaluation for all employee in info type 7.
At the time of financial year starting we will generate Absence quotas say CL, PL through RPTQTA00,
Entitlement is 12 days,Hence April month it self, record will be created in info type 2006.
In mid of month/year Joining employee, based on prorate base entitlement will be updated in info type 2006.
Now Client/My requirement is:
He does" t want to give total entitlement in april it self. every month 1 leave needs to updated. (12 days entitlement for CL, hence prorate base 1 day in April once we run in Payroll, 2 days (11) in May, 3 days (11+1) in june.. so on and so fourth...
How we can configure this. Please help me on this.
Regards,
MVR

Hi,
Try the following setting.
SPRO -> IMG -> Time Management -> Time Data Recording and Administration -> Managing Time Accounts Using Attendance/Absence Quotas -> Calculating Absence Entitlements -> Rules for Generating Absence Quotas -> Set Base Entitlements
In this select your Quota type and give ENTITLEMENT CONSTANT as 1.
RELATED TO PERIOD as Accrual Period
SPRO -> IMG -> Time Management -> Time Data Recording and Administration -> Managing Time Accounts Using Attendance/Absence Quotas -> Calculating Absence Entitlements -> Rules for Generating Absence Quotas -> Define Generation Rules for Quota Type Selection
In this, double click your Quota Type then Goto Accrual Period Tab and select Month
Now, the Program RPTQTA00 has to be run run every month with suitable Data Selection Period
Thanks and Regards
Kiran

Time Evalution & PDC recalculation

Dear Experts!
I have to face an weird problem. My scenario is as below:
1. I create a new Time Type to calculate the working date of employee in every month. My time wage type will replace an existed wage type in system, because it's configuration is not correct.
2. After checking on Dev, QAS, the value of Earn Leave ( generated monthly) is CORRECT, we move this TR to PRD.
And after moving it to PRD, there are a lot of employee re-run PT60 from Go Live Date. I don't know why.
Could you please guide me the way to know which recalculation date in Time Evaluation, and How SAP decide the date to retro Time Evaluation in PT60? I just guess the field PDC recalculation in IT 3 ( I read F1 of this field), but now I'm mixed about this information.
And you know, because we change the Earned Leave in Time ( I run PT60) eg: Earned Leave for Feb-2010 will be modified, of course the value of Time Wage Type will be changed. The date Earliest MD change in IT3 is NOT Changed. But the Payroll for this guy is retro from Mar-2010.
Can you please help me clear the way to re-run Time Evaluation & Payroll.
Regards!
Woody.

Hi Woody,
Please note the below Points carefully, which may help you to solve your issue:
Note -
Retro Runs are based on Infotype, If you change any Infotype related to Time / Payroll, then the system automatically maintain the "Earliest MD Change" date in IT 0003.
For IT 0003
1) When you change employee data that is relevant to payroll, the system stores the earliest date from which the master data change is valid. This date can be a future date after the last payroll run
2) The system deletes the date in the Earliest master data change field after successful completion of the payroll run.
The earliest recalculation date for time evaluation is also queried when master data and time data that is relevant to retroactive accounting is changed.
For Payroll Controll Record
Earliest retroactive accounting period
1) Retroactive accounting in payroll can begin on the start date of this period at the earliest.
2) If changes relevant for retroactive accounting have been made before this date, the system does not take these into account in either current or future retroactive accounting. However, retroactive accounting is initiated up to this period.
3) If the earliest personal retroactive accounting date (from IT 0003) differs from the earliest retroactive accounting period, then it will be backdated to the later date.
Comments:
1) May be the Time Wage Type Change (related to Payroll) might have triggred the Retro Payroll, and once it retro run happens the "the system delets the date in the Earliest Master Data Change Field", that is why you are unable to find that field with values.
2) Check the "Earliest Retroactive Accounting Period" in Control Record (Tcode PA03), so that you will get some idea. why it has happend.
3) While determining the Retro, the system checks the IT0003, Control Record, it will take the date whichever is backdated date.
Hope this helps.
Regards
Venu

Error in time evaluation

Dear All,
time evaluation is throwing an error msg "No entry in table T001P for key" for only one employee in the time evaluation display log.
Its happening in the initialization part in time evaluation. for example,
If i run the time evaluation for the month of 01.01.2009 to 24.02.2009. error message throwing on the initialization of 01.02.2009.
I have checked all the groupings in table V_001P_all. All are correct.
Where should i do the correction. Pls
Br.
Manjula

Hi Sikindar,
I have checked all grouping in V_T001P_All every think is correct,
And how can i check with grouping with dates??
This employee getting error message only in the initilation part in time evaluation log.
example if i run the time evaluation from 01.01.2009 to 01.03.2009 . time evaluation running only from 01.01.2009 to 31.01.2009 . its not moving to next month.
if i run time evaluation from 01.02.2009 to 01.03.2009 then its running only 01.02.2009 to 28.02.2009 its not moving to next month.
In the initialization in the next month im getting error message (no entry in table T001P for key)
Thnaks.
Manju

Time Evaluation Re Run

Hi There,
i was trying to run Time evaluation for the period 01.04.2011 to 31/12/2011.
from April, that is 01.04.4011 to 30.06.2011 Time evaluation was good, now time evaluation has to run from 01.07.2011 but time evaluation has repeated from 12.06.2011 to 11.07.2011 as Initialization period 07/2011, and the same scenario is repeated for the rest of the year..all periods are initiated on 12th of each month from 6th month that is 12.06.2011.
i was been trying to rectify this issue but was not bale to solve it, could any one please look in to it and let me know how to solve it?
your help is appreciated.
Thanks
Kumar

Hi,
thanks for reply but till now i have not yet customized the schema or any pcr, so it is pretty much standard TM04 schema, could you plz elaborate your answer?
Thanks.
Kumar

Evaluation of contability

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for