Header Ads

  • Recent Post

    Issue with Position Entry Date on Hire Date Changes

    An emplid occupies a particular position on a particular effective date. Say for example, emplid 00000002 was hired for position number 99999999 from 12-July-2009. Emplid 00000002's JOB record and Incumbents would reflect the position and emplid assignment correctly. However, some of the user reports may not reflect this. If emplid 00000001 was occupying the position number 99999999 until 11-Jul-2009 then this emplid would get pulled into the reports(running as of current date - latest) instead of retrieving emplid 00000002.

    This is because the reports could make use of PS_POSN_HISTORY record. POSN_HISTORY is the first of three nested views which retrieve position incumbent history. It selects Job records where incumbents have entered positions. Why does PS_POSN_HISTORY record does not reflect the position changes? Why is the previously associated emplid returned today? When data is viewed for current date why none of the emplids are fetched from this view. It is because of the mismatch in POSITION_ENTRY_DT and EFFDT in JOB record for this emplid.

    The SQL for POSN_HISTORY view is:
    SELECT 
    A.Position_Nbr
    ,A.Position_Entry_Dt
    ,A.Emplid
    ,A.EMPL_RCD
    ,A.EFFSEQ
    ,A.EFFDT
    ,A.Sal_Admin_Plan
    ,A.Grade
    ,A.Step
    ,A.CompRate
    ,A.Comp_Frequency
    ,A.Currency_Cd
    ,' '
    ,' '
    ,' '
    ,' '
    FROM
    PS_Job A
    WHERE A.Position_Entry_Dt = A.Effdt
     AND A.Effseq = (SELECT MIN(B.Effseq)
                                  FROM PS_Job B
                                  WHERE B.Emplid = A.Emplid
                                  AND B.EMPL_RCD = A.EMPL_RCD
                                  AND B.Effdt = A.Effdt
                                  AND B.Position_Nbr = A.Position_Nbr)

    If you look for this emplid - 00000002 in JOB record the POSITION_ENTRY_DT and EFFDT would be different. In general, POSITION_ENTRY_DT, DEPT_ENTRY_DT and EFFDT would be the same for an emplid whenever a POSITION_NBR or DEPTID is changed in JOB record. However when a person is hired with an EFFDT and later if the EFFDT is changed for the HIRE row then POSITION_ENTRY_DT and DEPT_ENTRY_DT date does not get updated. However, if the effective date change is made on any other action other than HIRE with DEPTID or POSITION_NBR change these dates always get refreshed. This is a PeopleSoft known bug and below are the details from My Oracle Support.

    Applies to:
    PeopleSoft Enterprise HRMS Human Resources - Version: 8.9 - Release: 8.9
    Information in this document applies to any platform.
    This document was previously published as Customer Connection Solution 201029157

    Symptoms
    Please see below.

    Cause
    Not Applicable

    Solution
    SOLUTION #201029157: Position and Department Entry Dates do not get refreshed.

    SPECIFIC TO:
    Enterprise, HRMS 8.9 and 9.0

    ISSUE:
    In release 8.9 when Effective Date of Hire is changed and the record is saved Position Entry Date and Department Entry Date do not get refreshed to the new date. This has not been the case in 8.8SP1 and prior, here when the effective date of the first row is changed, whether to a prior date or to a future date the Position Entry Date and Department Entry date are refreshed to the new date as expected.

    Users are basing few reports on these dates and expect the Position Entry Date and Department Entry Date to be refreshed when there is a change in the effective date.

    SOLUTION:
    ICE Report 1587420000 is opened to raise this issue with development team and the fix has been delivered in:
       1) For release HRMS 8.9 the fix is delivered in Bundle #11
       2) For release HRMS 9.0 the fix is delivered in Bundle #1

    WORKAROUND:
    N/A

    KEYWORDS:
    Position and Department Entry Dates, Effective Date

    3 comments:

    1. Many thanks. It was very useful and your explanation is awesome and helped me in solve similar issue in my organization.

      ReplyDelete
    2. I discovered your blog .. .good job for that !
      I wondered if there were any workaround about this issue, I mean if I don't want to apply this bundle.. because I guess there's many impacts .. !

      ReplyDelete
      Replies
      1. Hi @jeremie, why dont you try applying the bundle in a demo environment and extract the solution for this issue.

        Delete

    Please refrain for marketing messages and unnecessary back links.

    Post Top Ad

    Post Bottom Ad