@lubos can we have Status similar to Invoices, for Payslip Tab. Including Report how much amount owed to Employee and date of Payment made to employee?
I’m thinking along the line where expense claim owed to employee to be include in the report. which made Treasury works easier.
I’m in the situation some employees are project based, Payment for Salary and Wages will be on hold until the project is initiate however amount owe to keep track for payment in installment once project initiated by stage.
Your suggestion runs counter to the entire concept of payslips. Payslips only create obligations in the employee’s subaccount under Employee clearing account. When you pay an employee, you are debiting the Employee clearing account, not paying an individual payslip. So there is no payslip status to display.
The same is true when you create expense claims. These create liabilities. If the expense claims payer is an employee, that liability goes into Employee clearing account also. And once again, you are not paying a specific expense claim; you are debiting the Employee clearing account.
how is it that different compare to customers and suppliers? In addition, we’re not just create obligations to employee only. Don’t forget Inland Revenue Board, and Employment Provident Fund. I need to keep tabs how much do I pay them in parallel with employee. Since Payslip holding the Information of recorded calculation of how much we owed to pay for the period to the employee as well as the statutory body, why not add the feature to pay by individual payslip?
There is an additional layer in the database, comprising invoices, for Accounts payable and Accounts receivable. There is no such layer for Employee clearing account.
Yes, and that is handled by proper definition of payslip items for deductions and contributions.
What are you trying to illustrate with your three screen shots?
I understood what you mean of the underlying structure that there is no database handling by payslip, it lump into employee clearing account as @tut have explained.
This is request from me. if the underlying structure does not able to implement the feature that I need in near future. then is it possible to redesign the foundation for expense claim and payslip as to be consistent with the rest of the tabs (purchase and sale invoice tab)?
The concept I’m looking at is still the same, obligations to pay by line item. instead lump sum. A single glance to know which duration of wages or salary yet to be paid. Plan to pay by specific date in installment.
Unless @tut you have a better approach to keep tabs with payroll that I didn’t know.
The suggestion doesn’t run counter to the concept of payslips, its just that Manager is inconsistent with handling payslips compared to invoices.
Just as:
Sales Invoices only create obligations in the Customers subaccount under Accounts Receivable.
Purchase Invoices only create obligations in the Suppliers subaccount under Accounts Payable
Sales Invoices, Purchase Invoices, Payslips and Expense Claims are all primary entries.
Purchase Invoices, Payslips and Expense Claims are exactly of the same concept - obligations to pay a third party.
The fact that you can have Purchase Invoices displaying their status but Payslips not even though they can both commence from a button is due to a Manager inconsistency.
You have these parent and primary entry tabs relationships:
Customer + Sales Invoices - with status displayed
Suppliers + Purchase Invoices - with status displayed
Employees + Payslips - with status not displayed.
Therefore, Payslips exist in the exact same layer as Sales / Purchase Invoices.
However, Payslips aren’t currently displaying their status because Manager prevents individual payslips from being selected during the transaction process whereas with individual Sales / Purchases Invoices there isn’t this restriction.
Whilst one can explain the current approach with some form of self justification, it doesn’t distinguish the fact that Manager has this conflict in delivering a consistency of process.
It is understood the Expense Claims are different as they don’t have a parent tab.
button is due to a Manager inconsistency.