BUS1065.HIRED and start condition when position has end date diff from 31.12.9999

Thu Mar 20 05:28:01 EST 2003

Abby,

Not sure if you are already doing this, but debug and check which type =
of operation is actually called. As mentioned in my previous email on =
IT0001's creation of an employee action does not always results in a =
creation trigger; where other actions actually do trigger a creation =
where you are not expecting it. This is due to how the SAP functionality =
deals with overwrites, deletes and delimites of individual IT0001 =
records in the background. In production situations this is normally not =
so much of an issue (no current or future actions as they are normally =
done pro-actively) but it can be during testing (lots of records which =
require delimiting, delition or are overwritten when you do not expect =
it). This may require you to build in a bit of checking in the IT0001 =
triggering FM in T779X though.

As an example, if a user delimits an infotype it is actually a delete =
(of the previous action) and a create (with the same info as the =
previous one but a different end date) as far as SAP and T779X are =
concerned.

Hth,

Jeroen

-----Original Message-----
From: Dywan, Abby [mailto:adywan at clarkstonconsulting.com]
Sent: 19 March 2003 23:10
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: BUS1065.HIRED and start condition when position has end
date diff from 31.12.9999

Does anyone have any suggestions as to what could be wrong when you're =
hiring the position, hitting the HR_EVENT_RULES_PA0001 function module & =
it looks like you're finding the event correctly - but the event is NOT =
being raised?  I'm getting the events raised for other org objects when =
I go through T779X - but not when I'm trying to do it for personnel =
actions!  I'm really confused and help would be appreciated...

Thanks!
Abby :)

Abby Dywan

Clarkston Consulting
adywan at clarkstonconsulting.com
cell:  (404) 808-3974

-----Original Message-----
From: Cristiana D'Agosto [mailto:cristiana.dagosto at au1.ibm.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 19, 2003 1:26 PM
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: Re: BUS1065.HIRED and start condition when position has end
date diff from 31.12.9999

Hi Jeroen,

thanks for the info, I might have to go for FM although I am not so sure
if it will work either. As suggested by Kjetil I switched on the =
workflow trace and checking what I can do about it.

Regards

Cristiana

"Van der Burg, Jeroen JA SITI-ITPSEE" <jeroen.vanderburg at shell.com>
Sent by: SAP Workflow <Owner-SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU>
19/03/2003 07:04 PM
Please respond to "SAP Workflow Users' Group"

        To:     SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
        cc:
        Subject:        Re: BUS1065.HIRED and start condition when =
position has end date diff from
31.12.9999

Hi Cristiana,

Funny how similar questions seem to pop up on the list at the same time
from completly different people!

Not sure if this is any help, but I tend to prefer to build conditions =
on
any HR workflows directly in function modules linked to T779X. That does
allow you complete flexibility on the start conditions as, within HR, =
they
do tend to become a little bit complex over time.

We trigger multiple different workflows for new hires, all depending on
the situation etc. A good example is that we start a book-a-training
workflow when a new hire is placed on a position which allows the new =
user
extended access to the system and he/she user thus has to go on a course
to learn about it. These kind of start conditions, as far as I know, can
only be build in FM's; which also does allow me to group everything
started from a particular HR infotype together for easy maintenance.

Regards,

Jeroen

-----Original Message-----
From: Cristiana D'Agosto [mailto:cristiana.dagosto at au1.ibm.com]
Sent: 19 March 2003 05:03
To: SAP-WUG at MITVMA.MIT.EDU
Subject: BUS1065.HIRED and start condition when position has end date
diff from 31.12.9999

Hello all,

we are in version 4.6c.

We developed a workflow that should be triggered when an employee is =
hired
and employee group is different from '8'. This has been implemented via
Start Conditions and it is working fine.

Some of the positions created from my client have a determined end date,
these are their temporary positions and they do need to create the
position defining an end date i.e. end date diff from 31.12.9999. When =
an
employee is hired in a position that has an end date, when gets to
Infotype 0001 the system displays an error message saying that 'Object
<position number> exists from <begin date> to <end date> only'. The user
then clicks the button 'Assignment' located beside the field Percentage =
in
Infotype 0001 and sets the End Date to be whatever is the last valid day
for the position; then clicks the Continue button. The system then =
allows
the user to save the record.

The system creates 2 Infotypes 0001 via INS and the workflow is =
triggered
twice (and that's where my problem starts!).

I changed the Start Condition to check for employee group being =
different
from '8' and Position being different from '99999999' (that's how the
system saves the second 0001 record). To my surprise the worflow did NOT
start for any of the 2 BUS1065.HIRED events published (Status: Check FM
ends with exception). I checked the Event Log and both entries are =
exactly
the same (date , time, UTC, etc). It seems that the Start Condition is
unable to differentiate the 2 entries.

If I hire someone in a position that is valid till 31.12.9999 then the
workflow is triggered without a problem (only one event is published); =
if
I hire someone expicitly in position 99999999 the workflow is not
triggered (as expected; only one event is published). So, the Start
Condition is working fine when one BUS1065.HIRED is published, but =
doesn't
work fine when the position has an end date and 2 BUS1065.HIRED events =
are
published.

I wonder if in this case I will have to write a FM to check the Employee
Group and position? I would really like to avoid triggering the =
workflows
and checking if position is 99999999 within the Workflow and then 'kill'
the Workflow...

Any ideas?

Thanks in advance for your help

Regards

Cristiana