Sage 100

Upgrading client to new Sage 100 2.18.1 payroll and testing a VI import into the payroll data entry tables. The source file has (which they have been using successfully for years with other Sage 100 versions) multiple records per employee that are scattered throughout the file. For example, an employee might have a record for regular hours, another record with OT hours, another record for holiday hours and these records are not in sequential order by employee number but rather scattered throughout the file. When I import these hours all of the employees that have automatic deductions setup on them are having all of the automatic deductions added after each earnings code. Using the example above, after the regular earnings code line I see all of the automatic deductions. Then the OT hours earnings code line, after that all of the automatic deductions are AGAIN populated. Then the holiday earnings code line and AGAIN all of the automatic deductions are inserted on the check. In this case the automatic deductions are tripled on this employee. If I re-sort the file so that its in sequential order by employee number this import actually works fine and the automatic deductions are not tripled. We are considering this as an option but would like to fix this if its indeed an issue. I talked to Sage and they just referred me to the KB article about how to setup VI jobs for the new payroll version. Also, they sent me a document about how to import these hours without having deductions applied to the checks. This worked but then each employee does not have any of their automatic deductions on their checks. Curious if anyone has ran into this?

These may help. We did cover the import issues in a couple different threads too. You may want to search for postings by @JaneCavanaugh

Sage made us add Perform Logic to our Payroll Data Entry Imports: Importing into Payroll Data Entry on Sage 100 2018 and higher requires importing into the 2 separate tables 1. Create import into the table PR_PayrollCycle** oThe following fields must be included: ?BatchNo ?This field is only needed if Batch Entry is enabled ?PayCycle ?PayPeriodStartingDate ?CheckDate oAdditional fields may be used for this import, but these fields needed at a minimum 2.Create import into the table PR_PayrollHeader oThe following fields must be included: ?H.BatchNo ?This field is only needed if Batch Entry is enabled ?H.EmployeeKey ?Formatted DD-XXXXXXX where DD=Dept No and XXXXXXX=Employee No ?Refer to KB86744 - How to import into the EmployeeKey for more details ?H.CheckEntryNo ?This field can be assigned to 1 ?L.LineType ?This field can be assigned to E if only Earnings Codes are being imported ?L.EarningsCode ?L.Hours oAdditional fields may be used for this import, but these fields needed at a minimum oAuto Deductions ?Verify the following Perform Logic Command exists if Auto Deductions are desired: ?tmp = coBusiness'PreWrite(1) ?Verify the following Perform Logic Command exists if Auto Deductions are not desired: ?tmp = coBusiness'PreWrite(0) ?Refer to KB86745 for more details

I did run into this and we choose to sort the file by employee before importing.

Also, you don't actually have to have 2 imports if you go manually setup the first screen in Payroll Data Entry.

I had a customer this was doing it too also. They had created their own import and had temp fields. They failed to assign the temp fields to either line record or key assign and have them reset on each record. Once I fixed those it did not bring in deductions each time an earnings code was created.

Thanks for all of your feedback, I have been playing around this with this and haven't been able to get it. There are no temp fields on this import but there is a calculated field. I am continuing to look into this. Thanks!

Anyone have any luck with this? @PrestonWeber? I verified the PL is in place, checked the temp fields for line identification, set to reset on each record and the client still gets deductions on each earnings code. Is the only tried and true resolution to sort the file by employee?