FastTrack360 Version 12 Online Help
Defect Fixes V12.21
The following defects have been fixed in this release:
Item No. | Module | Description | Resolution |
---|---|---|---|
TR-4276 | Recruitment Manager | Where a job was created for a Client with a Monthly Timesheet Frequency, the Cycle Start Date populated on the job was incorrect as it was calculated based on a fortnightly cycle. | This issue has been fixed. Where the Frequency is ‘Monthly’, on creation of a Job, the system will insert a Cycle Start Date based on the Client Cycle Start Date ‘Day’ value and the Month and Year of the Job Order. This process will also run where a Job Template with a Frequency of ‘Monthly’ is applied, where the ‘Day’ value is defaulted to what is in the Job Template. Please be aware when using ‘Monthly’ frequency, the ‘Cycle Start Date’ day value needs to be based on your monthly timesheet cycle, for example the 1st of the month or the 15 are the usual values. Note: Tickets have been raised to update this strategy where Copying a Job and also to any related API actions. These will be completed in a future release. |
CY-2450 | Recruitment Manager | When a job that didn’t have any Last Updated details (ie job hasn’t been edited) was first submitted to timesheet, an oops error occured due to an audit entry not being able to be saved. It appeared as if the job had not been submitted to timesheet, however the action had been performed and the timesheets had been created. When Submit to Timesheet was clicked again, the system reloaded the page, showing that the job had been submitted however the system did not re-create the timesheets. | This item has been resolved. Now when submitting to timesheet, if the job has not been edited no error is displayed and the timesheets generate as expected. The page is refreshed and the ‘Unto Submit to Timesheet’ action displays at the header. |
TR-4232 | Time & Attendance | If a job was linked to a template with standard rates, if the job rates were edited and template pay codes were deleted, the deleted pay codes were still displayed on the timesheet. | This problem has been fixed. Now where a job is linked to a template with standard rates, if the job rates are edited and template pay codes are deleted, the deleted pay codes no longer display on the related timesheets. |
TR-3900 | Rates & Rules | In Rates & Rules > Maintenance > Oncost, when Editing an Oncost and viewing an existing rate, the Rate (%) field is mandatory - however it was possible to save changes when this field is empty, even when the rate had been used, if the empty field is not visible at the time Save is clicked. | This issue has been fixed. Now in Rates & Rules > Maintenance > Oncost, when Editing an Oncost and viewing an existing rate, if the Rate (%) field is empty and not visible at the time of Save, changes are not saved and validation message(s) display. |
TR-4151 | Payroll | The field that captures the start date of a contribution rate rule on the Payroll AU > Maintenance > Superannuation > Contribution Rate Rules > Super Rate Entry screen was not display-only for the last validity period on the rate rule. This was allowing the start date of a new rule to be changed such that it overlapped the previous validity period. | This item has been resolved. Now the start date of a contribution rate rule on the Payroll AU > Maintenance > Superannuation > Contribution Rate Rules > Super Rate Entry screen is showing as display-only where the start date of the validity period cannot be changed to a date that overlaps a previous validity period or to a date that would cause a gap between validity periods. |
TR-4044 | Payroll | Where an STP Pay Batch submission had a status of Rejected or Technical Error, when resubmitted the Total amounts shown on the STP Submission Audit screen were incorrect as they were being multiplied by the number of times that the STP batch had been submitted. | This item has been fixed. Now where an STP Pay Batch submission with a status of Rejected or Technical Error is resubmitted, on the STP Submission Audit screen the Total Gross & Total Withholding amounts in the header and grid display correctly. |
TR-3995 | Payroll | A user, after the STP EOFY batch has been submitted, changed a Payee’s Payee Type ie; from Labour Hire to Individual Non Business or vice versa AND the Tax Status was changed ie from Foreign Resident/Australian Resident to Working Holiday Maker or vice versa (where the validity period with the new Tax Status is in the same FY as the EOFY batch). Then a and a balancing payment adjustment batch was processed is processed as per Amending Information for a Finalised Prior Financial Year, the YTD Tax was incorrectly set to 0. | This issue has been resolved. Now if a user after the STP EOFY batch has been submitted, changes a Payee’s Payee Type ie; from Labour Hire to Individual Non Business or vice versa AND changes the Tax Status where the validity period with the new Tax Status is in the same FY as the EOFY batch - then a balancing payment adjustment batch is run, the YTD Tax displays as unchanged from what was reported in the EOFY STP batch. |
TR-3899 | Payroll | When processing an employment termination payment (ETP) that has a Taxable Amount, the calculated Tax amount could be changed to 0.00. When the termination was reported via STP, the STP submission was rejected with the error “Payee Total ETP PAYGW Amount must be provided”. | This problem has been fixed. Now if an ETP Taxable Amount has been keyed in at the Termination pay batch stage but the ETP Tax Amount is null or zero, where you attempt to save the termination details an error message is displayed as follows: |
TR-3955 | Payroll | If a Pay Code is configured as: Pay Code Type: Allowance; Bonus/Commission Payments: Ticked; Tax Type: Taxable; Include in Gross Earnings in STP Reports: Ticked - amounts were double reported as both Gross and Bonus/Commission in STP reporting. | This problem has been resolved. Now where a Pay Code is set up as Pay Code Type: Allowance; Bonus/Commission Payments: Ticked; Tax Type: Taxable; Include in Gross Earnings in STP Reports: Ticked - amounts will be reported correctly in STP reporting whereby the allowance amount will only be reported under the year-to-date Bonus/Commission amount and not the year-to-date Gross amount. |
TR-3917 | Payroll | If an STP EOFY batch had a Completed with Exceptions status, on resubmitting the system was unnecessarily resubmitting all payees who had been in the original submission. | This item has been fixed. Now where an STP EOFY batch has a Completed with Exceptions status, when you re-submit the batch only those payee’s who have errored are resubmitted. |
TR-3907 | Payroll | The data extract for the STP EOFY Post Submission report was doubling payees who had multiple validity periods on their Payee Records with a different No TFN Reason for each validity period. | This problem has been solved. Payees are no longer doubled-up in the STP EOFY Post Submission report data extract. |
TR-3898 | Payroll | If a payee has been included in pay batches during a financial year but had no earnings, tax or any other reportable amounts for that financial year, the payee was unnecessarily being included in STP submissions to the ATO despite there being no data to report for that payee. | This issue has been resolved. Now payees are now excluded from being reported in STP submissions if there is nothing to report. |
TR-3897 | Payroll | If the EOFY STP batch had a status of Completed with Exceptions, the Pre-submission report could only be run using the Extract Data option, the Open Report option is greyed out. | This problem has been resolved. Now if the EOFY STP batch has a status of Completed with Exceptions, the Open Report option is active so that the Pre-submission Report can be run as expected. |
TR-3878 | Payroll | On submitting an STP EOFY batch, the submission was rejected with the following error: CMN.ATO.PAYEVNTEMP.000179 - “The Period Start Date must be within the same financial year as the Pay/Update Date” This occurred if the STP EOFY batch was submitted on or before June 30 of the reporting financial year and was then resubmitted after June 30 because on resubmission, the pay/update date that was reported in the STP payload was set to the current date and not the end date of the financial year that was being finalised. | This issue has been fixed. If an STP EOFY batch is submitted on or before June 30 and then resubmitted after June 30, the pay/update date in the resubmission is now correctly set to June 30 of the financial year that is being finalised. |
CY-2410 | Payroll | When attempting to view the Payday Filing submission reports and the Payday Reconciliation (NZ) report, an error occurred and no data was returned if the report attempted to retrieve data pertaining to a payee with combined first name and surname that is greater than 50 characters in length. | This issue has been fixed. Now when running reports for Payday Filing reports, no error occurs and data is returned as expected irrespective of the length of the names of the payees who are referenced by the reports. |
TR-4149 | Payroll | Payday Return entries where erroneously created for pay batches that only contained contactors who were exempt from withholding for the period the period of the Return but were not exempt from withholding for a prior period. When a user attempted to submit such a Payday Return to the IRD, the following error was displayed: “No pay day data found for batch.” | This has been resolved. If all payments for a given period and payment date combination were to contractors who were exempt from withholding during that period, no Payday Return entry is created for that period and payment date as there is no information to be reported to the IRD. Alternatively, on submission of the Payday Return, if there is no data to report then the submission status of the Payday Return is set to Completed and the message “No pay day data found for batch.” is displayed in the Action Required column on the Payday Reporting screen. |
TR-3934 | Payroll | If a Contractor Payee record was saved with a zero Withholding Tax rate, it was not possible to edit the Payee record as the following error message was being displayed: “Contractor Tax Details: Withholding Rate is mandatory.” Similarly, it was not possible to edit a PAYE Payee record if it had been saved with a zero special deduction rate for student loan repayments as the following error message was being displayed: “PAYE Tax Details: Either Flat SL or Flat Tax Rate is mandatory for tax code STC.” | This has been fixed. Now a user is able to edit a Contractor Payee record if the record has been saved with a zero Withholding Tax rate. Likewise, it is now possible to edit a PAYE Payee record if it had been saved with a zero special deduction rate for student loan repayments. |
NE-430 | Payroll | UK Tax parameters were loaded twice for the same tax year. | This problem has been resolved. Validations have been put in place to ensure that this issue does not re-occur when updating UK Tax parameters. |
CY-2337 | Payroll | Where two pay batches were run in the same period, if the second pay batch only contained reimbursements and no other payments, this caused NI threshold values to be shown, even though there were no NIable earnings in the batch. | This issue has been fixed. If two pay batches are run in same period, if the second pay batch only contains reimbursements and no other payments, NI threshold values will not display where there are no NIable earnings in the batch. |
CY-2546 | Billing | Closing a Non-Timesheet Based Invoice or Credit Note was not being recorded in the Audit database. As such users were unable to tell when an open Invoice/Credit Note was closed. | This issue has been resolved. Now when closing a Non-Timesheet Based Invoice or Credit Note, this action is recorded in the Audit database. |
TR-4156 | Billing | Where a Bill Code Totals component was added to an Invoice Document Format, the Qty was incorrectly including Bill Codes with a 0 rate. This causes confusion as the Bill Code Totals Qty didn’t match the Qty displayed in the Invoice Items section of the invoice. | This problem has been resolved. Now where a Bill Code Totals component is added to an Invoice Document Format, the Qty will not include Bill Codes with a 0 rate. |
Classification-Public