Delimiting IT2001 with begda before earliest retroacitve date

[Former Member]

Hi

Our customers often have very long leaves (several years). This sometimes results in startdate being before earliest retroactive acounting date. But the enddate can be today or even in the future. If they need to change the enddate, this is not possible. Even with the delimit function we are stopped because of the admin record.

This behaviour differs from eg IT0057. Here we can delimit records with startdate < earliest retro; as long as enddate > earliest retro.

Why is this not possible for IT2001? Is it as designed or is it a bug/missing functionality?

/Kirsten

[agnes_peiffer]

SAP released a note 3197866 - Partial Delete for Time Management Infotypes, explaining that delimiting is not an options, but partial deleting is what should be used. This is still not working for our company when you are trying to end the absence after the last working day. The system tells you that the record is being deleted on a non-working day. When you adjust the date, it puts you back in the same situation of retro'ing back to the beginning of the record you are trying to delimit.

[Former Member]

Hi Kirsten,

did you find any solution for your problem? I have been solving this for 8 months and try to find any contact in SAP. But untill now, they only reply me that this is not bug, its local matter, in local SAP they wrote me to contact Attendances/Absences, there they wrote me this is a standard and to find solution somewhere on SAP portals. I also use PA0003-earliest retroac.date to block data to the past period. It protects the changing of data before earliest retroact.date. But delimition function is not changing and if delimit date is later than earliest retroact.date, it should work (it works for IT0014, IT0057, IT2003 etc., only it doesnt work with IT2001 a 2002). Could you please let me know, how did you solve it? Thank you very much, Alena Oriescikova (SAP consultant, Slovakia). alena.oriescikova@globesy.sk

[Former Member]

We have in fact not solved it.  We have to get the cases in to us on 3rd line support and debug past the control. This is of course not at all acceptable, and if you find an answer to this problem, I would appreciate you sharing it.

Regards

Kirsten