cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 

HR Data Destruction Issue for Retiree Employee (status 2)

rahul_gupta08
Explorer
0 Kudos
338

Hello Experts,

We have encountered with an error while destructing the retiree employees (employment status: 2). Rules and policies are configured as enclosed and status is live. It works for withdrawn employee (employment status: 0) with same configurations.

Has anyone come across with such issues? rules-created.png

rahul_gupta08
Explorer
0 Kudos

dharshan.a Do you have any idea why are we getting this issue?

Accepted Solutions (0)

Answers (5)

Answers (5)

former_member289103
Active Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Rahul,

I am not a HR expert, hence cannot say whether its a functionality gap or customer specific. If its a gap ( Your thought: SAP should have provided that entry), then you can raise a message to the right component requesting for the enhancement.

On the other hand, If you already have a date field in mind ,then there is no need for BADI implementation. You can enhance in IRM_CUST to handle such cases where we might need adding new date fields than the delivered, either by enhancing the standard content( conditions apply 🙂 ) or by building custom content. Any customization in IRM_CUST done the right way , if gives unexpected result, SAP should support it. So you need thorough understanding of IRM Customization. Please reach out to SAP Consulting if you need guidance in this matter.

Thanks and Regards,

Dharshan A

rahul_gupta08
Explorer

Hi Dharshan,

This seems a gap from SAP.

As I believe not all the customers are using the SAP for payroll and if the employee is retired, its personal data is not required in SAP. All payroll related data is already maintained in third party system and benefits will be given to employee accordingly.

I have raised the message to SAP.

BR,

Rahul

rahul_gupta08
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Dharshan,

SAP has provided only below Time References values :

1. Leaving Date of Employee

2. End of Record

3. Start of Record

4. End Of Year/Month/Quater

and to delete the employment status '2' (Retiree) we need time reference value as 'Retiree Date of Employee' also then only it will work. As we have to check when employee retired from company and accordingly data should be deleted based on rules. As you suggested I guess we have to implement the Indirect Start time reference BADI by passing any date as dummy and in the BADI you can output "current date" to the ILM framework to derive the Retention time.


Any idea how long does this BADI development takes and in case of any error occurred in program SAP will support?

BR,

Rahul

rahul_gupta08
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi,

Update to this issue:

  • 'From the retention rule It is referring to the leaving date. But the employee who is giving the error message does not have any leaving date as he is in status '2' which means he is a retiree.
  • If the employee has left the company he can only have employment status '0'. In all other employment status he is still in the company and thus can't have any leaving date.
  • 'If the employee has left the company he can only have employment status '0'.
  • The meaning of the different employment status is not country specific but international and has the same meaning for every country in SAP. Thus: 2: Employee with company, but as retiree
  • When referring to the documentation of the employment status , find the following information:

0: Employee not with company

1: Employee with company, but inactive

2: Employee with company, but as retiree

3: Employee active in company



So if anyone wants to delete the retiree employee can't do since SAP doesn't have option to do so.

BR,

Rahul

former_member289103
Active Participant

Hi Rahul,

This is a interesting scenario. If the leaving date is not filled, then you need to have a date in mind from which you can calculate the +X years. This needs to come from the rule definition outside the system first.

If the retention date is , for example, Creation date + X Years, then you can still go ahead and create the rule with creation date for status 2 records.

If you have a specific date ( say "current date" + X years ) in mind, then implement the Indirect Start time reference BADI by passing any date as dummy and in the BADI you can output "current date" to the ILM framework to derive the Retention time.

If the start date itself is unknown " ??? + X years ", then i would say the rule needs to derived for such cases first.

Baseline, if you have a rule defined properly for Status 2 records, then we can use ILM rules to model accordingly.

Are you implying that " Leaving date" is the only plausible option even for Retired employees ?

Thanks and Regards,

Dharshan A

former_member289103
Active Participant
0 Kudos

Hi Rahul,

I cannot think of a reason for such behavior unless there is another rule over-ruling the one in screenshot . Are these the only rules in the system? Make sure that no rule exists even in other audit areas for same criteria.

Thanks and Regards,

Dharshan A

rahul_gupta08
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Dharshan,

This is only rule exist in system. I haven't assigned the same object to any audit area so no chance of another rule.

Also I am not facing this issue with one object. None of the HR objects are deleting the employment status '2'.

BR,

Rahul

JGery
Employee
Employee
0 Kudos

Hi Rahul!

Provide more info about the error you face when trying to destruct retiree employees (employment status: 2).

Do you receive concrete error message/dump during this destruction process?

Regards

Gergely

rahul_gupta08
Explorer
0 Kudos

Hi Gergely,

Error message is: 'Retention rule does not permit the data to be destroyed'. But the same rule is working fine for employment status '0'.

Br,

Rahul