HR Supervisor/Employee Structure

I don't see that you've received any responses. If someone has contacted you directly, would you share? I'm dealing with this issue right now - we have students and trainees in a separate company so they are completely separate, but I have not been able to figure out a way to "cross the line" so to speak so that the managers that are responsible for them can see them/maintain them. The only thing I can think is to move them all to one company, but trying to make that happen has been a struggle for various reasons.

We had this same issue. The only way we were able to resolve it was to go to one HR company with each separate EIN as a separate process level.

FYI, we did the same thing as aphillips.

In order to accommodate for our multiple companies, we put their employee number from the other company in one of the User Fields for reporting. But this is only for reporting. It would not allow them to see the employee in EMSS.

With S3 HR companies do not talk. In many years of consulting I have only recommended multiple HR Companies once. Two completely different lines of business. Lawson HR companies easily accommodate multiple EIN's and corporate relationships. With this you only have to maintain one HR company. Otherwise you probably would need to add a custom table or use crystal to connect

We did this at my previous company since we had supervisors that spanned 3-4 companies. We built a js module, "companySelect", that we called at the top of each MSS module. This module would read EMPLOYEE each time the supervisor went in, with their employee number. If records returned was 1, they were in 1 company and those were the direct reports we showed them; if records returned was > 1 company, they were in multiple companies and they were presented with a "pick the company" window. once they selected a company,(Ex Company 1234) then they would see their direct reports for Company 1234. If a supervisor wanted to act on direct reports in Company 4321, they would just log out/in and select Company 4321. This approach also required each employee's company number in LS to be a place holder...we used Company 9999 for everybody, even though we had 100+ companies under the same corporate umbrella...so each employee had 1 LS record with Company 9999, Employee # was their HR11 employee number. If you don't have the javascript & html resources...don't try this approach. There were 3-4 of us that built/maintained this, so it wasn't too bad.

There are lots of drawbacks to separate companies, especially if it forces you to have two or more employee numbers for the same person.  Lawson treats them as separate people and you have to do a lot of work-around solutions to manage items like FICA and 401-K limits.

 

My best advice is always stick with one HR company and use multiple process levels, if needed.  Also, never introduce "dual employees" (only one employee number per person).

Brian, can you share why you would never introduce "dual employees"? I presume you mean that a person should not have 2 numbers for different roles. If that is the case, I'm wondering what pitfalls await us if we decide to add multi-records for someone in one company. As mentioned above, we are considering moving our students/trainees and other non-employees to the same company as our employees. Some of our employees actually also have another role as a volunteer or as a student/trainee. If they are on separate process levels, what kind of issues could we run into?

Thanks for all the reply. So looks like the only best way is to use process level?