Login
Register
Search
Home
Forums
Jobs
LawsonGuru
LawsonGuru Letter
LawsonGuru Blog
Worthwhile Reading
Infor Lawson News Feed
Store
Store FAQs
About
Forums
Human Capital Management
Lawson S3 HR/Payroll/Benefits
Separate company or process levels in exisiting company?
Home
Forums
Jobs
LawsonGuru
LawsonGuru Letter
LawsonGuru Blog
Worthwhile Reading
Infor Lawson News Feed
Store
Store FAQs
About
Who's On?
Membership:
Latest:
Saef
Past 24 Hours:
0
Prev. 24 Hours:
0
Overall:
5226
People Online:
Visitors:
403
Members:
0
Total:
403
Online Now:
New Topics
S3 Systems Administration
ADFS certificate - new cert
12/3/2024 9:38 PM
The certificates on the windows boxes expired and
Lawson S3 HR/Payroll/Benefits
Post Tax Benefit Plan Table
11/14/2024 9:16 PM
Hi, totally new to Laswon. I have a repor
Lawson S3 Procurement
ED501 Error: Map 850 not supported by /law/c15vda/lawson/test10/edi/bin/laws_out_91
11/12/2024 3:47 PM
Tried runnning ED501 and getting the atathced erro
Lawson S3 HR/Payroll/Benefits
Error
11/6/2024 9:54 PM
When I try to enroll a retiree in 72.1 health plan
Infor ERP (Syteline)
Syteline: New Data Maintenance Wizard (Error) Need help
11/1/2024 4:24 PM
Hi, I need help with an error on syteline while us
Dealing with Lawson / Infor
Implementing Lawson v10 with Cerner Surginet, Case Cart Picking, and Quick Adds for the OR
10/29/2024 4:20 PM
Hi Everyone, I am wondering if there is any org
Lawson S3 HR/Payroll/Benefits
Canada Tax Calculation (Federal and Provincial) Issue
10/23/2024 5:00 AM
Initially, we had problem with CPP2 calculation is
Lawson S3 HR/Payroll/Benefits
CA Section 125 401k Plan
10/22/2024 10:13 PM
Does anyone have any recommendations on how to fac
S3 Systems Administration
Running AC120 deleted records from ACMASTER table
10/22/2024 3:40 PM
We recently ran the AC120 as normal and somehow it
Lawson S3 Procurement
RQ13 Approval Info
10/17/2024 2:12 PM
When a Requisition is approved on RQ13, what table
Top Forum Posters
Name
Points
Greg Moeller
4184
David Williams
3349
JonA
3291
Kat V
2984
Woozy
1973
Jimmy Chiu
1883
Kwane McNeal
1437
Ragu Raghavan
1372
Roger French
1315
mark.cook
1244
Forums
Filtered Topics
Unanswered
Unresolved
Announcements
Active Topics
Most Liked
Most Replies
Search Forums
Search
Advanced Search
Topics
Posts
Prev
Next
Forums
Human Capital Management
Lawson S3 HR/Payroll/Benefits
Separate company or process levels in exisiting company?
Please
login
to post a reply.
4 Replies
0
Subscribed to this topic
68 Subscribed to this forum
Sort:
Oldest First
Most Recent First
Author
Messages
abassett
New Member
Posts: 4
8/13/2010 4:47 PM
We are adding 4 small "companies" to our exisiting Lawson population. We were planning to set up 1 new company (because that has been the practice) with 4 process levels, but I wonder if that makes sense. All 4 of these new groups are actually part of the existing Company 1 organization and each has a separate tax id.
Any thoughts on pros/cons of creating/not creating a new company for this?
Thanks for any input!
John Henley
Posts: 3353
8/13/2010 6:22 PM
moving to HR forum...
stephanie
Veteran Member
Posts: 330
8/16/2010 8:58 AM
The answer depends on your own business practices - do you need to easily report all companies together? Although you can merge company data using Crystal, HR Writer, Add-Ins, etc., standard Lawson reports generally don't allow that. A bigger consideration - do your employees move between companies (term in one, get hired in the other), or work in both? If so, you'll be better served setting up process levels instead of companies. Except for a few codes, if you use multiple companies you'll need to set up positions, job codes, benefits, personnel actions, etc. etc. separately, which can be a maintenance nightmare. Since you can set up different tax IDs by PL, I've always been a fan of keeping one company instead of multiple ones.
abassett
New Member
Posts: 4
8/16/2010 12:47 PM
Thanks so much Stephanie for your input - that is pretty much what I was thinking too.
John-thanks for getting my message to the right place.
MARCO3535
Advanced Member
Posts: 25
8/27/2010 6:13 PM
Stephanie,
My thinking exactly. My previous employer had a 2 company setup- instead of 1 company and 2 P/L .
It was a reporting nightmare, as well as the inconsistencies in the dept code, pay codes, job codes, not to mention the headaches - when a current ee 'transfers' between companies - 'terming' in 1 company and 'hiring' into the other company.
Eventually, we went to a 1 company setup, some prep work, lots of testing, but definitely worth it.
Later
Marco3535
Please
login
to post a reply.