employee numbers

Lyn_10072495
Member Posts: 54 Reckoner

I have given all my employees a number in the Reckon Employee file sector. When I process the STP and lodge it in the Reckon portal, the employee numbers are all mixed up. It appears that when I go into the Process STP sector of Reckon, the employees appear in random order (not numerical employee number order) but in this window they retain the number. EG they appear as:
Bob 5
Sue 2
Holly 1
Mark 3
Barry 4
This name order is then carried across to the portal and the employee numbers changed. EG
Bob 1
Sue 2
Holly 3
Mark 4
Barry 5
Im thinking I need to change the view order in the Process STP section perhaps? If so, how?
Bob 5
Sue 2
Holly 1
Mark 3
Barry 4
This name order is then carried across to the portal and the employee numbers changed. EG
Bob 1
Sue 2
Holly 3
Mark 4
Barry 5
Im thinking I need to change the view order in the Process STP section perhaps? If so, how?
0
Comments
-
Hi Lyn,
Thank you for your post.
First thing to clarify, the number you see in STP GovConnect is NOT the employee number. It's just a sequence number of employees in the list of submission. The employee number is hidden from the screen.
The employee name order is an issue which we have resolved in the upcoming R2 release (due later in June 2019) where you can define the list order from Edit > Preferences > Payroll and Employees > Company Preference > Display employee list by.
Please let us know if you still have any questions.
Thanks
Ifti0 -
Might be worth checking their my gov sign on - I've got an issue now where we uploaded STP for three months with Employee ID's being set, then we updated the employee ID's to an alpha code.... then when doing the next STP uploads all of a sudden now it shows TWO 'payment summaries' under all employee's my gov account, which is basically two 'group certificates' and they BOTH include the 3 months..... So it would appear everyone has earned more money but they infact have not... trying to work out how to fix it now. Thought I'd let you know incase...!
0
This discussion has been closed.