I’m a bit confused as to what would have caused the the Burden Rates for lines 2, 3, and 4 to be half of the Labor Rate.
We have Split Burden on our Resource Group. The user was not clocked in to another job during the same time. There was another user clocked into the same Resource, but not job, during Line 4, but that was all I could find.
Any ideas?
Burden is effectively the Resource time/cost - so (even if a different person and/or job-op), two people clocked into the resource for some activity simultaneously SHOULD split resulting burden hours (and cost) if you have split burden enabled for that resource.
Like labor time/cost splitting, it probably is limited to specific TYPES of activity (like Production only is for labor time splitting) & that’s easy enough to verify by setting up some experiments on your end.
Rob Brown
Here is a query showing who was clocked into this specific resource during this day 2/17/2017.I guess I’m confused because as you can see there are a couple of production activities taking place across different jobs using the same resource, but only the time entry that occurred first is being split, not both. Should it not split both?
I just don’t understand enough about burden and labor to understand what’s being done.
What strikes me is that it appears the splitting is going both ways (labor hours double burden hrs on job 602571 and burden hours half the labor hours on production entries for job 599738). It’s the inconsistency (and the fact that you have a single resource seemingly being used on multiple jobs simultaneously rather than having your OPs schedule through a resource group that is defined as several Swiss Screw machine finite resources).
Are all these job operations Time and Quantity labor reporting type (and are they truly being start activity/end activity reported in MES - or is someone doing manual entries using Time & Expense Entry)?
I’d also look at the specific job OP details and see if inadvertently the OP set up and production crew size is greater than 1. (The halving of the actual elapsed time on job 599738 to capture half the burden/machine time on several labor reporting records makes me suspect set up & production crew size may be 2 not 1).
I’d start with validating the job details for any/all these things (as they can be manually adjusted on the fly to produce different results - or if the jobs were created from approved part-rev methods at different times and resulted in different cost impacting details being generated.)
Then - validate these were all done with DataCollection/MES (and no distortions are occurring because they weren’t - or weren’t Start/End activity reported).
My observation is that Labor hrs only split when a shop employee is clocked into multiple Production activities (Start/End reporting activity) using MES. Set up doesn’t split labor (nor does indirect).
That may not be true with machine hours (burden hours) - or something else in your company config/cost methodology (or in how job details are created: from predefined Methods that call predefined Operations? - or are job details created manually for each job-OP?) may be coming into play.
Odd costing behavior is hard to track down (because so many things can cause it) - but if you take a systemic approach to looking for root cause of seemingly odd behavior/results, you’ll figure it out.
Rob Brown
