Proper Disposition of NonCon --> Rework Parts

Yahoo Archive
1
Rob -

We've been talking internally about this "rework" issue. After much
discussion, I'll try simplify the desired process, if I can:

Job 100 OP 40 - Turning
Job 100 OP 50 - Inspection
45 Pass to Job 100 OP 60
5 Fail then DMR to Rework

Now, here's what I think we'd like to do:
Job 100-R OP 52 - Rework 5 parts
Job 100-R OP 54 - Inspection of 5 parts
2 Fail then DMR to scrap
3 Pass and become material for Job 100 OP 60

--> Job 100 OP 60
continues with 45 passed from Job 100 OP 50
continues with 3 passed from Job 100-R OP 54

Is it possible to re-allocate the parts from Job 100-R back into the
middle of the production-stream for Job 100?

Thanks again, and have a great weekend!
--Ari
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik

________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Proper Disposition of NonCon --> Rework Parts



Glad to help Ari. You got lucky: We are still implementing and just
worked out the process a few weeks ago (so it was fresh in my mind).

You will need to add the Reason Code.

One weakness with the process (at least for us) - Many of our vendors
are overseas and, when we occasionally have a quality problem on a PO
receipt, it is often the best solution for all if we rework the parts
back into spec. We then debit the vendor for the cost of the rework.

Trouble is, once the Parts are dispositioned as 'Passed for Re-Work'
using the DMR Disposition app, the program feature available to request
a debit memo (a checkbox labeled Request Debit Memo) from within the DMR
Disposition app becomes disabled.

I guess Epicor (a global company) didn't consider a vendor's
non-compliant receipt might most efficiently (for all) be reworked
on-site and the vendor back-charged. Only DMR failures (from a PO and to
'scrap' or to be 'Returned To Vendor') enable a debit memo to be
requested.

It sounds like your issue is reworking material produced on a Job so, it
likely doesn't impact you.

Once we're Live and deem ourselve's stable, we'll perhaps (in a phase II
or III) attempt a customization to over-ride the debit memo request
limitations. (Hopefully it is behavior driven at a table.field level and
we can over-ride the standard behavior via some appropriate event
notification that triggers changing the culprit field value back to a
state that allows the Debit Memo Request to be made & processed.)

Rob

Ari Footlik <ari@... <mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com> > wrote:
Rob -

Thanks for the quick and detailed response. I'm running this past the
engineer before I go to Quality with it. Should "Passed for Re-Work"
already be an option for them, or will I need to add reason-codes? If
it's already there, I can't believe they haven't seen/figured this out
already...

--Ari
________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 11:35 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Proper Disposition of NonCon --> Rework Parts

Ari - Go with your instinct:

Create a new Job (for the Part & Rev requiring rework) that contains the
custom rework operation details needed. Also add the failed Part itself
as a material detail in the MoM.

Now, DMR Disposition the Failed Inspection Part Qty's as "Passed for
Re-Work" and Issue them directly to the Rework Job you have created.

Schedule/process the Job as you would any other. If your G/L is set up
to capture rework costs, report all labor activity as rework labor.

You can accomplish making it clear that the job is a Rework Job by to
methods (one simple, one less so):

(1) When selecting the "Next" Job number as you creating the rework Job,
simply stick an "R" (or some other character more meaningful to your
company culture) in front of the suggested Job number and then press OK
(and proceed to create the custom details of the Job).

(2) Use one of the available JobHead.ChkBx## ud boolean fields to
represent whether the Job is a rework or not. Customize Job Entry (or
whatever apps you tend to use) to display the Checkbox with a EpiLabel
of "Rework Job". Add code to default the value to False when creating a
new Job. You can then modify your traveller report so it clearly
indicates the Job is a REWORK job (perhaps requiring rework labor
entry).

Doing it this way should give you accurate costing.

Adding rework OPs to the original job will result in a job that either
needs to be manually costed/closed (if you only report the actual qty
reworked on the extra OPs) or overcosted (if report the extra reworks
complete for the entire job qty).

Rob Brown
Versa Products

Ari Footlik <ari@... <mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com>
<mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com> > wrote:
Good morning, all -

Our inspection department came to me this morning asking about the
proper way to handle parts that failed inspection but have been approved
for re-work. In the past, they tell me the have gone back and changed
quantities in the passed/failed fields, and Engineering then added
additional operations in the WO to re-work the newly "passed" parts, but
we all think this isn't correct, as among other things, it doesn't
properly indicate that only certain pieces need re-work and that the
rest of the pieces skip the newly added operation.

I believe the appropriate thing would be to disposition the
approved-for-rework parts as raw-material for a *new* WO, but we don't
know how to do this.

What are people doing for this situation?

Thanks in advance!
--Ari

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
2
Does anyone know if it is possible to have more than 1 Recurring
General Ledger Batch? It looks to me like you only can have 1.

We are on Version 6.10.521

David
3
Not that I know of. I find this to be a real pain in the you know what. I
have also asked to have the ability to import gje's and got the response of
"Why would you want to do that?"


Edward F. Fox, Jr., CPA

Controller

Maxson Automatic Machinery Company

Phone 401-596-0162 a Fax 401-596-1050

www.maxsonautomatic.com <http://www.maxsonautomatic.com/>



_____

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of
shockeydc
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 10:46 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [Vantage] Recurring GL Batches



Does anyone know if it is possible to have more than 1 Recurring
General Ledger Batch? It looks to me like you only can have 1.

We are on Version 6.10.521

David






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
4
Good morning, all -

Our inspection department came to me this morning asking about the
proper way to handle parts that failed inspection but have been approved
for re-work. In the past, they tell me the have gone back and changed
quantities in the passed/failed fields, and Engineering then added
additional operations in the WO to re-work the newly "passed" parts, but
we all think this isn't correct, as among other things, it doesn't
properly indicate that only certain pieces need re-work and that the
rest of the pieces skip the newly added operation.

I believe the appropriate thing would be to disposition the
approved-for-rework parts as raw-material for a *new* WO, but we don't
know how to do this.

What are people doing for this situation?

Thanks in advance!
--Ari


[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
5
Ari - Go with your instinct:

Create a new Job (for the Part & Rev requiring rework) that contains the custom rework operation details needed. Also add the failed Part itself as a material detail in the MoM.

Now, DMR Disposition the Failed Inspection Part Qty's as "Passed for Re-Work" and Issue them directly to the Rework Job you have created.

Schedule/process the Job as you would any other. If your G/L is set up to capture rework costs, report all labor activity as rework labor.

You can accomplish making it clear that the job is a Rework Job by to methods (one simple, one less so):

(1) When selecting the "Next" Job number as you creating the rework Job, simply stick an "R" (or some other character more meaningful to your company culture) in front of the suggested Job number and then press OK (and proceed to create the custom details of the Job).

(2) Use one of the available JobHead.ChkBx## ud boolean fields to represent whether the Job is a rework or not. Customize Job Entry (or whatever apps you tend to use) to display the Checkbox with a EpiLabel of "Rework Job". Add code to default the value to False when creating a new Job. You can then modify your traveller report so it clearly indicates the Job is a REWORK job (perhaps requiring rework labor entry).

Doing it this way should give you accurate costing.

Adding rework OPs to the original job will result in a job that either needs to be manually costed/closed (if you only report the actual qty reworked on the extra OPs) or overcosted (if report the extra reworks complete for the entire job qty).

Rob Brown
Versa Products


Ari Footlik <ari@...> wrote:
Good morning, all -

Our inspection department came to me this morning asking about the
proper way to handle parts that failed inspection but have been approved
for re-work. In the past, they tell me the have gone back and changed
quantities in the passed/failed fields, and Engineering then added
additional operations in the WO to re-work the newly "passed" parts, but
we all think this isn't correct, as among other things, it doesn't
properly indicate that only certain pieces need re-work and that the
rest of the pieces skip the newly added operation.

I believe the appropriate thing would be to disposition the
approved-for-rework parts as raw-material for a *new* WO, but we don't
know how to do this.

What are people doing for this situation?

Thanks in advance!
--Ari

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
6
Rob -

Thanks for the quick and detailed response. I'm running this past the
engineer before I go to Quality with it. Should "Passed for Re-Work"
already be an option for them, or will I need to add reason-codes? If
it's already there, I can't believe they haven't seen/figured this out
already...

--Ari
________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 11:35 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Proper Disposition of NonCon --> Rework Parts



Ari - Go with your instinct:

Create a new Job (for the Part & Rev requiring rework) that contains the
custom rework operation details needed. Also add the failed Part itself
as a material detail in the MoM.

Now, DMR Disposition the Failed Inspection Part Qty's as "Passed for
Re-Work" and Issue them directly to the Rework Job you have created.

Schedule/process the Job as you would any other. If your G/L is set up
to capture rework costs, report all labor activity as rework labor.

You can accomplish making it clear that the job is a Rework Job by to
methods (one simple, one less so):

(1) When selecting the "Next" Job number as you creating the rework Job,
simply stick an "R" (or some other character more meaningful to your
company culture) in front of the suggested Job number and then press OK
(and proceed to create the custom details of the Job).

(2) Use one of the available JobHead.ChkBx## ud boolean fields to
represent whether the Job is a rework or not. Customize Job Entry (or
whatever apps you tend to use) to display the Checkbox with a EpiLabel
of "Rework Job". Add code to default the value to False when creating a
new Job. You can then modify your traveller report so it clearly
indicates the Job is a REWORK job (perhaps requiring rework labor
entry).

Doing it this way should give you accurate costing.

Adding rework OPs to the original job will result in a job that either
needs to be manually costed/closed (if you only report the actual qty
reworked on the extra OPs) or overcosted (if report the extra reworks
complete for the entire job qty).

Rob Brown
Versa Products


Ari Footlik <ari@... <mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com> > wrote:
Good morning, all -

Our inspection department came to me this morning asking about the
proper way to handle parts that failed inspection but have been approved
for re-work. In the past, they tell me the have gone back and changed
quantities in the passed/failed fields, and Engineering then added
additional operations in the WO to re-work the newly "passed" parts, but
we all think this isn't correct, as among other things, it doesn't
properly indicate that only certain pieces need re-work and that the
rest of the pieces skip the newly added operation.

I believe the appropriate thing would be to disposition the
approved-for-rework parts as raw-material for a *new* WO, but we don't
know how to do this.

What are people doing for this situation?

Thanks in advance!
--Ari

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
7
Glad to help Ari. You got lucky: We are still implementing and just worked out the process a few weeks ago (so it was fresh in my mind).

You will need to add the Reason Code.

One weakness with the process (at least for us) - Many of our vendors are overseas and, when we occasionally have a quality problem on a PO receipt, it is often the best solution for all if we rework the parts back into spec. We then debit the vendor for the cost of the rework.

Trouble is, once the Parts are dispositioned as 'Passed for Re-Work' using the DMR Disposition app, the program feature available to request a debit memo (a checkbox labeled Request Debit Memo) from within the DMR Disposition app becomes disabled.

I guess Epicor (a global company) didn't consider a vendor's non-compliant receipt might most efficiently (for all) be reworked on-site and the vendor back-charged. Only DMR failures (from a PO and to 'scrap' or to be 'Returned To Vendor') enable a debit memo to be requested.

It sounds like your issue is reworking material produced on a Job so, it likely doesn't impact you.

Once we're Live and deem ourselve's stable, we'll perhaps (in a phase II or III) attempt a customization to over-ride the debit memo request limitations. (Hopefully it is behavior driven at a table.field level and we can over-ride the standard behavior via some appropriate event notification that triggers changing the culprit field value back to a state that allows the Debit Memo Request to be made & processed.)

Rob

Ari Footlik <ari@...> wrote:
Rob -

Thanks for the quick and detailed response. I'm running this past the
engineer before I go to Quality with it. Should "Passed for Re-Work"
already be an option for them, or will I need to add reason-codes? If
it's already there, I can't believe they haven't seen/figured this out
already...

--Ari
________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 11:35 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Proper Disposition of NonCon --> Rework Parts

Ari - Go with your instinct:

Create a new Job (for the Part & Rev requiring rework) that contains the
custom rework operation details needed. Also add the failed Part itself
as a material detail in the MoM.

Now, DMR Disposition the Failed Inspection Part Qty's as "Passed for
Re-Work" and Issue them directly to the Rework Job you have created.

Schedule/process the Job as you would any other. If your G/L is set up
to capture rework costs, report all labor activity as rework labor.

You can accomplish making it clear that the job is a Rework Job by to
methods (one simple, one less so):

(1) When selecting the "Next" Job number as you creating the rework Job,
simply stick an "R" (or some other character more meaningful to your
company culture) in front of the suggested Job number and then press OK
(and proceed to create the custom details of the Job).

(2) Use one of the available JobHead.ChkBx## ud boolean fields to
represent whether the Job is a rework or not. Customize Job Entry (or
whatever apps you tend to use) to display the Checkbox with a EpiLabel
of "Rework Job". Add code to default the value to False when creating a
new Job. You can then modify your traveller report so it clearly
indicates the Job is a REWORK job (perhaps requiring rework labor
entry).

Doing it this way should give you accurate costing.

Adding rework OPs to the original job will result in a job that either
needs to be manually costed/closed (if you only report the actual qty
reworked on the extra OPs) or overcosted (if report the extra reworks
complete for the entire job qty).

Rob Brown
Versa Products

Ari Footlik <ari@... <mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com> > wrote:
Good morning, all -

Our inspection department came to me this morning asking about the
proper way to handle parts that failed inspection but have been approved
for re-work. In the past, they tell me the have gone back and changed
quantities in the passed/failed fields, and Engineering then added
additional operations in the WO to re-work the newly "passed" parts, but
we all think this isn't correct, as among other things, it doesn't
properly indicate that only certain pieces need re-work and that the
rest of the pieces skip the newly added operation.

I believe the appropriate thing would be to disposition the
approved-for-rework parts as raw-material for a *new* WO, but we don't
know how to do this.

What are people doing for this situation?

Thanks in advance!
--Ari

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
8
Rob -

Thanks again for your sage advice. I didn't ask if this applied to v6,
but we're moving to v8 in the next few weeks, so if it doesn't work now,
I'm sure we'll get it implemented then.

Happy holidays!
--Ari
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ari Footlik
IT Manager - R. A. Zweig


________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com [mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 7:05 PM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com
Subject: RE: [Vantage] Proper Disposition of NonCon --> Rework Parts



Glad to help Ari. You got lucky: We are still implementing and just
worked out the process a few weeks ago (so it was fresh in my mind).

You will need to add the Reason Code.

One weakness with the process (at least for us) - Many of our vendors
are overseas and, when we occasionally have a quality problem on a PO
receipt, it is often the best solution for all if we rework the parts
back into spec. We then debit the vendor for the cost of the rework.

Trouble is, once the Parts are dispositioned as 'Passed for Re-Work'
using the DMR Disposition app, the program feature available to request
a debit memo (a checkbox labeled Request Debit Memo) from within the DMR
Disposition app becomes disabled.

I guess Epicor (a global company) didn't consider a vendor's
non-compliant receipt might most efficiently (for all) be reworked
on-site and the vendor back-charged. Only DMR failures (from a PO and to
'scrap' or to be 'Returned To Vendor') enable a debit memo to be
requested.

It sounds like your issue is reworking material produced on a Job so, it
likely doesn't impact you.

Once we're Live and deem ourselve's stable, we'll perhaps (in a phase II
or III) attempt a customization to over-ride the debit memo request
limitations. (Hopefully it is behavior driven at a table.field level and
we can over-ride the standard behavior via some appropriate event
notification that triggers changing the culprit field value back to a
state that allows the Debit Memo Request to be made & processed.)

Rob

Ari Footlik <ari@... <mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com> > wrote:
Rob -

Thanks for the quick and detailed response. I'm running this past the
engineer before I go to Quality with it. Should "Passed for Re-Work"
already be an option for them, or will I need to add reason-codes? If
it's already there, I can't believe they haven't seen/figured this out
already...

--Ari
________________________________

From: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com> ] On
Behalf
Of Robert Brown
Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2007 11:35 AM
To: vantage@yahoogroups.com <mailto:vantage%40yahoogroups.com>
Subject: Re: [Vantage] Proper Disposition of NonCon --> Rework Parts

Ari - Go with your instinct:

Create a new Job (for the Part & Rev requiring rework) that contains the
custom rework operation details needed. Also add the failed Part itself
as a material detail in the MoM.

Now, DMR Disposition the Failed Inspection Part Qty's as "Passed for
Re-Work" and Issue them directly to the Rework Job you have created.

Schedule/process the Job as you would any other. If your G/L is set up
to capture rework costs, report all labor activity as rework labor.

You can accomplish making it clear that the job is a Rework Job by to
methods (one simple, one less so):

(1) When selecting the "Next" Job number as you creating the rework Job,
simply stick an "R" (or some other character more meaningful to your
company culture) in front of the suggested Job number and then press OK
(and proceed to create the custom details of the Job).

(2) Use one of the available JobHead.ChkBx## ud boolean fields to
represent whether the Job is a rework or not. Customize Job Entry (or
whatever apps you tend to use) to display the Checkbox with a EpiLabel
of "Rework Job". Add code to default the value to False when creating a
new Job. You can then modify your traveller report so it clearly
indicates the Job is a REWORK job (perhaps requiring rework labor
entry).

Doing it this way should give you accurate costing.

Adding rework OPs to the original job will result in a job that either
needs to be manually costed/closed (if you only report the actual qty
reworked on the extra OPs) or overcosted (if report the extra reworks
complete for the entire job qty).

Rob Brown
Versa Products

Ari Footlik <ari@... <mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com>
<mailto:ari%40zweig-cnc.com> > wrote:
Good morning, all -

Our inspection department came to me this morning asking about the
proper way to handle parts that failed inspection but have been approved
for re-work. In the past, they tell me the have gone back and changed
quantities in the passed/failed fields, and Engineering then added
additional operations in the WO to re-work the newly "passed" parts, but
we all think this isn't correct, as among other things, it doesn't
properly indicate that only certain pieces need re-work and that the
rest of the pieces skip the newly added operation.

I believe the appropriate thing would be to disposition the
approved-for-rework parts as raw-material for a *new* WO, but we don't
know how to do this.

What are people doing for this situation?

Thanks in advance!
--Ari

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------------------------------
Looking for last minute shopping deals? Find them fast with Yahoo!
Search.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]

---------------------------------
Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your homepage.

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]






[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]