Stocking Subassemblies and Std Costing

Yahoo Archive
1
You are not alone. We leave everything on jobs.

-Peter Volkert


--- In vantage@yahoogroups.com, "saab_barracuda" <chris.clunn@...>
wrote:
>
> We have been putting our subassemblies in inventory and issuing
back
> out to jobs as needed. This process works well for us from an
> inventory management standpoint. The problem come in with the
> costing. When we issue the subassemblies to stock, the part loses
the
> MLB (Material/Labor/Burden) breakdown and combines all costs into
> Material. Then at the end of the line when you sell the high level
> assembly, you can't see the costs in their proper cost components
as
> some of the Labor and Burden are bundled into the Material
category.
>
> All this seemed to work out fine last year when we were operating
with
> Average costs with version 6.1. But beginning this year as part of
> our V8 implementation, we moved to Standard costing. This cost
> breakdown issue has really thrown a monkey wrench into the works.
Any
> suggestions?
>
> I've talked with Epicor consulting and they are suggesting either
> keeping everything in WIP or possibly custom programming. Material
> Management doesn't like the idea of juggling WIP jobs to maintain
the
> subassemblies in pseudo inventory for months at a time. I'm not
crazy
> about the custom programming idea either. I find it hard to
believe
> we are the only ones that would possibly need this functionality.
>
> Is anyone in the group putting subassemblies in inventory and using
> standard costs? How is it working for you? I'm really curious how
> you handle the transactions, costing, and reporting.
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris
>
2
We have been putting our subassemblies in inventory and issuing back
out to jobs as needed. This process works well for us from an
inventory management standpoint. The problem come in with the
costing. When we issue the subassemblies to stock, the part loses the
MLB (Material/Labor/Burden) breakdown and combines all costs into
Material. Then at the end of the line when you sell the high level
assembly, you can't see the costs in their proper cost components as
some of the Labor and Burden are bundled into the Material category.

All this seemed to work out fine last year when we were operating with
Average costs with version 6.1. But beginning this year as part of
our V8 implementation, we moved to Standard costing. This cost
breakdown issue has really thrown a monkey wrench into the works. Any
suggestions?

I've talked with Epicor consulting and they are suggesting either
keeping everything in WIP or possibly custom programming. Material
Management doesn't like the idea of juggling WIP jobs to maintain the
subassemblies in pseudo inventory for months at a time. I'm not crazy
about the custom programming idea either. I find it hard to believe
we are the only ones that would possibly need this functionality.

Is anyone in the group putting subassemblies in inventory and using
standard costs? How is it working for you? I'm really curious how
you handle the transactions, costing, and reporting.

Thanks,

Chris