Peer testing results

Test Results, as reported by Alyson Shaw:

Peer Testing HR changes for REF (RES037)

1.1  Remove retirement date

UNIDESK I120920-0694 refers

Requirement is to set the retiraldate to null for all records as this field no longer has meaning in light of retirement legislation.

I have reviewed the code within the package and can see that the retirement date is being set to null within the cursors.

I have run the extract and the retiraldate is now null for all records in the view.

Result : PASS

1.2  Bugfix for Employee Start Date

UNIDESK I120406-0618 refers

Requirement is to pick up the start date of the employee’s latest period of service and not the start date of their original service (although the two might be the same if the person has not been rehired).

I have reviewed the code and can see that the calculation is being performed.

I have run the extract and checked the employmentstartdate of the employee mentioned in the initial unidesk call. It is correctly showing the start date of her latest period of service (i.e 02-Jul-2001).

I checked the start date for an employee who has a single period of service and it is showing correctly.

Result: PASS

1.3  Fixed Term Contract changes

Majority of changes that were originally specified for fixed term contracts were withdrawn. Last remaining requirement was to have field called fix_term contract in the StaffOrganisationRelation view  but to leave it null.

I have reviewed the code and can see the fix term contract field in the cursors and it is being set to null.

It has been added to pureint_person_org_tmp,  pureint_staff_org_tmp and pureint_person_org_mv.   The ddl for the mv has been amended to include this new field.

However it is not present in pureint_v_staff_org (the StaffOrganisationRelation view) so needs to be added.

1.4  Additional People Changes

Requirement is to match ‘missing’ people on employee number only and ignore the organisation unit held against the funding record.  The extract should simply take the org unit from the person’s most recent assignment record.

I have reviewed the code and this is working as expected from the org_person_refresh side of things. Note that I have not tested population of the pureint_additional_people table itself. That is done inside the finance extract code and has not been altered.

However – I have had a quick look at the pureint_fin_refresh_pkg (populate_tables procedure) and found:

update pureint_funding_persons_tmp pfp

    set internal_organisation_id = nvl((select org_unit

                                        from pureint_additional_people pap

                                        where pap.person_id = pfp.person_id

                                        and pap.processed = 'Y'),'UOE')

    where internal_organisation_id = 'UOE';

This is not strictly speaking within the scope of the changes currently being peer tested and I do not think it should stop anything going ahead. However, I am wondering if now that we know that the org unit on the additional people table (which is the org unit on the funding) does not match the org units of the employees, does the above bit of code still hold good?