• Search Forums
    Advanced Search
Prev
Next
Forums Human Capital Management Lawson S3 HR/Payroll/Benefits

BSI Cyclic O and JT 146517

 2 Replies
 0 Subscribed to this topic
 69 Subscribed to this forum
Sort:
Author
Messages
beverly godwin
New Member
Posts: 0
New Member
7/23/2010 12:10 PM
I realize that the BSI Cyclic is mandator and we will be putting that in, but if we are not even using Arizona payroll, would we have to put in the JT 146517 that lawson wrote to go with the BSI cyclic. This JT is bundled (of course) with a million other patches and the info file is 267 pages. We really do not want to have to stop and do a bunch of functional testing for something that is not necessary.

Any one out there tried doing BSI cyclic O w/o the corresponding JT from lawson?
mark.cook
Veteran Member
Posts: 444
Veteran Member
New Poster
New Poster
Congrats on posting!
7/23/2010 12:28 PM
We are in process. We opened a case with Lawson and they stated we did not have to put that JT in at this time if we were not impacted with Arizona employees. There was also another discussion thread about this same topic a couple of weeks ago that might help you as well with several responses indicating the same concerns.
Deleted User
New Member
Posts: 0
New Member
7/23/2010 1:51 PM
We are in the same situation here, where we have no employees impacted by this change. I applied the BSI update yesterday without the JT and ran parallel PR140's. Everything matched up on the balancing. I also had my Payroll department check the PR80 and everything looks good there. The only problem I have encountered so far is the PRTF locks up my Portal and/or LID session. I am going to apply the JT to my development system to see if it corrects the problem.