Hi Prasanna Karlekar,

As discussed request you to please look into this issue. Thank you!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
CC: Mandar Kulkarni, Vijay Siddha, Satya, Jaideep Vinchurkar

Hi Debbie Kulling,

Analysis for this issue is in progress.
As per initial analysis there is issue with Age band calculation in Billing summary report and age band with which cost was calculated at the time of election.
Will need further analysis to find the employee list for whom age bands are not getting calculated properly at reports side and also to check if incorrect age band is the only reason for incorrect premium appearing against the age band.

Will provide more update tomorrow.

Thank you!

cc: Satya

Hi Debbie Kulling,

Two employees 'AVA TYSON' and 'MELISSA DORRELL' had D.O.B '03/01/1972'. These were not enrolled by new hire mode.
Election effective date was 3/1/2017. Hence rate was also effective with 3/1/2017.
In Billing Summary Report, age was calculated with date '3/1/2017' due to which these employees were falling into age band '45-49'.
While allocating cost, system calculated age with date '1/1/2017' due to which these employees got cost as per age band '40-44'. Which is correct as per the rule applied on Rates.

As of now, we have found the solution for this. We are working on scenario testing at dev end, after which this will get deployed on Local, Stage and Production environment.
But please note that, this may not be the perfect solution as it may fail in some scenarios.
There are several conditions on rates screen that can be configured for age calculation. So proper fix can only be done by taking enhancement WT-9136,which will avoid incorrect age band errors and will even boost the performance of Billing Summary Report.

cc: Satya,Prasanna Karlekar,Venkatesh Pujari

Thanks,
Jyoti Agrawal

Working on other priority task. So, keeping this on hold.

We need to get an ETA on when this is going to be worked on. We are still getting employees included in the enrollment counts that are in pending EOI and it is causing issues with the carriers

Hi Debbie Kulling,

This JIRA is for Ageband and cost match and currently we have kept this on hold.
Will provide an update tomorrow regarding current implementation of EOI pending records.

Thank you!

cc: Satya, Jyoti Agrawal

Hi Debbie Kulling,

We have WT-9147 for EOI pending records which we have not yet worked on it. Will try to schedule it in coming week.

Thank you!

cc: Satya, Jyoti Agrawal

Have kept this JIRA OnHold. We tried calculating age bands while pulling the summary report, but we are getting incorrect age band in some or the other scenarios.
We will resume working on this once WT-9136 enhancement is complete.

Thank you!

cc: Jyoti Agrawal, Satya, Gaurav Sodani

Below are 3C's :-

Concern:
In Billing Summary report, ageband wise cost is not appearing correctly.

Cause:
While displaying the report ageband wise, we need to calculate employee's age. There are different rules set on Rates screen based on which employee age is calculated and cost is assigned as per the age band. When report is executed with back date for rule like "At Time of Election for new hire and January 1 of Current year for others", logic to determine if the employee is new hire or not will not be always accurate. As the new hire span is limited and differs employee to employee. Hence, in such scenarios, it is difficult to get accurate base date election wise, from which employee age can be calculated.

Correction:
Reports need employee/dependent ageband or age to be saved against the cost that was calculated from it.

Closing this ticket as it requires improvement in system WD-190.

Regards,

Satya Prakash

Cc: Amruta Lohiya