Uploaded image for project: 'WORKTERRA'
  1. WORKTERRA
  2. WT-11209

ACA_Waive Scenario_Codes are not reflecting correctly.

    Details

    • Type: Bug
    • Status: Closed
    • Priority: Medium
    • Resolution: Done
    • Affects Version/s: None
    • Fix Version/s: None
    • Component/s: ACA
    • Labels:
      None
    • Environment:
      QA
    • Bug Type:
      Functional
    • Bug Severity:
      Medium
    • Level:
      Partner
    • Module:
      ACA - 2017
    • Reported by:
      Harbinger
    • Item State:
      Production Complete - Closed

      Description

      1.Login to LB.
      2.Edit company say "For QA LB METSO Prod Copy''.
      3.Add test employee.
      4.Waive medical plan for 1st 15 day of Jan month or last 15 days of month.
      5.Change the class of the employee so that different ACA Plan will get eligible to employee.
      6.Rerun 1095-C report.
      7.Check the codes.

      Test employees to be considered as 129129129 & 130130130

      Actual: Line 14 code displayed as 1H and Line 16 code displayed as blank.
      Expected:As ACA plans are eligible atleast 1H code should not display.

        Attachments

          Issue Links

            Activity

            Hide
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment -

            Files Affected:

            Database Objects/MasterCompanyDB/04_Stored Procedures/dbo.OES_SP_ACA_Update_WEFEmployeeEligibility_IneligibleEEUpdate.sql

            Show
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment - Files Affected: Database Objects/MasterCompanyDB/04_Stored Procedures/dbo.OES_SP_ACA_Update_WEFEmployeeEligibility_IneligibleEEUpdate.sql
            Hide
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment -

            Concern:ACA_Waive Scenario_Codes are not reflecting correctly.
            Cause: In this scenario,Employee was getting one offer till 1/15 and next offer was eligible to him from 1/15 i.e same day. We were extending codes only of those employee who had offer from next day after the first offer ended.As the end date and start date were same,this offer was not getting extended and so 1H was getting displayed.
            Correction: We have added condition to extend the offer in the case where offer ends on one date and next offer starts on same date

            Show
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment - Concern :ACA_Waive Scenario_Codes are not reflecting correctly. Cause : In this scenario,Employee was getting one offer till 1/15 and next offer was eligible to him from 1/15 i.e same day. We were extending codes only of those employee who had offer from next day after the first offer ended.As the end date and start date were same,this offer was not getting extended and so 1H was getting displayed. Correction : We have added condition to extend the offer in the case where offer ends on one date and next offer starts on same date
            Hide
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Smita Pawar,

            Please verify this issue.Deployed on LB

            Show
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Smita Pawar , Please verify this issue.Deployed on LB
            Hide
            smita.pawar Smita Pawar (Inactive) added a comment -

            We have verified above mentioned issue on LB.
            Its working fine. Fix is ready for stage.
            PFA pdf's of verified employees.

            Show
            smita.pawar Smita Pawar (Inactive) added a comment - We have verified above mentioned issue on LB. Its working fine. Fix is ready for stage. PFA pdf's of verified employees.
            Hide
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment -

            Hi Smita Pawar,

            This Jira has been deployed on Azure.
            Please verify.

            Show
            ramya.tantry Ramya Tantry (Inactive) added a comment - Hi Smita Pawar , This Jira has been deployed on Azure. Please verify.
            Hide
            rutuja.chilwar Rutuja Chilwar (Inactive) added a comment -

            Verified above mentioned point , which is working as expected.

            CC- Rakesh Roy Sachin Hingole Smita Pawar

            Show
            rutuja.chilwar Rutuja Chilwar (Inactive) added a comment - Verified above mentioned point , which is working as expected. CC- Rakesh Roy Sachin Hingole Smita Pawar
            Hide
            mahendra.mungase Mahendra Mungase (Inactive) added a comment -

            We have verified this issue on Production and observed that it does not exist.

            Thanks,
            Mahendra

            Show
            mahendra.mungase Mahendra Mungase (Inactive) added a comment - We have verified this issue on Production and observed that it does not exist. Thanks, Mahendra

              People

              Assignee:
              smita.pawar Smita Pawar (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              smita.pawar Smita Pawar (Inactive)
              Developer:
              Ramya Tantry (Inactive)
              QA:
              Smita Pawar (Inactive)
              Votes:
              0 Vote for this issue
              Watchers:
              4 Start watching this issue

                Dates

                Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved:
                Pre-Prod Due Date:
                Production Due Date:
                Code Review Date:

                  Time Tracking

                  Estimated:
                  Original Estimate - 6h Original Estimate - 6h
                  6h
                  Remaining:
                  Remaining Estimate - 0h
                  0h
                  Logged:
                  Time Spent - 7h
                  7h