Re: Another G/L question with an A/P twist... -- SYSTEM21

I did not consider PM in the equation. I'm almost making sense of what you said... Just to be clear... We want multiple PM companies and multiple AP companies all pointing to a single GL company...

So to illustrate: ______________________________ AP cono PM cono GL cono 07 07 90 08 08 90 . . . 25 25 90 ______________________________ AP and PM will be a one-to-one relationship (they will always be the same cono). AP and PM will always point to the same GL (many AP & PM conos to one GL cono).

We were contemplating a new GL account code structure that places the source company number in position 5 & 6 of the GL Account code.

If we maintain these company realtionship rules between the applications would we be safe in bypassing that safety check in PL015 that tests to see if the Vendor already exists in the Consolidated GL company when we attempt to add a vendor in one of the multiple AP companies.

I appreciate your consideration of this question.


----Original Message Follows----
From: pajrawson@xxxxxxx
Reply-To: System 21 Users <system21@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: system21@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [SYSTEM21]   Another G/L question with an A/P twist...
Date: Thu, 19 May 2005 11:03:13 -0400

The reason is Purchase Management not necessarily Accounts Payable. A PM company is attached to a GL Company, but multiple AP companies can be attached to a GL. It is therefore possible that one pM company can service multiple AP companies (which share the same GL)!!

Hope that makes sense.

Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: Jeff Klipa <jklipa@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: system21@xxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thu, 19 May 2005 14:12:45 +0000
Subject: [SYSTEM21] Another G/L question with an A/P twist...


Greetings everyone,

We're contemplating moving to one General Ledger.

If you look at the code for Vendor maintenance (PL015) in A/P it won't let you add a vendor code to PLP05 if a vendor already exists within the same G/L company. Error message "USL0032 - Supplier code already exists within General Ledger"

Using the SUPNAMGL logical file keyed on GLCO05/SUPN05/DSEQ05 the logic in program PL015 won't let you point the same vendor in multiple A/P companies to one G/L company.

My question to the group is, "Why does this logic exist...?" What is the problem with having the same vendor in multiple A/P companies pointing to one consolidated G/L company...? I must be missing the bigger picture...

Any feedback would be appreciated...

Thanks.