Understanding the Processing Order of Complementary Rule Instances
The system uses the process order rules for segmented calendars described earlier to determine which user field set to process first, second, third, and so on when there are element assignment and positive input entries combined with complementary rule instances. In other words, earning/deduction assignments continue to dictate the order of processing; however, the following, additional rules apply when there are complementary rule instances:
When the system generates a complementary rule instance, the resolution order of that instance is determined by the process order number of the element assignment with same user field set (if any) in any slice or segment; within that user field set, however, the system processes the complementary rule instance based on the order of the slice in which it occurs.
Note:
If there are multiple element assignments with the same user field set as the complementary rule, the system always uses the lowest process order number from among the assignments to determine the process order.
If there is no user field match between the element assignments and a complementary rule instance, the system processes instances in the order of the slices, using the process order rules described earlier to determine the order. .
The examples in this topic illustrate these rules.
Example 1: Process Order When an Element Assignment Shares the Same User Field as the Complementary Rule
An earning E1 is set up to trigger element segmentation (and proration) when it is assigned to a payee.
E1 is assigned to a payee with a begin date of June 16 and a user field value of State = MO; the amount is 3000 and the end date is open.
E1 is assigned to the same payee with a begin date of June 16 and a user field value of State = AR; the amount is 3000 and the end date is open.
At the rule definition level, E1 is defined with a calculation rule of Amount and a user field value of State = MO. The amount is 4000.
Note:
In this example, element assignment is abbreviated Assign.
| Component | Rule Definition | Assign (Instance 1) Process Order Number = 10 Slice 2: June 16–30 | Assign (Instance 2) Process Order Number = 20 Slice 2: June 16–30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Amount |
4000 |
3000 |
2000 |
|
|
User Field (State) |
MO |
MO |
AR |
The system resolves three instances of E1 in the following order:
| Element | Instance | Assign Instance | Amount | User Field | Begin/End Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
E1 |
1 |
0 |
2000 (Complementary Rule Instance) |
MO |
June 1– June 15 |
|
E1 |
2 |
1 |
1500 |
MO |
June 16 – June 30 |
|
E1 |
3 |
2 |
1000 |
AR |
June 16 – June 30 |
In this example, the process order number of the element assignment with the user field set of MO drives the process order of the matching complementary rule instance; within that user field set, the system processes the complementary rule and associated element assignment in the order of the slices in which they occur (slice 1 before slice 2).
Example 2: Process Order When an Element Assignment Shares the Same User Field as the Complementary Rule
An earning E1 is set up to trigger element segmentation (and proration) when it is assigned to a payee.
E1 is assigned to a payee with a begin date of June 16 and a user field value of State = AR; the amount is 3000 and the end date is open.
E1 is assigned to the same payee with a begin date of June 16 and a user field value of State = MO; the amount is 2000 and the end date is open.
At the rule definition level, E1 is defined with a calculation rule of Amount and a user field value of State = MO. The amount is 4000.
Note:
In this example, element assignment is abbreviated Assign.
| Component | Rule Definition | Assign (Instance 1) Process Order Number = 10 Slice 2: June 16–30 | Assign (Instance 2) Process Order Number = 20 Slice 2: June 16–30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Amount |
4000 |
3000 |
2000 |
|
|
User Field (State) |
MO |
AR |
MO |
The system resolves three instances of E1 in the following order:
| Element | Instance | Assign Instance | Amount | User Field | Begin/End Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
E1 |
1 |
0 |
2000 (Complementary Rule Instance) |
MO |
June 1– June 15 |
|
E1 |
2 |
1 |
1500 |
AR |
June 16 – June 30 |
|
E1 |
3 |
2 |
1000 |
MO |
June 16 – June 30 |
In this example, as in the previous one, the process order number of the element assignment with the user field set of MO drives the process order of the matching complementary rule instance; within that user field set, the system processes the complementary rule and associated element assignment in the order of the slices in which they occur (slice 1 before slice 2). However, the user field values and process order numbers of the element assignments are reversed in this example (as compared to the previous one). In other words, the assignment with the user field set of AR has a lower process order number (higher priority) than the assignment with the user field set of MO, and is calculated first, respecting slice order.
Example 3: Process Order When an Element Assignment Does Not Share the Same User Field as the Complementary Rule
An earning E1 is set up to trigger element segmentation (and proration) when it is assigned to a payee.
E1 is assigned to a payee with a begin date of June 16 and a user field value of State = KS; the amount is 3000 and the end date is open.
E1 is assigned to the same payee with a begin date of June 16 and a user field value of State = AR; the amount is 2000 and the end date is open.
At the rule definition level, E1 is defined with a calculation rule of Amount and a user field value of State = MO. The amount is 4000.
Note:
In this example, element assignment is abbreviated Assign.
| Component | Rule Definition | Assign (Instance 1) Process Order Number = 10 Slice 2: June 16–30 | Assign (Instance 2) Process Order Number = 20 Slice 2: June 16–30 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Amount |
4000 |
3000 |
2000 |
|
|
User Field (State) |
MO |
KS |
AR |
The system resolves three instances of E1 in the following order:
| Element | Order Number | Assign Instance | Amount | User Field | Begin/End Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
E1 |
1 |
0 |
2000 (Complementary Rule Instance) |
MO |
June 1 – June 15 |
|
E1 |
2 |
1 |
1500 |
KS |
June 16 – June 30 |
|
E1 |
3 |
2 |
1000 |
AR |
June 16 – June 30 |
In this example, there is no user field set match between the element assignments and the complementary rule instance. The system processes the complementary rule before the assignments following the order of the slices; it processes the assignment with the user field of KS before the assignment with the user field of AR based on their process order numbers.