Payee's Are Rapidly Growing

brodine · #1

I'm our Stake Finance Clerk, and right after the change to CUBS I was looking at my Payee list and noticed that each unit in our Stake had two listings, both identical. I merged the two and did a "send/receive" which produced about 3 pages of "Add participant" information. A couple of days later when I did another "send/receive", I got another 3 pages of "Add participant" info and, what do you know, I now have four identical enteris for each unit. To make a long story short, I now have 7 enteries for each unit in my payee list, all active, and all identical. There must be a bug somewhere that needs to be fixed, either that or I'm going to have to start up my own paper factory (10 units in our Stake).

Any one else had this problem?

aebrown · #2

brodine wrote:I'm our Stake Finance Clerk, and right after the change to CUBS I was looking at my Payee list and noticed that each unit in our Stake had two listings, both identical. I merged the two and did a "send/receive" which produced about 3 pages of "Add participant" information. A couple of days later when I did another "send/receive", I got another 3 pages of "Add participant" info and, what do you know, I now have four identical enteris for each unit. To make a long story short, I now have 7 enteries for each unit in my payee list, all active, and all identical. There must be a bug somewhere that needs to be fixed, either that or I'm going to have to start up my own paper factory (10 units in our Stake). Any one else had this problem?

Yep, I noticed that, too. It seems like every few days I get the "Add Participant" info for each unit listed on the Finance Transmission Report. I've taken to printing transmission reports to PDF; I can then commit to paper if it seems important. I was really glad I instituted that practice when I had a 39-page transmission report.

ralitaco · #3

On the ward level, I just went thru all our donor's and made Hidden anyone that had not made a donation this year. That resulted in a 23 page report that also included the checks I had written.

I hope they fix it so they don't always print

mfmohlma · #4

ralitaco wrote: I hope they fix it so they don't always print

...or at least change the format so we get more than 6 on a page...

rpyne · #5

oregonmatt wrote:...or at least change the format so we get more than 6 on a page...

Barring that, we need an increase in budget allocation to pay for all the additional paper being used.

We now have 16 copies of our Stake in our donor list that cannot be edited or merged. Interestingly, all but one of them shows as a nonmember record. It seems to grow by two or three each week.

calebpusey · #6

Apparently this is an issue that the CUBS team is aware of and are working to fix. My ward has 7 different payees for my stake. It has to do with MLS not recognizing the payee list that is held in CUBS.

crislapi · #7

I noticed that today on the stake MLS. I had 8 payees for each of my units as well as 4-6 donors for each. I merged them all into one and, in the process, noticed that new temporary member numbers were given every single time.

After merging them all down to one for each unit, I then was prompted to print financial transmission reports. There were about 7 reports to print, and each of them was 32 pages long. Each report looks remarkably similar to the one that just printed. Luckily, since we've switched to CUBS I've been printing all reports to PDF and then, if I need/want to file a paper copy, I then print it.

waynecooke · #8

Why couldn't they have figured these things out before rolling it to thousands of units?

That is what "de-bugging" is all about.

#9

wcooke wrote:Why couldn't they have figured these things out before rolling it to thousands of units?

That is what "de-bugging" is all about.

Good question. However it is a question usually asked by outside observers not involved in the process of such a significant change. All we can do is speculate on the entire process without knowing the timelines and issues that had to be worked out to implement this change. Waiting for all the bugs to be worked out could possibly have pushed the transition beyond the established deadline. We don't even know how many times the deadline was actually pushed out before the decision was made to procede as it was. We do know that there was at least one transition date that was pushed out for the US because they discovered unacceptable issues with the system when rolled out in Canada.

At some point they had to make the decision that the existing bugs were acceptable and that the rollout must be made.

At least for this issue there is an alternative to killing all the trees necessary to print the reports. Just print them to PDF and then only print to paper from the PDF when warranted.

wrigjef · #10

I feel the excess paper pain as well. What is the requirement related to printing transmission reports anyway? I believe you can just cancel out of the option to print that report while still printing the other stuff required for files and audits.