with the prior system.
According to this article in the ODT problems existed in the old Datacom system:-
Principals around the country are criticising the Ministry of Education after major payroll errors, which have created a bureaucratic nightmare for many schools.
Datacom is contracted by the Ministry of Education to provide payroll services to more than 80,000 New Zealand teachers. The latest payroll round – the first of the school term – was filled with errors, New Zealand Principals Federation president and Balclutha Primary School principal Paddy Ford said.
‘‘A number of schools have not received any pay, and many support staff have been paid the incorrect amounts.
Sounds familiar does it not?
Then this most interesting comment:-
Kaikorai Valley College principal Philip Craigie said: ‘‘Some people haven’t been paid correctly. That’s typical at this time of year, but there seem to be a few more teachers with pay problems than previous years.”
Mr Craigie said some teachers had to be paid from school funds so they could afford groceries, but believed the pay problems were traditionally rectified within a couple of weeks.
So problems apparently happened with regular monotony in the past.
Then this comment:-
:‘‘Schools deserve better. It’s a nightmare. We are dealing with unnecessary bureaucracy and huge numbers of errors.
Payroll systems have changed for the worse and we need to have immediate action from the ministry, directing their payroll service providers to shape up or ship out.”
No not about Novopay, but about Datacom.
This article was datelined 15 February 2008.
This article raises questions such as were there major issues with data entry in the past?
Were there problems with information supplied by schools?
Was any effort made to simplify processes as part of Novopay design?
What proportion of the payroll actually has errors?
What is an acceptable error rate for a payroll system of this size and complexity?
How do the payroll errors breakdown as to nature of error?