Wishlist

It is currently the case that the absence type “mobile working” is hierarchically given priority over vacation. If vacation and mobile work overlap in a period of time, mobile working, i.e. working, is displayed. That shouldn't be the case. If there is an overlap, a) a conflict is displayed b) If this is difficult, vacation has priority, as this has more far-reaching effects.

Our vacation permit includes the representative, so he should also be able to approve the vacation request. The representative function already exists, so he just needs to be notified and sign virtually. Approval process: The representative (to ensure that someone covers the field of activity) The inspection (this is the department head or someone who checks again that it really fits and checks) The boss (so that it is also legally valid)

A colleague only started 10.02 with us. She is now entitled to part of her vacation. However, Projo does not calculate until March. As a result, she has less vacation. Is it possible somewhere to calculate the vacation exactly and not just at the beginning of the next month?

We need a clearly separated, up-to-date presentation of vacation data in the Employees → Absences → Vacation Account section. Among other things, there is currently no differentiation between requested and approved vacation and a correct calculation of available vacation days. What is currently missing: A clear separation between requested vs. approved. Available vacation days are falsely reduced due to applications that have not yet been approved. Our needs: For transparent annual information, employees should be able to understand at any time: actual vacation days available Current status as of the reporting date Separation of taken and approved advantages: Higher transparency for employees and managers Reliable key date evaluations for annual financial statements and controlling Automated processes (e.g. reminders of remaining vacation) are becoming more correct and efficient Less manual rework by HR

When applying for a period of absence, it is currently possible to name a substitute, even if he is also absent. In this case, a “conflict” should be displayed or only the delegates who are available during the period can be selected.

Projo shows the vacation transfer from the previous period, e.g. under periods/months. For each office, it can be determined by when the old vacation must be reduced. It can also be determined whether this is omitted on the specified date or not. From our point of view, it would be important that the project would also show how many days of vacation transfer have already been taken by the office-specific date. This should be visible to the MA but should also be detectable/evaluable in an evaluation for the project manager and in an office-wide evaluation.

Our payslips include vacation taken and remaining entitlement for the year. Here we need the real figures. If my employee has 30 days of vacation and has taken 6 so far, that is still 24th. Projo does not recognize this, as the vacation has been planned for the whole year (according to projo then remainder 0). As an example, I have included a list that we have sent to our payroll office so far.

It would be very helpful if vacation entitlements could be differentiated between statutory vacation entitlement and superstatutory vacation claim in Projo. The legal claim for a 5-day week amounts to 20 days. Any additional vacation entitlement from the employer would then have to be shown separately. This is particularly important in the case of prolonged illnesses lasting several years and the associated holiday package.

projo offers extensive options for defining the approver for absences. Here we use the function “if defines fixed teams, otherwise project teams” with the addition “use fallback approvers”. We're doing pretty well with that. However, we think it makes sense to always send certain types of absences to a specific person. These could include, for example, illness or even period of education as examples. It would be great if projo could set this as an additional setting for each absence. 3 states could then be defined here: • Use basic settings • Override default setting and define A specific approver • Use basic settings and name ONE specific approver as the second necessary approver I understand that the function can be quite complex, as it may be different/depending on the selected default setting. It could therefore be useful that it could be useful to “give up” the basic setting and define the type of approval process absence-type-specific as a characteristic in the settings of the respective absence. Or you choose in the basic settings whether you want to activate individual approval procedures for each absence. It would therefore remain unchanged for everyone who is satisfied with the current process. VG! Jan

Half public holidays look as if they were completely free in the monthly presentation (e.g. 24.12.-0.5 day off; 25.12. - 1 day off) The wish here would be to display them graphically differently so that employees still take vacation here, for example.