> If you have union dues to be deducted, it is a formula to compute it against the total wage you make (or it is a flat deduction amount).
Except when it isn't. For example, some folks have multiple roles, covered by different unions, with different rules. Those rules are applied to different parts of their "total wage". I suspect that some wages don't count for 401(k). And so on.
None of these things necessarily have simple definitions and they interact in complex ways. Any "general model" is likely to be wrong and seemingly minor changes can have huge consequences.
Actually, it is feasible. It is possible to do this still. Solve it with a model to start and chain the calculation events. You can re-iterate based on the different situations. The design, when thought through, can be accommodating such variations. It is definitely a lot of work (dont get me wrong). If this was not feasible, there would be no Payroll vendors. :)
> It is definitely a lot of work (dont get me wrong).
We agree.
My point is that the models are brittle because every entity (govt, unions, etc) has different definitions for every one of the "common" terms, can change their definitions, and the scope is very context and usage dependent.
Except when it isn't. For example, some folks have multiple roles, covered by different unions, with different rules. Those rules are applied to different parts of their "total wage". I suspect that some wages don't count for 401(k). And so on.
None of these things necessarily have simple definitions and they interact in complex ways. Any "general model" is likely to be wrong and seemingly minor changes can have huge consequences.