按集体合同生成薪酬工作簿

B implements more of the CBA correctly: it calculates the Article 7.4 split-rehearsal waiver, checks sound-check frequency using prior engagement history, and pays the Article 4.2(c) French horn premium even when a trumpet is present. A omits that waiver and incorrectly disallows the horn premium. A’s substitute-minimum formula also offsets rehearsal and sound-check earnings against the synthesizer substitute’s per-show entitlement; consequently, its loaded sample receives no special show uplift. B nevertheless falls short of the requested robustness: Setup!B20 automatically awards quartet premiums based only on four weekly violin/viola/cello chairs, without checking whether additional acoustic strings invalidate eligibility, and provides no conflict flag for that configuration. B is the better foundation, but neither is fully reliable across the requested orchestra configurations.

A is substantially closer to a reliable payroll tool. Its formulas implement the Article 7.4 split-rehearsal waiver, use engagement dates and prior sound checks for frequency checks, select rates by effective date, and provide linked per-person category totals. A correctly applies the Article 4.2c first-local French-horn premium when a trumpet is present; B incorrectly forbids that premium and omits it from the sample horn player’s pay. B also never implements the split-rehearsal waiver, and its substitute-show formula offsets the show minimum against rehearsal and sound-check earnings, leaving the sample synthesizer substitute with no show top-up. Neither fully meets the task: A’s automatic quartet test in Setup B19–B20 merely counts four weekly violin/viola/cello players. Four such players plus an acoustic bass would incorrectly trigger the quartet premium without a warning, despite the entire-acoustic-string-section requirement. B’s sound-check frequency test covers only the current week rather than the engagement.

Both workbooks deliver the core structure: a rate table that can be updated each year, roster, schedule and attendance inputs, CBA conflict flags, and per-musician totals for performance, rehearsal, sound check, audit, premiums, doubling and vacation. B is better because its contract readings are more accurate, its checks are more robust, and it is more usable. Correctness problems in A: (1) A's Roster check flags any premium on a French Horn as a VIOLATION whenever a trumpet is on the roster. Its sample sets the only horn to 'None'. This ignores Art. 4.2.c, which grants the first local French horn 15% 'regardless of seating position'. So A underpays the horn and would mark a correct premium as a violation. (2) A's Art. 4.2.f.ii substitute minimum is a top-up compared against the sub's total non-audit earnings, including rehearsal and sound check pay. For the sample sub, the computed top-up is $0, so the single show is paid at $251.06 instead of 150% ($376.59). (3) A always tops rehearsals up to 3 hours and does not implement the Art. 7.4 split-rehearsal waiver. (4) A only counts trumpets on the local roster when testing the horn rule. What B does better: - It pays the first local French horn 15% under 4.2.c when the show has a trumpet. - It applies MIN(150% × base × shows, guarantee) plus the 25% premium for the synth sub. - It implements the 7.4 waiver logic and meal-break checks across back-to-back calls. - It tracks sound-check frequency over the whole engagement, using engagement dates and prior sound checks. - It records exigent circumstances for pre-10 AM rehearsals and flags missing first-local designations. - It asks whether the show's instrumentation (including traveling musicians) calls for a trumpet. - It selects rates automatically by the payroll week-ending date. - It adds a Payroll Summary with reconciliation checks, a per-musician Pay Stub (Art. 11.4), Calc Detail, and a CBA dashboard. The 9:30 AM rehearsal is shown as a red CONFLICT in its render. A's advantages are larger capacity (100 musicians × 50 services versus B's 40 × 30) and a clear OK/REVIEW/VIOLATION summary. However, its Read Me render shows overlapping, cramped text and truncated labels. Overall, B is the more reliable payroll submission tool.

A is the more correct and usable payroll model. B's pay logic misapplies several CBA terms. French horn: A pays the first local horn 15% under Art. 4.2c when the show has a trumpet, and reserves the 4.2a 15%/20% horn rule for shows without one. B sets the sample horn to 'None' (0% on the Roster). Its Roster check also flags any horn premium as a violation whenever a trumpet is present ('Horn premium not payable'). That underpays by about $354 on scale wages and raises a false conflict against a term the CBA actually grants. Synth sub (Art. 4.2f.ii): A pays MIN(150% x base x shows, guarantee) = $376.59, plus the 25% premium, with a switch for the premium basis. It also pays two audits and 25% on rehearsal and sound check. B's top-up is MAX(0, MIN(1.5 x base x shows, guarantee + 25%) - earnings excluding audits). Because rehearsal, sound check and premiums count against it, the top-up computes to 0 and the sub gets only $251.06 for the show, so the 150% never applies. Weekly guarantee: A pays $2,008.50 for up to 8 shows plus base per extra show. B pays 8 x 251.06 = $2,008.48 and treats the guarantee as a floor on total earnings including rehearsals and premiums. Regular players come up 2 cents short at 8 shows, and players who miss shows can be shorted more. Conflict checks: A checks 20% designations by instrument, requires first-local status and catches duplicates. It separates CONFLICT, CHECK and NOTE with an Exigent input and rolls them up on a dashboard, and it highlights the 9:30 rehearsal input in red. It implements the Art. 7.4 waiver and treats sound-check frequency across the engagement using engagement dates and prior sound checks. B flags only more than one sound check in a week and does not implement the 7.4 waiver, though its text mentions it. It would not flag a 20% designation on, say, a viola. It also invents a rule paying late rehearsals at base wage, where A flags them for rate review. Updatability: A selects rates by effective dates and holds rule parameters on the Rates sheet. B needs a manually entered payroll year and hard-codes 1.5 in the sub formula. B also miscites Art. 4.5b as 'Art. 5.5.b'. Usability: A adds a Setup sheet, a per-person Payroll Summary with reconciliation checks, a Pay Stub for Art. 11.4 and a Calc Detail sheet. B's advantages are larger capacity (100 musicians x 50 services versus 40 x 30) and a Local? column, but these do not offset the wrong pay. B's sample also has the sub auditing after playing, and its Read Me instructions render crammed in a narrow column.