按集体合同生成薪酬工作簿

B implements materially stronger CBA checks. Its Schedule tests the daytime and same-location conditions for the split-rehearsal waiver, captures exigent-circumstance and intermission inputs, and uses prior sound-check counts/dates to check engagement-wide frequency. A’s waiver ignores daytime/location conditions, omits the intermission check, and checks sound-check frequency only within the current week. A’s Payroll formula also pays the synthesizer substitute’s 25% premium only on performances, omitting rehearsals and sound checks despite Article 4.2.f.i’s “all work” provision; B includes those services. Both provide editable rates and per-person totals for the required payroll categories. Neither is fully robust, however: B selects rates solely by week-ending date and instructs splitting rate-change weeks without addressing the resulting separate weekly-guarantee calculations. Its quartet “Yes” override also triggers premiums without checking the required four-player configuration. A’s per-service date pricing is an advantage, but its more substantial pay and compliance-checking omissions make B preferable.

A is better: its formula-driven summary itemizes every CBA payroll category, rounds and reconciles pay lines, checks rate-period coverage, and uses prior sound-check dates/counts for engagement-level compliance. B’s Payroll!M8 omits the electronic premium on the sample synthesizer substitute’s rehearsals and sound check despite the CBA’s “all work” provision. Its Roster premium formula also imposes an unsupported highest-premium-only MAX rule. B’s rehearsal-waiver formula ignores the required daytime and same-location conditions, while its rate lookups ignore effective-to dates. A nevertheless falls short of robust compliance across orchestra configurations: Setup!B20 automatically awards quartet premiums merely when four weekly violin/viola/cello musicians are counted. Four such players plus an acoustic bass would incorrectly qualify, without a conflict flag, even though the quartet is not the entire acoustic string section.

Both workbooks meet the core brief. Each has an effective-dated rates table, roster/schedule/attendance inputs, CBA flags, and per-person totals for performances, rehearsals, sound checks, audit pay, premiums, doubling and 5.5% vacation. I hand-checked A's formulas against its cover-note totals and they are internally consistent ($30,665.51). B applies the CBA more faithfully and protects the contractor better: - **Synth sub premium:** B pays the 25% electronic premium on the synth sub's rehearsal and sound check, following Art. 4.2.f.i "all work". A pays it only on the one show, which arguably underpays. - **Woodwind premium:** B lets the Employer designate more than one woodwind for the premium. A's duplicate first-local check would wrongly raise a VIOLATION in that case. - **First-horn 20% premium:** B has a Setup input for whether the show calls for a trumpet, including traveling players. A infers this only from trumpets on the local roster, so it misses traveling trumpets. - **Rehearsal rules:** B adds inputs for exigent circumstances and the 10-minute break each 50 minutes. It flags the 9:30 AM rehearsal as a red CONFLICT unless exigent circumstances are documented; A shows only an amber WARNING. - **Meal breaks:** B checks for a missing meal break across back-to-back rehearsals. - **Sound-check frequency:** B tracks it across the engagement using prior-sound-check inputs. A counts only within the current week. - **Weekly guarantee:** A pays the full guarantee even when a weekly musician plays 0 shows; B pays nothing in that case and flags short attendance for review. - **Premium stacking:** A pays only the single highest premium. B stacks the string-quartet and electronic premiums on the first-local premium, which matches each clause's "additional pay" wording. - **Extra outputs:** B adds a CBA Checks dashboard, a per-musician Pay Stub for Art. 11.4, a transparent Calc Detail sheet and reconciliation checks. - **Cached values:** B's file stores calculated values. A's formula cells read as blank in non-recalculating viewers, although they render in a recalculating engine. A's advantages are its simpler layout and per-service date-based rate lookup, which handles a week spanning a rate change. B requires splitting such a week into two payroll runs. These do not outweigh B's greater accuracy and completeness of CBA enforcement.

Both workbooks are formula-driven, with effective-dated rate tables, 40 musician and 30 service rows, attendance grids, and per-person totals for performances, rehearsals, sound checks, audits, premiums, doubling and vacation. For the nine weekly musicians the pay logic is the same: $2,008.50 guarantee, premiums and doubling on all work, 45% woodwind doubling, and 5.5% vacation. A is stronger on pay correctness, conflict detection and robustness. Pay correctness: A pays the synth sub's 25% electronic premium on rehearsal and sound check as well as the show, citing Art. 4.2f.i 'all work' (about $151.50 by my calculation). It also has a switch for the premium basis. B's formula limits the sub's premium to shows ($62.77), giving the $1,367.72 total in its cover note. B also takes MAX of applicable premiums, so a first-local electronic player or quartet member gets only the single highest premium. The CBA excerpt contains no such no-stacking rule, so this could underpay in other orchestra configurations. A stacks these premiums and shows them separately (chair, quartet, electronic). Conflict highlighting: A turns the 9:30 AM input cell red and logs a CONFLICT unless an exigent-circumstances field is marked Y. B shows only an amber WARNING and reports 0 violations. A has separate rule columns and a CBA Checks dashboard covering start time, minimum call and Art. 7.4 waiver, 10-minute breaks, meal break, sound-check window, length and frequency, first-local eligibility and duplicates, 20% chair limits, missing electronic premium, audits required per book, and attendance validity. It also has a status banner and reconciliation checks. B's checks are real and include service overlaps and duplicate first-local marks, with violation and warning counters, but they are fewer. It has no exigent or break inputs and no attendance validation. Robustness: A tracks prior sound checks and engagement dates for Art. 7.10 across a run. B's engagement-length input is not used by its check, which only counts sound checks in the current sheet, so a repeat in a later week is missed. A parameterizes rule thresholds as named cells and has an editable instrument table, a trumpet-in-show setting that includes traveling players, auto quartet detection, and a rate-row check. B hard-codes values such as <8 shows and the literal 1 sound-check limit, and its horn logic looks only at trumpets on the local roster. B does price services by their own date across a rate change, a modest advantage, whereas A requires split payroll runs. Usability and submission: A adds a per-musician Pay Stub supporting Art. 11.4 and a Calc Detail audit trail, with audits marked directly on attendance. B is simpler and has a signature block, but no stub or premium breakdown. Its text extraction shows no cached formula results, and the Day column renders blank. A's extra sheets add some complexity, but they serve the stated purpose and do not offset these gaps in B.