Loading
Because it is approved in an HR system and planning happens in a delivery tool. The manager approves a fortnight in July and the project plan still shows that person at full capacity for those weeks.
The collision is found when the milestone is missed, and everyone involved had the information in front of them at some point.
A leave request goes to the reporting line in Nest and, on approval, reduces that person's available hours in Loop for those dates.
Any project relying on them in that window shows the shortfall immediately — in capacity, on the Gantt and in the calendar view — while there is still time to re-plan.
It will not refuse leave because a project is tight. It shows the consequence and leaves the decision with the manager, because the alternative is a system that quietly discourages people from taking their entitlement.
It also does not reassign the work.
Delivery dates are promised against hours that exist. A date proposed across a fortnight when two of four people are away is visibly wrong before it is offered to a client.
Approvers see the delivery consequence at the point of approving, which is where the trade-off actually is.
No. Availability crosses; the reason stays in Nest.
They can show as provisional so planning sees the risk.
Yes, from the working pattern on the personnel record.
We will run it end to end on your own numbers in half an hour, and tell you honestly which parts Treepie does not improve.