Add supervisor to employee

It is common in company structure that an employee has a supervisor.
It is useful to have the information in Tryton in order to give special access right to the supervisor (e.g. see/edit timesheet of subordinates).

I choose the term supervisor/subordinates because I find that it does not imply a specific structure (like a pyramid, flat or circle etc.).

assigned to @ced

added company type::feature + 1 deleted label

Here is review266331002

I did not add a tree view of the employee because it may not be a tree but a cyclic graph.

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

I will like to have dave opinions here about the "subordinates" word as it's a word that may have negative conotations [1], so I will prefer to include the wording that may have less negative conotations in native english.


[1] https://www.businesswritingblog.com/business_writing/2009/04/subordinatesa-word-to-avoid-.html

I checked with https://wikidiff.com/supervisor/subordinate as I searched for the antonym of supervisor.

review266331002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/266331002/#ps270551002

I could not find another word that describe correctly. All friendly alternatives proposed has bias in the meaning and are not general/generic.

Although technically correct, I don't think subordinates is a term that I would use when referring to the group of people that are supervised by someone, for the reasons given in the link in msg53185.

I agree that the nearly all the alternatives suggested do not work in this context - team, workers, employees, assistants, associates, colleagues.

I can see a couple of possible options.

* Use "reports to" for supervisor, and "direct reports" for subordinates, although I personally don't think this is as clear as supervisor and subordinates.

* Use "Supervises" as the label for the subordinates field, which would make sense next to a list of employees that the employee supervises. Although I'm not sure whether this would be a great name for the field?

I strongly support the proposal of David Harper to *not* use supervisor/subordinate in this context.
There are alternatives like monitoring, checking, scrutiny, surveillance etc.

El 15/11/19 a les 13:46, David Harper ha escrit:
> * Use "Supervises" as the label for the subordinates field, which would make sense next to a list of employees that the employee supervises. Although I'm not sure whether this would be a great name for the field?

Does it make sense to use "Supervised Employees" or is as bad as "Subordinates"?

On 2019-11-15 13:46, David Harper wrote:
> * Use "reports to" for supervisor, and "direct reports" for subordinates, although I personally don't think this is as clear as supervisor and subordinates.

Using verbs for field always seems wrong.
And I agree that supervisor/subordinates are clearer.

> * Use "Supervises" as the label for the subordinates field, which would make sense next to a list of employees that the employee supervises. Although I'm not sure whether this would be a great name for the field?

I agree also that verb will be wrong for a field name. But I'm not
against using it as label on the view.

On 2019-11-15 13:59, Mathias Behrle wrote:
> There are alternatives like monitoring, checking, scrutiny, surveillance etc.

All those terms sounds for me worst and inaccurate. They contain a
notion of permanent watching which is not the purpose of the scheme.

review266331002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/266331002/#ps270561002

On 2019-11-15.14:02:28 Sergi wrote:
> Does it make sense to use "Supervised Employees" or is as bad as "Subordinates"?

It is not as bad as subordinates, because it doesn't have the idea of "less than" that subordinate does. So I think it is a good suggestion.

> On 2019-11-15 13:59, Mathias Behrle wrote:
>> There are alternatives like monitoring, checking, scrutiny, surveillance etc.
>
> All those terms sounds for me worst and inaccurate. They contain a
> notion of permanent watching which is not the purpose of the scheme.

AFAIU the original notion of this issue is giving access permissions to distinct users for distinct records of other users. This must be in no way bound to a structure of subordinate (besides that the word itself sounds really awful). There could be very well another employee (or even someone outside the company) with the task of controlling e.g. timesheets. This job is most alike to controller, auditor, checker, examinant.

Company/Party structure is basically the purpose of module party_relationship. Placing fixed company structure into a separate module may lead to redundant records and seems to be improper modelling.

review266331002 updated at https://codereview.tryton.org/266331002/#ps252751002

New changeset 0ed259ef06f2 by Cédric Krier in branch 'default':
Add supervisor and subordinates of employee
https://hg.tryton.org/modules/company/rev/0ed259ef06f2

added 1 deleted label and removed 1 deleted label

closed

New changeset 4bdfdf4c4349 by Cédric Krier in branch 'default':
Add supervisor and subordinates of employee
https://hg.tryton.org/tryton-env/rev/4bdfdf4c4349

mentioned in issue #8825 (closed)