Home · Solutions · HR & people
Solution · HR & peopleAn instructor’s settlement computes itself from the class calendar, not from memory on the first of the month
Instructor payouts without the spreadsheet
A robot collects delivered classes from the calendar and rota, applies each instructor’s own rates, sends everyone a statement to approve, and hands over payout-ready data. Mismatches become cases to resolve before payday, not a row after it.
Executive summary
Instructors work on assorted contracts and rates: per hour, per participant, with commission; hours get written down from memory and messages, and the monthly spreadsheet breeds the same disputes.
The robot collects delivered classes from the calendar and rota, cover included, applies each instructor’s price book and sends a statement for one-click approval; mismatches become cases before payday, not after.
Settlements take hours instead of days, payouts need no corrections, instructors see their numbers live, and the owner sees class profitability per group and trainer for the first time.
the class calendar and rota; instructor price books; statements for approval; payout data and cases in Microsoft Teams
Business problem
The spreadsheet, memory and the post-payday row
A small class business, a studio, a range, a swimming or language school, pays instructors in a way that grew organically: one has a flat hourly rate, one a per-participant rate, one a share of her group’s memberships, one two of those at once, on a freelance contract or a B2B invoice. Each arrangement is rational; what is irrational is their sum in one spreadsheet.
Settlement begins on the first of the month with a reconstruction: who taught how much. The calendar says one thing, the rota another, and reality, with cover, cancelled classes and an extra Saturday, a third. The owner glues it together from memory and messages, instructors send in their own versions, and the differences surface where they always do: cover and cancellations.
Then the spreadsheet multiplies hours by rates that have exceptions of their own: a different rate for the beginners’ group, another for one-to-ones, a weekend supplement. One slip in a row and the payout needs correcting, and a correction after payday is the worst kind of conversation with a person on whose loyalty the firm stands.
And in all this, the knowledge nobody has time to extract goes missing: which classes actually earn their keep. The instructor’s rate is a class’s largest cost, but nobody sets it against attendance and group revenue, because the settlement itself eats all the energy.
How it works today
Below is what the work looks like before anything is automated.
- PersonThe first of the month opens with a reconstruction: who taught how much, from memory and messages
- Risk of errorCalendar, rota and reality disagree around cover and cancellations
- PersonThe spreadsheet multiplies hours by rates with exceptions; one slip spoils a payout
- WaitingInstructors wait for statements and send corrections after the deadline
- Risk of errorDisputes surface after payday, at the worst possible moment of the relationship
- Risk of errorNobody computes class profitability, because the settlement eats all the energy
Why the current process costs more than it appears
The bill that never shows up in a budget.
- Two days of the owner’s work a month is, over a year, a month of work handed to a spreadsheet.
- Every post-payday correction costs more than its amount: it erodes trust in both directions.
- An instructor who has to police his own hours every month has a ready reason to leave for a place where he does not.
- Without a profitability figure, the timetable is arranged by tradition, not results.
Cost of inaction
The first two rows are plain labour, easy to count at home: the settling person’s hours and the team’s total time writing down their own hours. The third row is the dearest and uncountable: the team’s trust that the firm pays exactly and on time.
The model assumes the class calendar, kept current, becomes the source of truth; where it is missing, the first implementation step is putting it in order, which by itself ends half the disputes.
A model organisation with realistic proportions – the numbers exist so you can run the same maths on your own data; they are not a client result.
A movement studio: fourteen instructors on a mix of contracts, from hourly rates to group membership commission, classes in a calendar, a weekly rota, Microsoft 365.
Around 420 classes a month, cover and cancellations included; the spreadsheet settlement takes the owner two days.
Instructors send in their own hour versions; differences surface around cover; a post-payday correction happens every few months.
Nobody computes class profitability; the timetable follows tradition.
The robot files delivered classes daily from the calendar and rota, cover included from the change history; at month end it applies each instructor’s price book, sends a one-click approval statement, and raises mismatches as cases before payday; approved data goes to payouts and to a per-group profitability figure.
In the modelled case the settlement falls from two days to two hours, and post-payday corrections disappear. Model numbers, not the studio’s records.
Proposed solution
We start by writing down the price books: each instructor’s rates with every exception, the rules for cover, cancellations and minimum attendance. Today that document exists in several heads at once; once written it becomes the single version of truth, versioned at every change.
The source of hours is the class calendar: the robot files what actually happened daily, with the trainer, cover and attendance where it is recorded. At month end every instructor receives their statement: the class list, the rates, the total; they approve with one click or flag a specific row. A flag becomes a case to resolve before payday, with that class’s history at hand.
Approved statements go out as payout-ready data: transfer amounts for freelance contracts, expected amounts on B2B invoices, attachments for the accountant. Along the way the owner gets what she never had: instructor cost per group set against attendance, the first honest profitability figure for the timetable.
UiPath Orchestrator: daily class filing, the monthly schedule, retries and an audit trail; UiPath Integration Service connectors for Microsoft Teams, Outlook 365 and SharePoint
Versioned price books with exceptions, one-click approval statements, mismatch cases before payday, payout data and a per-group profitability figure
The class calendar and rota as the source of hours; the settlement register in SharePoint; attendance from the booking system via export or API where one exists
How the automated process works
- AutomationThe robot files delivered classes daily from the calendar, with trainer and cover
- AutomationAt month end each instructor’s price book computes itself, exceptions included
- SystemThe instructor gets a statement and approves with one click, or flags a row
- PersonA flag becomes a case before payday, with the class’s history at hand
- AutomationApproved data goes to payouts: transfers, B2B invoice amounts, accountant attachments
- PersonThe owner sees instructor cost per group set against attendance
Human-in-the-loop model
Automation handles
- Collecting delivered classes, computing by the price books and the approval statements
- Approvals handling and mismatch cases before payday
- Payout data and the monthly per-group profitability figure
People decide
- The price books, the cover and cancellation rules, and every change to them
- Resolving disputed cases and deciding exceptions
- The payouts themselves and staffing decisions; the automation counts, it does not hire
Before and after
Systems and integrations
The stack is short on purpose: one engine, one execution layer, one place where a person decides.
Inputs
- the class calendar and rota with change history
- instructor price books with exceptions
- attendance from the booking system (if any)
- instructor approvals and flags
Automation layer
- UiPath Orchestrator
- UiPath Robots
- UiPath Integration Service
- UiPath Action Center
Target systems
- each instructor’s approved statement
- payout data and B2B invoice amounts
- the per-group profitability figure in Microsoft Teams
Human touchpoints: statement approval once a month; mismatch cases in Microsoft Teams; a price book review at every change
Technologies used
daily class filing, the monthly schedule, retries, a record of every settlement line
Aapproval statements, cases, reports
Aprice books and the settlement register with versions and permissions
Athe source of delivered classes; scope depends on the interface
Bper-participant rates and the profitability figure; via export or API
BIllustrative economic model
Numbers you can check against your own data.
The model assumes a class calendar kept current as the source of truth; putting the calendar in order is part of the implementation where it is missing. Rates and volumes belong to the scenario; your own numbers go into the calculator alongside.
Run the maths on your data
An illustrative estimate based on your inputs. It models freed capacity, not promised savings.
Business benefits
- Settlements take hours instead of days and stop ruining the first week of the month
- Payouts need no corrections; disputes resolve before the transfer, not after it
- Instructors see their numbers live and approve with one click
- Cover and cancellations count by written rules, not negotiation
- The owner sees for the first time which classes earn their keep
The management view
- Pay rules are written and even, the foundation of trust in a team of scattered contracts
- Every settlement’s history is complete: classes, rate, approval, payout
- A new instructor is a new price book row, not a new spreadsheet tab and a new risk
Board-level KPIs
time to close settlements · post-payday corrections · mismatches flagged before payday · instructors’ time spent on settling · instructor cost per group
Security and governance
The automation has exactly the permissions it needs. Not one more.
- The robot works on settlement data: classes, rates, amounts; each instructor sees only their own
- Price books and settlements have versions and permissions; an authorised person makes changes
- Every settlement line has a source: a calendar class with its history
- Pay data is visible only to the owner and the accountant
- Data stays in your Microsoft 365 tenant; the robots run in the EU region of UiPath Automation Cloud
Why now
Good instructors are scarce; exact, punctual payouts are part of the offer, not a courtesy.
Contract forms keep multiplying, each with its own rules; the spreadsheet stopped holding them.
Class costs are rising; without a profitability figure the timetable is arranged blind.
Relevant executive roles
Gets two days a month back, plus a profitability figure she never had
Sees his classes and amounts live; approves in a minute and trusts the payout
Receives ready, approved data instead of a spreadsheet with corrections
Common questions and objections
It can, precisely because the rules are different but constant: the rate, the exceptions, the way cover counts are rules you write down once. The automation does not unify the contracts; it computes each by its own rules, only without slips and within the hour.
It is not a monitoring system; it is an exact-payout system: for the first time the instructor sees his classes and amounts live, instead of reconstructing them from memory at month end. In practice it is the team who asks first when we start, because the one standing point of friction with the firm disappears.
Which is exactly why the source is a calendar with change history, not someone’s memory: cover noted in the calendar counts by the cover rules automatically. A change nobody recorded surfaces at statement approval, before payday rather than after it.
When this is not the right solution
- Two instructors on an identical hourly rate: a calendar and multiplication suffice
- No class calendar at all and no will to keep one: first the calendar, then the automation
- Expecting the automation to decide what pay should be: it computes by the rules, it does not set them
A question for the next management meeting
How many hours does settling the team cost us each month, and how many of them go into straightening out the same things as always?
Implementation approach
Scope without ambiguity, before anything is signed.
We deliver
- Written price books for every instructor, with exceptions and versions
- Automatic collection of delivered classes from the calendar and rota
- One-click approval statements and mismatch cases before payday
- Payout data and expected B2B invoice amounts
- The monthly per-group profitability figure and two weeks of parallel running
We need from you
- The current pay rules of every instructor; we write them down together
- Access to the class calendar and rota
- A decision who resolves disputed cases and approves price book changes
Stages
Discovery
Contracts, rates, exceptions, hour sources, dispute history
Rules
Versioned price books, cover and cancellation rules, the approval path
Build
Class collection, computing, statements, cases, payout data
Parallel run
One full monthly cycle: the robot computes, the spreadsheet runs alongside, we compare
Go-live
Settlements move to the system; a price book review after the first cycle
A quick win. The largest piece is the one-off writing down of price books and exceptions; the computing and approvals run on the Microsoft 365 you already have.
The third of the month, 11:10 p.m.: the spreadsheet is four hundred out, and the transfers are due tomorrow.
Describe your setup: how many instructors, which contract forms, how long the settlement takes. We return a draft of the price books ready to write down, and the arithmetic of the hours to recover.
Count your settlement hoursThe neighbouring process usually has the same problem
Sick leave at 6:40, patients from 8:00, and the manager hunts for cover down a phone chain.
See the solution Finance & accountingMemberships paid or pausedThe membership is two months unpaid, and entry still works. Nobody noticed.
See the solution Finance & accountingCost invoices to the accountant without the binderOn the fifth the accountant asks about missing invoices. The inbox hunt begins.
See the solutionIndustries where we deploy this most oftenSmall business & services