Explanation for employees not being configured for payment

[jniles]

After discussion with Dr. Rice of Hopital Evangelique Vanga, some of the following reasons may explain why employees are not configured for payment:

1. The employee is being sanctioned and suspended for 3 months due to misconduct.
2. The employee is being seconded out to another organisation for a time period (such as on a mission de service).
3. The employee is away studying and not working (extended leave of absence).

In an ideal world, all employees should be configured for payment every month. Rather than have the user create a new payment period each month, and optionally select employees, I propose that employees should be configured for payment by default, and if any employee is omitted from the list who is not locked the user should type in a justification for why they will not be paid. This will allow us (the developers) to figure out any additional cases for why employees are not being paid.

To complete this issue, the following should happen:

1. A new TEXT field should be added to the payment period table to record this information.
2. Client-side logic should show this field if the user omits a user from the list with text similar to "You have omitted EMP.XYZ.133 - jniles from payment this month. Please record why they are not configured on the list in the textarea below:"
3. Conditional logic to block submission of the form without this message if there are employees who are not locked and not configured for payment.
4. Logic to ensure that all employees are selected for payment at the beginning of the payment period configuration.