why do other uses need to see who can login on a server? that is on its own a security risk and should not be exposed...

Interesting.  I was not aware of that quirk of PARSENAME.

SELECT PARSENAME(LTRIM(RTRIM(REPLACE(REPLACE(REPLACE(@statement, CHAR(9), ''), CHAR(10), ''), CHAR(13), ''))), 1)

why do other uses need to see who can login on a server? that is on its own a security risk and should not be exposed by default.

If...

Use: SELECT PARSENAME(@statement, 1), viz.:

declare @statement varchar(100) = '[dbo].[vw_EmployeeData]'
SELECT PARSENAME(@statement, 1)

set @statement = 'dbo.Employee'
SELECT PARSENAME(@statement, 1)

;WITH UDT_CKB_SNAPSHOT AS
(
  SELECT  [UPC] ,[MASTERCHAINNAME] ,[EVENT_TYPE],[STARTDATE],[ENDDATE] ,[EVENT_NAME] 
  FROM [BYIntegration].[SCPOMGR].[UDT_CKB_SNAPSHOT]
  WHERE [EVENT_TYPE]='Promotion' AND
        [STARTDATE] BETWEEN...

So, if I created a test table right now, and made an identity column, added 10 rows to it, then rebooted the server, and added another row, you're...

This is so wrong.  Your company is trying to have you fix the wrong problem.  The real problem is the source of the data and...

If you rounded the numbers, it seems like you'd end up with 296, 4, 1:

SELECT 300*.986, 300*.012, 300*.002 --295.800, 3.600, 0.600

The first round up seems clearest, so 296.  You'd have...

This is so wrong.  Your company is trying to have you fix the wrong problem.  The real problem is the source of the data and THAT's what...

The patient's name is not present anywhere.  That is, there's no way to know who patient "A", let alone to know what doctor(s) he/she saw.

This is so wrong.  Your company is trying to have you fix the wrong problem.  The real problem is the source of the data and THAT's what actually needs...

This was an interesting problem because for 'Shift' rows, you need to output only one row.  But for non-'Shift' rows, you (mostly) need to output two rows: a row for...

I wouldn't go thru all those gyrations to pull out the values.  Imagine the hassle to just add one more column to the output.

I'd do something similar to this instead.

I think this will work.  I have NOT yet adjusted it for performance (or tuned it at all yet, really), I was just trying to make it work.  Let me...

As noted, a LEFT JOIN is what you need.  An INNER JOIN requires a matching row in both tables; a LEFT JOIN will keep the row from the left-hand table...