Hi Skye,
That's an interesting situation, but I'd suspect one that is quite rare: an edge case.
When Task B was removed -- wiping out the predecessor relationship to Task C along with it, I expect that Workfront then ran the usual timeline calculation, and -- since Task C's handoff date would have been null -- it followed the remaining predecessor back to Task A, noted Task A's Actual Completion Date, and plonked it into Task C's Handoff Date. Logical, but perhaps unfair to the Assignee on Task C, who was then deemed "behind".
I suppose you could appeal to Workfront (from a feature request perspective) that at the plonking point, the Handoff date should be the later of Task A's Actual Completion Date and $$NOW, citing this example. However, I suspect there are other situations where having the Task A Actual Completion Date would be preferable.
In the meantime, if this edge case happens regularly enough to justify a workaround, I'd suggest you invent a report, Task level custom calculation and/or calculated view that spots the anomaly to reassure Assignees that although Workfront is showing them as behind, it's not their fault.
Regards,
Doug
