### Steps to reproduce
- Install **Payroll** app
- Create two companies each belonging to different countries, for example:
	- Company A in US
	- Company B in AE
- In **Company A**, create a salary structure with a salary rule that belong to Company A -US-
- Using **Company A**, In the payroll app, Go to > **Reporting** > **Payroll** and click on the **MEASURES** dropdown button, U can see the newly created salary rule. Try clicking on it. Everything works fine.
- Now switch to **Company B**, create a salary structure with a salary rule that belong to **Company B** -AE-
- Using **Company B**, In the payroll app, Go to > **Reporting** > **Payroll** and click on the MEASURES dropdown button, U can see the newly created salary rule. Try clicking on it. a DB error occurs.

### Investigation
- When we create a new salary rule, we `_generate_payroll_report_fields()` https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b9adb690d7fd38c66a787377967a856b9678ffd1/hr_payroll/models/hr_salary_rule.py#L195
- Which `init()` the payroll report, creating a new DB view. However only the current company rules are fetched removing the other companies rules from the view as the old one is dropped https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b9adb690d7fd38c66a787377967a856b9678ffd1/hr_payroll/report/hr_payroll_report.py#L145

### Discuss
I think a better approach would be to construct a new view each time you open the payroll report, meaning to `init()` the report each time we go into https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/b9adb690d7fd38c66a787377967a856b9678ffd1/hr_payroll/report/hr_payroll_report.py#L157-L165
but I think it's not a good idea to drop a view and create another each time also!

opw-3675598

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#55759
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#55606

The cards in the ecological report weren't translated due to the strings being defined in t-values. This is switched so that they will now be correctly exported to the .pot file + translated.

Additionally cleaned up some of the incorrect English for a better UX. More terms could be improved/fixed as well, but they do not affect the users as much + are already translated so changing them was avoided in stable.

- Carbon => "carbon emissions": this or CO_2 are used when referring
      to reducing pollution due to burning fuel. "carbon" on its own implies
      the element, whereas adding "emissions" to the end of it implies CO_2
      (emissions), because English ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
- sparred => saved/reduced: sparred is both spelled wrong (i.e. should be spared) and incorrect to use in this case
- like => that's: "like" doesn't make sense to use in this case and is confusing to read. "That's" indicates how much the user is saving/reducing/etc. "Approximately" or "about" also would have worked, but are less friendly sounding

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#55894
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#54685

Steps to reproduce:
-------------------
- install hr_payroll and hr_holidays;
- create an employee;
- create a contract for this employee (since 1st January for example);
- create and approve a sick time off for this employee (for a day in January);
- create a payslip for this employee (the payslip has two "worked days");
- confirm the payslip;
- go to Reporting / Payroll and group by employee;
- click on the employee's line to display the list view.

Issue:
------
There are two records.
This can be explained by saying that this is a record by worked days type. However, if we click on it, we see that the detail is the same for both records.

Cause:
------
The query which generates the virtual table `hr_payroll_report` will give as `id`, the value of the `id` which corresponds to the payslip.
```sql
SELECT
	p.id as id,
	wd.id as wdid,
	wd.name
FROM
	(SELECT * FROM hr_payslip WHERE state IN ('done', 'paid')) p
	left join hr_payslip_worked_days wd on (wd.payslip_id = p.id)
```

The result of this query will be two records:
```
 id | wdid |    name
----+------+------------
  1 |   2  | Unpaid
  1 |   3  | Attendance
```

When we want to obtain the details of the record, we will perform a read on the `hr.payroll.report` model for an `id` equal to 1 for both records, i.e. we will retrieve the same values.

Solution:
---------
Forcing the id to be unique.
Add a field indicating the type to avoid confusion.

Note:
In the list view, it is possible to group by "Payslip Name" to avoid confusion.
Note 2:
It is a band-aid fix that helps us understand what is going on in the report, but it needs to be redesigned to redirect us directly to payslip records and not records corresponding to worked days (and avoid aggregation problems).

opw-3686692

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#55882
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#55629

This traceback arises when a user tries to unlink multiple records

Steps to produce

1. Install  `approvals`
2. Open `approvals/manager/all approvals`
3. Select multiple records then delete them.


Error:
```
ValueError: too many values to unpack (expected 1)
  File "odoo/models.py", line 5837, in ensure_one
    _id, = self._ids
ValueError: Expected singleton: approval.request(9, 8)
  File "odoo/http.py", line 2150, in __call__
    response = request._serve_db()
  File "odoo/http.py", line 1722, in _serve_db
    return service_model.retrying(self._serve_ir_http, self.env)
  File "odoo/service/model.py", line 133, in retrying
    result = func()
  File "odoo/http.py", line 1749, in _serve_ir_http
    response = self.dispatcher.dispatch(rule.endpoint, args)
  File "odoo/http.py", line 1953, in dispatch
    result = self.request.registry['ir.http']._dispatch(endpoint)
  File "odoo/addons/base/models/ir_http.py", line 222, in _dispatch
    result = endpoint(**request.params)
  File "odoo/http.py", line 722, in route_wrapper
    result = endpoint(self, *args, **params_ok)
  File "addons/web/controllers/dataset.py", line 24, in call_kw
    return self._call_kw(model, method, args, kwargs)
  File "addons/web/controllers/dataset.py", line 20, in _call_kw
    return call_kw(request.env[model], method, args, kwargs)
  File "odoo/api.py", line 468, in call_kw
    result = _call_kw_multi(method, model, args, kwargs)
  File "odoo/api.py", line 453, in _call_kw_multi
    result = method(recs, *args, **kwargs)
  File "home/odoo/src/enterprise/17.0/approvals/models/approval_request.py", line 113, in unlink
    if self.has_product:
  File "odoo/fields.py", line 1148, in __get__
    record.ensure_one()
  File "odoo/models.py", line 5840, in ensure_one
```
When the user tries to delete  multiple records traceback will be generated because it  tries to unlink a record instead of calling the entire record set.

which leads to  the traceback from here
https://github.com/odoo/enterprise/blob/1551fc9de63706944dffb3d5e57c88482b214a46/approvals/models/approval_request.py#L96-L105

After applying this commit we will resolve the issue by filtering the records and then unlinking the record set.

sentry-4916651369

Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#55848
Forward-Port-Of: odoo/enterprise#55412