Allocation Review Process Sample Clauses

Allocation Review Process. An employee may request a review of their position when the employee believes that the basis of its request has become a permanent requirement of the position. The request must be complete and submitted in writing to Human Resources on a form provided by the University. Allocation reviews will be processed according to the University Position Review and Allocation procedure. A position may not be reviewed more often than once every six (6) months.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Allocation Review Process. The department head, or an employee may request that a position be reviewed when the requesting party believes that the basis of its request has become a permanent requirement of the position. A position may not be reviewed more often than once every six (6) months. The request must be complete and in writing on forms provided by the Employer. Requests may be submitted to Human Resources or to an employee’s direct supervisor or department. Human Resources will provide a copy of the request to PSE. Any party may submit additional information, including the names of individuals, which the party believes is relevant to the position review. An employee may request that a PSE representative be present as an observer at meetings with the Employer reviewer scheduled to discuss the request for position review. The University will notify the employee in writing of their right to have a PSE representative observe meetings regarding the position review. The University’s notice will include a link to PSE representative contact information. The Employer reviewer will investigate the position and issue a written response to the employee or employee representative within sixty (60) calendar days from receipt of forms by Human Resources. A completed request is defined as the employee completing all employee portions of the reclassification forms. The response will include notification of the class and salary assigned when the position is reallocated, or notification of the reasons the position does not warrant reallocation when the request is not approved. In the event that an employee is reallocated to a lower classification, the employee will be paid their current salary provided it is within the salary range of the new position. In those cases where the employee’s current salary exceeds the maximum amount of the salary range for the new position, the employee will continue receiving the salary the employee was receiving prior to the reallocation downward until such time as the employee vacates the position or their salary falls within the new range. Following receipt of the Employer’s determination, an employee may request reconsideration in accord with the provisions of WAC 357. Employer allocation decisions will not be subject to the grievance procedure.
Allocation Review Process. A. The department head, or an employee may request that a position be reviewed when the requesting party believes that the basis of its request has become a permanent requirement of the position. A position may not be reviewed more often than once every six (6) months. B. The request must be complete and in writing on forms provided by the Employer. Requests may be submitted to Human Resources or to an employee’s direct supervisor or department. Human Resources will provide a copy of the request to PSE. Any party may submit additional information, including the names of individuals, which the party believes is relevant to the position review. C. An employee may request that a PSE representative be present as an observer at meetings with the Employer reviewer scheduled to discuss the request for position review. D. The Employer reviewer will investigate the position and issue a written response to the employee or employee representative within sixty (60) calendar days from receipt of forms by Human Resources. A completed request is defined as the employee completing all employee portions of the reclassification forms. The response will include notification of the class and salary assigned when the position is reallocated, or notification of the reasons the position does not warrant reallocation when the request is not approved. E. In the event that an employee is reallocated to a lower classification, with a maximum pay differential greater than five percent (5%), he or she may exercise full options under Article 32. Following receipt of the Employer’s determination, an employee may request reconsideration in accord with the provisions of WAC 357. Employer allocation decisions will not be subject to the grievance procedure.
Allocation Review Process. An employee may request a review of their position when the employee believes that the basis of its request has become a permanent requirement of the position. The request must be complete and submitted in writing to Human Resources on a form provided by the University. Allocation reviews will be processed according to the University Position Review and Allocation procedure. A position may not be reviewed more often than once every six (6) months. An employee may request a PSE representative be present as an observer at meetings when the Employer interviews the employee about the information provided in the Position Review Request form and the job responsibilities the employee performs. PSE must provide as much advance notice as possible to the Human Resources Office of their participation in the interview. The Employer will review the position and issue a written response to the employee or employee representative within sixty (60) calendar days from receipt of forms by Human Resources. A completed request is defined as the employee completing all employee portions of the reclassification forms. The response will include notification of the classification, salary range and step, and justification for the assigned classification.
Allocation Review Process. 24.4.1 The department head, or an employee may request that a position be reviewed when the requesting party believes that the basis of its request has become a permanent requirement of the position. A position may not be reviewed more often than once every six (6) months. 24.4.2 The request must be complete and in writing on forms provided by the University. Requests may be submitted to Human Resources or to an employee’s direct supervisor or department. Any party may submit additional information, including the names of individuals, which the party believes is relevant to the position review. 24.4.3 An employee may request that a PSE representative be present as an observer at meetings with the University reviewer scheduled to discuss the request for position review. 24.4.4 The University reviewer will investigate the position and issue a written response to the employee or employee representative within sixty (60) calendar days from receipt of forms by Human Resources. A completed request is defined as the employee completing all employee portions of the reclassification forms. The response will include notification of the class and salary assigned when the position is reallocated, or notification of the reasons the position does not warrant reallocation when the request is not approved. 24.4.5 In the event that an employee is reallocated to a lower classification, he or she will be placed on the layoff list for his or her prior classification. 24.4.6 An employee may request reconsideration following receipt of the University's determination in accord with the provisions of WAC 357.

Related to Allocation Review Process

  • Review Process A/E's Work Product will be reviewed by County under its applicable technical requirements and procedures, as follows:

  • Claims Review Population A description of the Population subject to the Claims Review.

  • Claims Review Methodology ‌‌ a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject‌‌ to the Quarterly Claims Review.

  • Review Protocol A narrative description of how the Claims Review was conducted and what was evaluated.

  • Review Procedures a. In consultation with the Illinois SHPO, NRCS shall identify those undertakings with little to no potential to affect historic properties and list those undertakings in Appendix A. Upon the determination by the CRS that a proposed undertaking is included in Appendix A, the NRCS is not required to consult further with the SHPO for that undertaking. A list of undertakings with the potential to affect historic properties comprises Appendix B. b. The lists of undertakings provided in Appendices A and B may be modified through consultation and written agreement between the NRCS State Conservationist and the SHPO without requiring an amendment to this Illinois Prototype Agreement. The NRCS State Office will maintain the master list and will provide an updated list to all consulting parties with an explanation of the rationale for classifying the practices accordingly. c. Undertakings identified in Appendix B shall require further review as outlined in Stipulation V. a. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO to define the undertaking’s APE, identify and evaluate historic properties that may be affected by the undertaking, assess potential effects, and identify strategies for resolving adverse effects prior to implementing the undertaking. 1) NRCS may provide its proposed APE, identification of historic properties and/or scope of identification efforts, and assessment of effects in a single transmittal to the SHPO, provided this documentation meets the substantive standards in 36 CFR Part 800.4-5 and 800.11. 2) The NRCS shall attempt to avoid adverse effects to historic properties whenever possible; where historic properties are located in the APE, NRCS shall describe how it proposes to modify, buffer, or move the undertaking to avoid adverse effects to historic properties. 3) Where the NRCS proposes a finding of "no historic properties affected" or "no adverse effect" to historic properties, the SHPO shall have 30 calendar days from receipt of this documented description and information to review it and provide comments. The NRCS shall take into account all timely comments. i. If the SHPO, or another consulting party, disagrees with NRCS' findings and/or determination, it shall notify the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar daytime period. The NRCS shall consult with the SHPO or other consulting party to attempt to resolve the disagreement. If the disagreement cannot be resolved through this consultation, NRCS shall follow the dispute resolution process in Stipulation VIII below. ii. If the SHPO does not respond to the NRCS within the thirty (30) calendar day period and/or the NRCS receives no objections from other consulting parties, or if the SHPO concurs with the NRCS' determination and proposed actions to avoid adverse effects, the NRCS shall document the concurrence/lack of response within the review time noted above and may move forward with the undertaking. 4) Where a proposed undertaking may adversely affect historic properties, NRCS shall describe proposed measures to minimize or mitigate the adverse effects, and follow the process in 36 CFR Part 800.6, including consultation with other consulting patties and notification to the ACHP, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement to resolve the adverse effects. Should the proposed undertaking have the potential to adversely affect a known NHL, the NRCS shall, to the maximum extent possible, undertake such planning and actions that may be necessary to minimize harm to the NHL in accordance with 54 U.S.C. § 306107 of the NHPA and 36 CFR Part 800.6 and 800.10, including consultation with the ACHP and respective National Park Service, Regional National Historic Landmark Program Coordinator, to develop a Memorandum of Agreement. d. NRCS will conduct archaeological surveys and will submit reports and other documentation to SHPO for review and comment. When no archaeological sites have been located by the archaeological survey, NRCS may proceed with the proposed undertaking. Reports for negative surveys must be submitted to SHPO on a quarterly basis. All positive and negative reports submitted to SHPO will be sent digitally for submission to the Inventory of Illinois Archaeological Sites (IAS) data file maintained by staff at the Illinois State Museum (ISM) housed under the Illinois Department of Natural Resources (IDNR). The NRCS further agrees that access to specific site location data will be restricted to the CRS, the NRCS field personnel installing conservation practices adjacent to the cultural resource, and the landowner. Specific site location information for individual projects will be maintained in a secure cultural resources file kept in the field offices and will not be available to the public. e. Curation: NRCS personnel will not collect artifactual material during routine field inspections. However, if a professional survey, evaluation testing, or mitigation is required, NRCS shall ensure that all materials and records resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities on federal or state property are curated by the Illinois State Museum. The NRCS shall ensure that all records resulting from cultural resource surveys or data recovery activities on private property are curated by the Illinois State Museum or an equivalent curation facility in accordance with 36 CFR Part 79. Subject to the landowner's permission, all objects resulting from cultural resources surveys or data recovery activities are maintained by the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution until their analysis is complete and they are returned to their owner(s). Although landowners will be encouraged to donate artifactual material, it is understood that objects collected on private land remain the property of the landowner(s) unless the landowner(s) donates the material to the Illinois State Museum or equivalent research institution. This excludes burial goods, as stipulated by XXXXXX.

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!