Application for Re-evaluation of a Position Sample Clauses

Application for Re-evaluation of a Position. (a) An application for re-evaluation of a position may be made by the employee holding the position or by the supervisor of the position. Where a supervisor requests the re-evaluation of a position, the employee who holds the relevant position will be advised. (b) Prior to making an application for re-evaluation, an employee may request that their supervisor provide them with a written description of their current position that can be used for the purposes of the job evaluation (such as a position description). (c) Unless exceptional circumstances exist, position re-evaluations will be completed and the employee advised of the outcome within 8 weeks from the date the application and supporting documentation is received by Human Resources. (d) An employee who submits an application for a re-evaluation of their position will not be able to make a further application for a re-evaluation of their position until a period of 12 months has elapsed. (e) Where an existing position is re-evaluated to a higher level, the effective date of the re-evaluation will be the date of submission of the application for re- evaluation to the University, unless the Director, Human Resources (or nominee) can determine that the position has changed from an identifiable earlier date. (f) Where a decision is made not to reclassify a position, the Director, Human Resources (or nominee) will, upon request, provide written reasons for the decision or, if the employee requests, meet with the employee to discuss the outcome of the re-evaluation within a reasonable period following the decision being made. (g) Without limiting the University’s ability to change a position under clause 29.0 – Managing Change in the Workplace - of this Agreement, an application for re- evaluation under subclause 21.2(a) will only result in a position being reclassified to a higher level or no change to the current level.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Application for Re-evaluation of a Position. (a) If an employee is of the view that their level of work has so changed as to merit re-evaluation and a supervisor refuses to apply for such re-evaluation, the employee may have the position re-evaluated by Human Resources. (b) Where an existing position is re-evaluated to a higher level, the effective date of the re-evaluation will be the date of submission to the University, or an earlier date as agreed between the supervisor and the employee. (c) Without limiting the University’s ability to change a position under clause 29.0 – Managing Change in the Workplace - of this Agreement, an application for re- evaluation under subclause 21.2(a) will only result in a position being reclassified to a higher level or no change to the current level.
Application for Re-evaluation of a Position. (a) If an employee is of the view that their level of work has so changed as to merit re- evaluation and a supervisor refuses to apply for such re-evaluation, the employee may have the position re-evaluated by Human Resources. (b) Where an existing position is re-evaluated to a higher level, the effective date of the re- evaluation will be the date of submission to the University or an earlier date as agreed between the supervisor and the employee. (c) Without limiting the University’s ability to change a position under clause 24.3 of this Agreement, an application for re-evaluation under clause 17.2(a) above will only result in a position being reclassified to a higher level or no change to the current level.

Related to Application for Re-evaluation of a Position

  • SUBMISSION OF THE MONTHLY MI REPORT 4.1 The completed MI Report shall be completed electronically and returned to the Authority by uploading the electronic MI Report computer file to MISO in accordance with the instructions provided in MISO. 4.2 The Authority reserves the right (acting reasonably) to specify that the MI Report be submitted by the Supplier using an alternative communication to that specified in paragraph 4.1 above such as email. The Supplier agrees to comply with any such instructions provided they do not materially increase the burden on the Supplier.

  • Annual Evaluation The Partnership will be evaluated on an annual basis through the use of the Strategic Partnership Annual Evaluation Format as specified in Appendix C of OSHA Instruction CSP 00-00-000, OSHA Strategic Partnership Program for Worker Safety and Health. The Choate Team will be responsible for gathering required participant data to evaluate and track the overall results and success of the Partnership. This data will be shared with OSHA. OSHA will be responsible for writing and submitting the annual evaluation.

  • Program Evaluation The School District and the College will develop a plan for the evaluation of the Dual Credit program to be completed each year. The evaluation will include, but is not limited to, disaggregated attendance and retention rates, GPA of high-school-credit-only courses and college courses, satisfactory progress in college courses, state assessment results, SAT/ACT, as applicable, TSIA readiness by grade level, and adequate progress toward the college-readiness of the students in the program. The School District commits to collecting longitudinal data as specified by the College, and making data and performance outcomes available to the College upon request. HB 1638 and SACSCOC require the collection of data points to be longitudinally captured by the School District, in collaboration with the College, will include, at minimum: student enrollment, GPA, retention, persistence, completion, transfer and scholarships. School District will provide parent contact and demographic information to the College upon request for targeted marketing of degree completion or workforce development information to parents of Students. School District agrees to obtain valid FERPA releases drafted to support the supply of such data if deemed required by counsel to either School District or the College. The College conducts and reports regular and ongoing evaluations of the Dual Credit program effectiveness and uses the results for continuous improvement.

  • Proposing Integration Activities in the Planning Submission No integration activity described in section 6.3 may be proposed in a CAPS unless the Funder has consented, in writing, to its inclusion pursuant to the process set out in section 6.3(b).

  • Distribution of UDP and TCP queries DNS probes will send UDP or TCP “DNS test” approximating the distribution of these queries.

  • Withdrawal of Property from Market or Termination of Discussions Potential Investor acknowledges that the Property has been offered for sale subject to withdrawal of the Property from the market at any time or rejection of any offer because of the terms thereof, or for any other reason whatsoever, without notice, as well as the termination of discussions with any party at any time without notice for any reason whatsoever.

  • TECHNICAL EVALUATION (a) Detailed technical evaluation shall be carried out by Purchase Committee pursuant to conditions in the tender document to determine the substantial responsiveness of each tender. For this clause, the substantially responsive bid is one that conforms to all the eligibility and terms and condition of the tender without any material deviation. The Institute’s determination of bid’s responsiveness is to be based on the contents of the bid itself without recourse to extrinsic evidence. The Institute shall evaluate the technical bids also to determine whether they are complete, whether required sureties have been furnished, whether the documents have been properly signed and whether the bids are in order. (b) The technical evaluation committee may call the responsive bidders for discussion or presentation to facilitate and assess their understanding of the scope of work and its execution. However, the committee shall have sole discretion to call for discussion / presentation. (c) Financial bids of only those bidders who qualify the technical criteria will be opened provided all other requirements are fulfilled. (d) AIIMS Jodhpur shall have right to accept or reject any or all tenders without assigning any reasons thereof.

  • Formal Evaluation All formal evaluations of personnel shall be conducted openly and with full knowledge of the employee concerned by an administrator or supervisor of the District.

  • Petition for Annual Conference Session The Local Church acknowledges that pursuant to the governing standing rules of the Annual Conference, petitions for consideration of the legislative body must be submitted to the Secretary of the Annual Conference on or before April 1 of the current Annual Conference year. The Annual Conference will make reasonable efforts to assist the Local Church in completing the required petition, which will include this Disaffiliation Agreement as an attachment thereto making it subject to public review. If the petition is not filed in a timely manner, the Parties will make good faith efforts under the standing rules of the Annual Conference to cooperate to bring the petition to the legislative floor for consideration by appropriate motions to suspend the standing rules for the purposes of considering the petition.

  • Final Evaluation IC must submit a final report and a project evaluation to the Arts Commission within thirty (30) days after the completion of the Services. Any and all unexpended funds from IC must be returned to City no later than sixty (60) days after the completion of the Services.

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