GENERAL DISCUSSION AND ADJOURNMENT Sample Clauses

Related to GENERAL DISCUSSION AND ADJOURNMENT

Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
Survival of Provisions After Termination (1) If this Settlement Agreement is not approved, is terminated or otherwise fails to take effect for any reason, the provisions of Sections 3.2(3), 4.1(5)(b), 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 9.1, 9.2, 10(4), 11.1(2) and 12.2(3), and the definitions and Schedules applicable thereto shall survive the termination and continue in full force and effect. The definitions and Schedules shall survive only for the limited purpose of the interpretation of Sections 3.2(3), 4.1(5)(b), 6.1, 6.2, 6.3, 6.4, 9.1, 9.2, 10(4), 11.1(2) and 12.2(3) within the meaning of this Settlement Agreement, but for no other purposes. All other provisions of this Settlement Agreement and all other obligations pursuant to this Settlement Agreement shall cease immediately.
Formal Discussions Section 3.1.1. Pursuant to 5 USC 7114(a)(2)(A), the Union shall be given the opportunity to be represented at any formal discussion between one or more employees it represents and one or more representatives of the Employer concerning any grievance (to include settlement discussions) or any personnel policy or practice or other general condition of employment. This right to be represented does not extend to informal discussions between an employee and a supervisor concerning a personal problem, or work methods and assignments.
Preparation and Organisation of Meetings The Chairperson shall convene ordinary meetings of the Project Committee at least once every 6 (six) months and shall also convene extraordinary meetings at any time upon written request of any Member.
Conclusions and Recommendations The demonstration and evaluation process provided an opportunity to test community specific tools with a range of end users from the memory institution domain and to gain greater insight into both the current and future evolution of the SHAMAN prototypes for preservation, access and re-use. Xxxx et al. (2000) in their user evaluation study of the Alexandria Digital Library which incorporated the evaluation of a Web prototype by earth scientists, information specialists and educators raised four key questions in relation to their findings that SHAMAN may be well advised to consider, they are paraphrased here with our conclusions from the investigations. What have we learned about our target organizations and potential users?  Memory institutions are most definitely not a homogenised group; their needs and requirements differ greatly across the domain.  Representatives of the archives community are agreed on the benefits of SHAMAN‟s authenticity validation function.  The representatives of government information services remained unconvinced as to the need or benefit of grid technologies or distributed ingest while librarians saw the value of grid access as an asset of the framework. What have we learned about the evaluation approach for digital preservation?  Within the limits of the exercise, in terms of time-frame and resources, the approach adopted has generated useful information for the further development of demonstrators and for the development of the SHAMAN framework overall. What have we learned about the SHAMAN ISP1 demonstrator?  Respondents to the evaluation questionnaires and the focus groups indicate that, overall, the presentation of the demonstrator worked effectively and that, in general, participants in the demonstration and evaluation events were able to understand the intentions of the demonstration and to apply the ideas presented to their own context. What have we learned about the applicability of the SHAMAN framework to memory institutions?  Respondents to the questionnaires and participants in the focus groups readily identified the value of the SHAMAN framework to their own operations. The majority had not yet established a long-term digital preservation policy, but recognized the need. Generally, the concepts of distributed ingest and grid operations found favour.  Virtually all practitioners in the focus groups, however, drew attention to need of a lower level demonstration that would be closer to their everyday preservation troubles, especially for digital preservation to be applied to non-textual materials, such as film, photographs and sound archives. In addition to the criteria suggested by Xxxx et al., we can add a further project-related question: What have we learned that has implications for the training and dissemination phase of the Project?  It was not part of the remit of the demonstration and evaluation specifically to discover information of relevance to the training and dissemination function. However, a number of factors will affect the efficacy of any training programme in particular. o First, no common understanding of digital preservation can be assumed of the potential target audiences for training. Consequently, it is likely that self-paced learning materials will be most effective in presenting the SHAMAN framework. o Secondly, the aims of SHAMAN as a project must be conveyed clearly: specifically, that it is a kind of „proof-of-concept‟ project and is not intended to deliver a package of programs capable of being implemented by institutions. o Thirdly, it needs to be emphasised that the SHAMAN framework is not limited to text documents; it can be applied to materials of all kinds. However, the demonstrations relate to bodies of material that were actually available for use. o Fourthly, the existing presentation materials are capable of being adapted for use in training activities. o Finally, the target audiences will appreciate the possibility of online access to the demonstrator, which will need to have very great ease of access in order that people with diverse backgrounds are able to use it with equal facility. We believe that, overall, WP14 has met its aims and objectives in this demonstration and evaluation of ISP1. Valuable lessons have been learnt by all parties involved, which will be transferred to the evaluation of ISP2 in the coming months.
Informal Discussions The employee's concerns will be presented orally by the employee to the appropriate supervisor. Every effort shall be made by all concerned in an informal manner to develop an understanding of the facts and the issues in order to create a climate which will lead to resolution of the problem. If the employee is not satisfied with the informal discussion(s) relative to the matter in question, he/she may proceed to the formal grievance procedure.
Informal Discussion If an employee has a problem relating to a work situation, the employee is encouraged to request a meeting with his or her immediate supervisor to discuss the problem in an effort to clarify the issue and to work cooperatively towards settlement.
Formal Discussion In the event that a difference of a general nature arises regarding interpretation, application, operation or alleged contravention of this Collective Agreement, the Union shall first attempt to resolve the difference through discussion with the Employer, as appropriate. If the difference is not resolved in this manner, it may become a policy grievance.
Public Access to Meetings and Records If the Contractor receives a cumulative total per year of at least $250,000 in City funds or City-administered funds and is a non-profit organization as defined in Chapter 12L of the San Francisco Administrative Code, Contractor shall comply with and be bound by all the applicable provisions of that Chapter. By executing this Agreement, the Contractor agrees to open its meetings and records to the public in the manner set forth in §§12L.4 and 12L.5 of the Administrative Code. Contractor further agrees to make-good faith efforts to promote community membership on its Board of Directors in the manner set xxxxx xx §00X.0 of the Administrative Code. The Contractor acknowledges that its material failure to comply with any of the provisions of this paragraph shall constitute a material breach of this Agreement. The Contractor further acknowledges that such material breach of the Agreement shall be grounds for the City to terminate and/or not renew the Agreement, partially or in its entirety.
NOTIFICATION OF PUBLIC EVENTS AND MEETINGS 2 A. CONTRACTOR shall notify ADMINISTRATOR of any public event or meeting funded in 3 whole or in part by the COUNTY, except for those events or meetings that are intended solely to serve 4 clients or occur in the normal course of business.