Job Classification Review Procedure Sample Clauses

Job Classification Review Procedure. (i) Where the Union has initiated the Job Classification Review Procedure, representatives of the Union and HEABC shall within twenty-eight (28) days consider which profile best describes the core function of the job in question and how the job fits into the industry standard for like jobs. At the request of either party, the parties will complete and utilize the job questionnaire(s) in this consideration. The parties shall attempt to resolve the matter through negotiations. (ii) Failing resolution of the matter by negotiations, the matter may be referred by either party to the BCHOA as a classification arbitration. The Arbitrator shall consider the same criteria (see Article 21.02(B)(i)) as the parties in determining the appropriate classification/wage level for the job in question. (iii) Classification arbitrations will be governed by the following processes: the parties will be limited to four (4) hours’ presentation each, the parties will utilize staff representatives of the Union and HEABC to present cases, and the award will be issued within thirty (30) days of the hearing. The arbitrator’s decision shall be limited to determining the appropriate classification/wage level of the job.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (11)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Job Classification Review Procedure. (i) Where the Union has initiated the Job Classification Review Procedure, representatives of the Union and HEABC shall within twenty-eight (28) days consider which profile best describes the core function of the job in question and how the job fits into the industry standard for like jobs. At the request of either party, the parties will complete and utilize the job questionnaire(s) in this consideration. The parties shall attempt to resolve the matter through negotiations. (ii) Failing resolution of the matter by negotiations, the matter may be referred by either party to classification arbitration. The classification arbitrators shall be either Xxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxxx, or other mutually agreeable arbitrator. The Arbitrator shall consider the same criteria (see Article 21.02(B)(i)) as the parties in determining the appropriate classification/wage level for the job in question. (iii) Classification arbitrations will be governed by the following processes: the parties will be limited to four (4) hours’ presentation each, the parties will utilize staff representatives of the Union and the HEABC to present cases, and the award will be issued within thirty (30) days of the hearing. The arbitrator’s decision shall be limited to determining the appropriate classification/wage level of the job.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (8)
Job Classification Review Procedure. A. An employee may request a review of his/her job classification as it pertains to his/her actual job responsibilities and step placement. B. The Site Supervisor and Superintendent will review a written request and provide a written decision to the employee within twenty (20) working days.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Job Classification Review Procedure a) Where the Union has initiated the Job Classification Review Procedure, representatives of the Union and the Employer shall within twenty-eight (28) days consider which profile best describes the core function of the job in question, and how the job fits into the industry standard for like jobs. The parties shall attempt to resolve the matter through negotiations. b) Failing resolution of the matter by negotiations, the matter may be referred by either party to classification arbitration. The classification arbitrators shall be Xxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxx Xxxxxx, or other mutually agreeable arbitrator. The Arbitrator shall consider the same criteria (see Article 21.02(B)(b)) as the parties in determining the appropriate classification/wage level for the job in question. Classification arbitrations will be governed by the following processes: the parties will be limited to four
Sample 1Sample 2
Job Classification Review Procedure. (i) Where the Union has initiated the Job Classification Re- view Procedure, representatives of the Union and HEABC shall within twenty-eight (28) days consider which profile best describes the core function of the job in question and how the job fits into the industry standard for like jobs. At the request of either party, the parties will complete and (ii) Failing resolution of the matter by negotiations, the mat- ter may be referred by either party to the BCHOA as a classification arbitration. The Arbitrator shall consider the same criteria (see Article 21.02(B)(i)) as the parties in de- termining the appropriate classification/wage level for the job in question. (iii) Classification arbitrations will be governed by the follow- ing processes: the parties will be limited to four (4) hours’ presentation each, the parties will utilize staff representa- tives of the Union and HEABC to present cases, and the award will be issued within thirty (30) days of the hearing. The arbitrator’s decision shall be limited to determining the appropriate classification/wage level of the job.
Sample 1Sample 2
Job Classification Review Procedure. Where the Union has initiated the Job Classification Review Procedure, representatives of the Union and the Employer shall within twenty-eight (28) days consider which profile best describes the core function of the job in question and how the job fits into the industry standard for like jobs. At the request of either party, the parties will complete and utilize the job questionnaire(s) in this consideration. The parties shall attempt to resolve the matter through negotiations.
Sample 1
Job Classification Review Procedure. Upon initiation of the Job Classification Review Pro- cedure, representatives of the Union and HEABC shall within twenty-eight (28) days consider which profile best describes the core function of the job in question, and how the job fits into the industry standard for like jobs. At the request of either party, the parties will complete and utilize the job ques- tionnaire(s) in this consideration. The parties shall attempt to resolve the matter through negotiations.‌‌
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs

Related to Job Classification Review Procedure

  • Classification Review Grand Valley State University and APSS shall jointly determine the review assessment survey instrument to be used at Grand Valley State University. The parties shall maintain a Joint Review Committee, composed of three members appointed by the Human Resources Office and three members appointed by the Alliance. Bargaining unit members questioning the assigned classification of their position may do so by using the following procedure: A. Meet with the Employment Manager in the Human Resources Office to discuss the review process, changes in their job responsibilities, duties and any other process questions they may have. B. PSS member will fill out the assessment survey and email to the Employment Manager along with any other documentation that supports the request. The survey instrument will be jointly administered/reviewed by the Assessment Team (consisting of the Employment Manager and an Alliance member of the Joint Review Committee). A meeting with the PSS is scheduled for a verbal review of the documentation and to answer any questions the Assessment Team may have. The supervisor or appointing officer is encouraged to attend. If the Assessment Team believes a job site visit is warranted as a result of the survey information, they will schedule a time for a joint visit. C. The completed survey instrument shall be coded. The survey results, as determined by the Assessment Team, shall be shared with the survey participant. D. After receiving the survey results, the survey participant, if they so choose shall have the opportunity to meet with the Joint Review Committee for additional input and appeal. Any additional information shall be reviewed by the Committee, and where the Committee feels it is necessary, the survey will be recoded, in a manner mutually agreeable. E. The Joint Review Committee shall then deliberate as to the merit of the upgrade requested by the participant. If the Committee is not able to reach a consensus, the University will decide on the classification. The Alliance may appeal that decision through the arbitration procedure of the collective bargaining agreement. Professional Support Staff members may engage in the review process no more than once per year. Supervisors questioning the assigned classification of a staff member’s position shall provide supporting rationale, complete an assessment survey instrument and discuss with Manager of Employment. The Manager of Employment shall notify an Alliance Representative that a Supervisor is reviewing a staff member’s classification. The review and outcome shall be completed within 45 working days unless the Alliance Representative and Manager of Employment mutually agreed to an extension. The Alliance will be provided with the scored instrument and any supporting rationale.

  • Review Procedure If the Plan Administrator denies part or all of the claim, the claimant shall have the opportunity for a full and fair review by the Plan Administrator of the denial, as follows:

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

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

  • AUDIT REVIEW PROCEDURES Any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under an interim or post audit of this AGREEMENT that is not disposed of by agreement, shall be reviewed by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration. Not later than thirty (30) calendar days after issuance of the final audit report, CONSULTANT may request a review by ALAMEDA CTC’s Deputy Executive Director of Finance and Administration of unresolved audit issues. The request for review will be submitted in writing. Neither the pendency of a dispute nor its consideration by ALAMEDA CTC will excuse CONSULTANT from full and timely performance, in accordance with the terms of this AGREEMENT. CONSULTANT and subconsultants’ contracts, including cost proposals and ICRs, may be subject to audits or reviews such as, but not limited to, an AGREEMENT Audit, an Incurred Cost Audit, an ICR Audit, or a certified public accountant (“CPA”) ICR Audit Workpaper Review. If selected for audit or review, the AGREEMENT, cost proposal and ICR and related workpapers, if applicable, will be reviewed to verify compliance with 48 CFR, Chapter 1, Part 31 and other related laws and regulations. In the instances of a CPA ICR Audit Workpaper Review it is CONSULTANT’s responsibility to ensure federal, state, or local government officials are allowed full access to the CPA’s workpapers including making copies as necessary. The AGREEMENT, cost proposal, and ICR shall be adjusted by CONSULTANT and approved by ALAMEDA CTC to conform to the audit or review recommendations. CONSULTANT agrees that individual terms of costs identified in the audit report shall be incorporated into the contract by this reference if directed by ALAMEDA CTC at its sole discretion. Refusal by CONSULTANT to incorporate audit or review recommendations, or to ensure that the federal, state, or local governments have access to CPA workpapers, will be considered a breach of contract terms and cause for termination of the AGREEMENT and disallowance of prior reimbursed costs.

  • 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.

  • Client Classification 7.1. We shall not have an obligation to treat our clients in different classes depending on their knowledge and expertise.

  • Claims and Review Procedure In the event that any claim for benefits that must initially be submitted in writing to the Board of Directors, is denied (in whole or in part) hereunder, the claimant shall receive from First Charter a notice of denial in writing within 60 days, written in a manner calculated to be understood by the claimant, setting forth the specific reasons for denial, with specific reference to pertinent provisions of this Supplemental Agreement. Any disagreements about such interpretations and construction shall be submitted to an arbitrator subject to the rules and procedures established by the American Arbitration Association. The arbitrator shall be acceptable to both First Charter and the Executive (or Beneficiary); if the parties cannot agree on a single arbitrator, the disagreement shall be heard by a panel of three arbitrators, with each party to appoint one arbitrator and the third to be chosen by the other two. No member of the Board of Directors shall be liable to any person for any action taken under Article VIII except those actions undertaken with lack of good faith.

  • Job Classification Full-Time and Part-Time (a) When a new classification (which is covered by the terms of this Collective Agreement) is established by the Hospital, the Hospital shall determine the rate of pay for such new classification and notify the Local Union of the same within seven (7) days. If the local challenges the rate, it shall have the right to request a meeting with the Hospital to endeavor to negotiate a mutually satisfactory rate. Such request will be made within ten (10) days after the receipt of notice from the Hospital of such new occupational classification and rate. Any change mutually agreed to resulting from such meeting shall be retroactive to the date that notice of the new rate was given by the Hospital. If the parties are unable to agree, the dispute concerning the new rate may be submitted to arbitration as provided in the Agreement within fifteen (15) days of such meeting. The decision of the Board of Arbitration (or Arbitrator as the case may be) shall be based on the relationship established by comparison with the rates for other classifications in the bargaining unit having regard to the requirements of such classification. (b) When the Hospital makes a substantial change during the term of this agreement in the job content of an existing classification which in reality causes such classification to become a new classification, the Hospital agrees to meet with the Union, to permit the Union to make representation with respect to the appropriate rate of pay. (c) If the matter is not resolved following the meeting with the Union the matter may be referred to arbitration as provided in the Agreement within fifteen (15) days of such meeting. The decision of the Arbitrator shall be based on the relationship established by comparison with the rates for other classifications in the bargaining unit having regard to the requirements of such classifications. (d) The parties further agree that any change mutually agreed to or awarded as a result of arbitration shall be retroactive only to the date that the Union raised the issue with the Hospital.

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