Local Review Process Sample Clauses

Local Review Process. (a) where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary increment the teacher may, within 14 working days of being notified of the deferral, seek a review. (b) the teacher may be represented during the process. (c) the reviewer shall be a person nominated by the Board of Trustees and acceptable to the teacher. The reviewer may be another staff member but should not be someone connected with the original decision to defer progression. In the event that agreement cannot be reached on a reviewer within a reasonable time the Board shall determine who the reviewer shall be. (d) the reviewer will give the teacher and the Chief Executive fair opportunity to make representations. (e) the reviewer shall make recommendations to the Board within 30 days of receiving the teacher’s application for review. (f) the Board shall make a final decision within 14 days of receiving the recommendation. (g) where requested, the teacher shall have access to the information about him/herself provided to the Board by the reviewer. (h) nothing in this clause prevents the teacher from taking a personal grievance in accordance with Part 9 of this agreement.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (30)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Local Review Process where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary increment the teacher may, within 14 working days of being notified of the deferral, seek a review. the teacher may be represented during the process. the reviewer shall be a person nominated by the Board of Trustees and acceptable to the teacher. The reviewer may be another staff member but should not be someone connected with the original decision to defer progression. In the event that agreement cannot be reached on a reviewer within a reasonable time the Board shall determine who the reviewer shall be. the reviewer will give the teacher and the Deputy Chief Executive fair opportunity to make representations. the reviewer shall make recommendations to the Board within 30 days of receiving the teacher’s application for review. the Board shall make a final decision within 14 days of receiving the recommendation. where requested, the teacher shall have access to the information about him/herself provided to the Board by the reviewer. nothing in this clause prevents the teacher from taking a personal grievance in accordance with Part 9 of this agreement.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (7)
Local Review Process. 3.9.1 (a) Where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary increment the teacher may, within fourteen
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (6)
Local Review Process. 3.9.1 (a) Where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary increment the teacher may, within fourteen (14) working days of being notified of the deferral, seek a review.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3See All (5)
Local Review Process. (a) Where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary increment the teacher may, within 14 working days of being notified of the deferral, seek a review; (b) The employee may be represented during the process; (c) A reviewer shall be a person nominated by the Board of Trustees and acceptable to the employee. The reviewer may be another staff member but should not be someone connected with the original decision to defer progression. In the event that agreement cannot be reached on a reviewer within a reasonable time the Board shall determine who the reviewer will be; (d) The reviewer will give the employee and the principal fair opportunity to make representations; (e) The reviewer shall make recommendations to the Board within 30 days of receiving the employee’s application for review;
Sample 1Sample 2
Local Review Process. Where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary increment the teacher may, within 14 working days of being notified of the deferral, seek a review; The employee may be represented during the process; A reviewer shall be a person nominated by the Board of Trustees and acceptable to the employee. The reviewer may be another staff member but should not be someone connected with the original decision to defer progression. In the event that agreement cannot be reached on a reviewer within a reasonable time the Board shall determine who the reviewer will be; The reviewer will give the employee and the principal fair opportunity to make representations; Where requested, the employee shall have access to the information about him/herself provided to the Board by the reviewer; Nothing in this clause prevents the employee from taking a personal grievance in accordance with Part 10 of this Agreement. Note: In cases of very small schools it may be necessary to develop a reciprocal arrangement with a neighbouring school.
Sample 1
Local Review Process. 3.9.1 Where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary increment the teacher may, within fourteen (14) working days of being notified of the deferral, seek a review. The employee may be represented during the process. A reviewer shall be a person nominated by the school board and acceptable to the employee. The reviewer may be another staff member but should not be someone connected with the original decision to defer progression. In the event that agreement cannot be reached on a reviewer within a reasonable time the school board shall determine who the reviewer will be. The reviewer will give the employee and the principal fair opportunity to make representations. The reviewer shall make recommendations to the school board within thirty (30) days of receiving the employee’s application for review. The school board shall make a final decision within fourteen (14) days of receiving the recommendation. Where requested, the employee shall have access to the information about him/herself provided to the school board by the reviewer. Nothing in this clause prevents the employee from taking a personal grievance in accordance withPart Eight of this agreement.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Local Review Process i) In the event that there are exceptions to the disposition freeze as noted in Section 5.8 c), the Interim Advisory Panel will review and comment on any renewable resource allocations or land dispositions during the road construction and land use planning process. The panel will use provincial policy on which to base decisions or develop interim guidelines to ensure due process, equity, confidentiality and fairness. This does not give the panel a veto or formal approval over SERM activities or decisions, during this interim period. ii) SERM will inform the panel in a timely fashion about any renewable resource allocations or land dispositions in the Phase 3 geographic area as per Section 6.3.1, Stage 3 below.
Sample 1
Local Review Process. Where a teacher disagrees with the deferral of their salary incre ent the teacher xx, within 14 working days of being notified of the deferral, seek a review; The e ployee ay be represented during the process; A reviewer shall be a person no inated by the Board of Trustees and acceptable to the e ployee. The reviewer ay be another staff e ber but should not be so eone connected with the original decision to defer progression. In the event that agree ent cannot be reached on a reviewer within a reasonable ti e the Board shall deter ine who the reviewer will be; The reviewer will give the e ployee and the principal fair opportunity to ake representations; Where requested, the e ployee shall have access to the infor ation about hi /herself provided to the Board by the reviewer; Nothing in this clause prevents the e ployee fro taking a personal grievance in accordance with Part 10 of this Agree ent. Note: In cases of very s all schools it ay be necessary to develop a reciprocal arrange ent with a neighbouring school.
Sample 1

Related to Local Review Process

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

  • 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.

  • 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:

  • FINAL BILLING SUBMISSION Unless otherwise provided by the System Agency, Grantee shall submit a reimbursement or payment request as a final close-out invoice not later than forty-five (45) calendar days following the end of the term of the Contract. Reimbursement or payment requests received after the deadline may not be paid.

  • 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.

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

  • Seniority Verification Process i. The new school district shall provide the employee with the necessary verification form at the time the employee achieves continuing contract status. ii. The employee must initiate the seniority verification process and forward the necessary verification forms to the previous school district(s) within ninety (90) days of receiving a continuing appointment in the new school district. iii. The previous school district(s) shall make every reasonable effort to retrieve and verify the seniority credits which the employee seeks to port.

  • Asset Representations Review Process Section 3.01 Asset Representations Review Notices and Identification of Review Receivables. On receipt of an Asset Representations Review Notice from the Seller according to Section 5.7 of the Receivables Purchase Agreement, the Asset Representations Reviewer will start an Asset Representations Review. The Servicer will provide the list of Review Receivables to the Asset Representations Reviewer promptly upon receipt of the Asset Representations Review Notice. The Asset Representations Reviewer will not be obligated to start, and will not start, an Asset Representations Review until an Asset Representations Review Notice and the related list of Review Receivables is received. The Asset Representations Reviewer is not obligated to verify (i) whether the conditions to the initiation of the Asset Representations Review and the issuance of an Asset Representations Review Notice described in Section 7.6 of the Indenture were satisfied or (ii) the accuracy or completeness of the list of Review Receivables provided by the Servicer.

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

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