Organizational Change. (a) If the University introduces or intends to introduce a measure, policy, practice or change that affects the terms, conditions, or security of employment of a significant number of employees to whom a collective agreement applies, the University agrees to give the Union sixty (60) days written notice prior to the measure, policy and/or practice taking effect. During the notice period the University will consult with Union Representatives through the Labour/Management Committee with the intention of developing a strategy to allow the Sessional Lecturer to complete their current appointment in the term in which notice is served.
Organizational Change. 18.6,1 In the event that the Employer introduces organizational change which results in the displacement of employees from employment with the Employer, the Employer shall make every effort to place such employees in other job openings.
Organizational Change.
(a) The University agrees to provide the Union with at least two (2) month’s notice in writing of its intention to introduce an organizational change which affects the terms and conditions or security of employment of employees covered by this Agreement.
(b) The University will consult with the Union prior to implementing such an organizational change and will provide the Union with the opportunity to discuss alternatives to the change.
(c) Should the introduction of organizational change result in substantial changes in an employee’s procedures or position and/or increased skills and abilities required, then the University will provide training and equipment as required.
(d) Should the introduction of organizational change result in the employee’s position becoming redundant, the University will give notice of layoff under Article 17. The employee may, within five (5) working days of such notice, elect to accept severance wages at the employee’s current regular rate of pay on the basis of one (1) week’s wages per year of service for the first ten (10) years of service and two (2) weeks’ wages per year of service thereafter, in which case the provisions of Article 25.13 and Article 17 do not apply.
Organizational Change. (a) Should the introduction of a significant organizational change lead to a layoff of employees, the Employer must perform the following:
i) Provide at least twenty (20) days’ notice to the Union and employees affected;
ii) Consult with the Union prior to the change taking place.
(b) It is also agreed that “regular” layoffs that take place in the normal course of business and seasonal fluctuations would not fall under the term of this Article.
(c) This Article does not exempt the Employer from any obligations it may have under Section 54 of the Labour Code.
Organizational Change. In the event that the Board shall merge, amalgamate, or combine any of its operations or functions with another employer, the Board will endeavour to ensure the retention of seniority, wages and benefits equal to those in place for employees in this bargaining unit at the time.
Organizational Change. In the event that organizational change is instituted, the Employer will notify the Union as soon as practicable of the impending change. The Employer undertakes to consider practical ways and means of minimizing the adverse effect, if any, on the employees concerned.
Organizational Change. It is recognized that the NAMM, NHN, the Company or its affiliated Hospitals, Physician Organizations and/or PHOs may undergo organizational changes during the term of this Agreement for good and valid reasons that are important to their future success. It is also recognized that the obligations and relationships established by the Master Agreement and this Agreement implement important strategies for the Parties and must, therefore, be protected from any harmful influence that might be caused by organizational evolution.
Organizational Change. The parties agree to adopt the principles of Article 54 of the Labour Relations Code.
Organizational Change. The King County Sheriff’s Office adapted a three-phased approach to effect organizational change that involved changes in recruitment strategies, in the selection system, and in how it assessed deputy performance. Further, it linked information on job functions, required competencies, and the test scales used to assess them, to performance appraisal rating scales. Together, all of this information increased the content and construct validity of the sheriff’s office’s performance management system supported by HSS. As such, the work presents a solid model for consideration when institutionalizing organizational change. The performance management system facilitated by HSS represents a change in emphasis when compared to traditional selection research. Further, it shows how a well-conceived hiring project can introduce vital change into an organization. Central to this effort was the guiding principle that drove HSS in the King County Sheriff’s Office and which defined it as more than a hiring project. HSS was framed as the foundation of organizational systemic change that would affect critical human resource systems. The sheriff’s office was clear that instead of revising strategies aimed only at recruit deputies, HSS would affect the career life of all deputies. Clearly, the link to performance appraisal helps to accomplish that objective. Unique Accomplishments • Developed core competencies with links to existing assessment tools • Developed a model eligibility list • Developed a service-oriented performance appraisal The linking of competencies to existing occupational and clinical assessment tools through the auditing process takes advantage of the scientific evidence that has supported commercially available tools in accordance with laws and published guidelines for the use of psychological screening in employee selection. These guidelines include The Uniform Guidelines on Employees Selection Procedures, the 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act, and the Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing (American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the 1999 National Council for Measurement in Education). Consequently, the information developed for the King County Sheriff’s Office provides a substantive menu of existing assessment tools that can be transported and used to assess identified competencies. Many of these tools are valid predictors of performance in occupations with similarities to those of deputy sh...
Organizational Change. 33.01 The Employer shall ensure the Union is kept informed of pending organizational changes. The Employer shall ensure the Employees are kept informed of pending operational changes. As a result of pending organizational change, the Employer shall endeavour to establish planning committees or working groups involving affected Employees and management:
