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.
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.
Mutual Discussions The Employer and the Union acknowledge the mutual benefits to be derived from dialogue between the parties and are prepared to discuss matters of common interest.
No Existing Discussions As of the date hereof, the Company is not engaged, directly or indirectly, in any discussions or negotiations with any other party with respect to an Acquisition Proposal.
Discussion Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and advise that it is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies.
Existing Discussions The Company agrees that it will immediately cease and cause to be terminated any existing activities, discussions or negotiations with any Persons conducted heretofore with respect to any Acquisition Proposal. The Company agrees that it will take the necessary steps to promptly inform the individuals or entities referred to in the first sentence hereof of the obligations undertaken in this Section 6.2. The Company also agrees that it will promptly request each Person that has heretofore executed a confidentiality agreement in connection with its consideration of acquiring it or any of its Subsidiaries to return or destroy all confidential information heretofore furnished to such Person by or on behalf of it or any of its Subsidiaries.
Written Evaluation The Superintendent in consultation with the Board shall review and assess the Administrator’s performance on or before February 1 of each year. The Administrator shall be formally evaluated in writing annually by the Superintendent on or before February 1 of each year. The evaluation shall include a description of the Administrator’s duties and responsibilities and the standards to which the Administrator is to perform. It shall consider the Administrator’s specific duties, responsibilities, management and competence as an Administrator; specify the Administrator’s strengths and weaknesses with supporting reasons; align with research based standards established by the Illinois State Board of Education and use data and indicators on student growth as a significant factor in rating performance. The evaluation shall also consist of a review of the Administrator’s progress toward meeting established professional, student performance and academic goals set forth in Appendix A and a review of the Administrator’s leadership and management performance relative to his current assignment. The written evaluation shall be signed by both the Superintendent and the Administrator. The Administrator may respond to the evaluation in writing and such response shall be attached to and included in the Administrator’s personnel file.
OTHER IMPORTANT TERMS 19.1 Even if we delay in enforcing this Agreement, we can still enforce it later. If we do not insist immediately that you do anything you are required to do under these terms, or if we delay in taking steps against you in respect of your breaking of this Agreement, that will not mean that you do not have to do those things and it will not prevent us taking steps against you at a later date. For example, if you do not pay us an amount when it is due and we do not chase you but we continue to provide the Services, we can still require you to make the payment at a later date.
19.2 If a court finds part of this Agreement illegal, the rest will continue in force. Each of the sections of this Agreement operates separately. If any court or relevant authority decides that any of them are unlawful, the remaining sections will remain in full force and effect.
19.3 We may transfer this agreement to someone else. We may transfer our rights and obligations under this Agreement to another organisation including within our group of companies. We will contact you to let you know if we plan to do this. If you are unhappy with the transfer you may end our Agreement by closing your Profile by contacting us via the details set out in section 10.4.
19.4 You need our consent to transfer your rights to someone else. You may only transfer your rights or your obligations under this Agreement to another person if we expressly agree to this in writing. We may not be able to agree to this as doing so may likely put us in breach of our legal and regulatory obligations (including our obligations to comply with anti-money laundering laws).
19.5 Other people that may have rights under this contract. This Agreement is between you and us. No other person shall have any rights to enforce any of its terms, except as explained in sections 13 (Compensation you may owe us).
19.6 The meaning of certain words and phrases not defined elsewhere:
Results and Discussion Table 1 (top) shows the root mean square error (RMSE) between the three tests for different numbers of topics. These results show that all three tests largely agree with each other but as the sample size (number of topics) decreases, the agreement decreases. In line with the results found for 50 topics, the randomization and bootstrap tests agree more with the t-test than with each other. We looked at pairwise scatterplots of the three tests at the different topic sizes. While there is some disagreement among the tests at large p-values, i.e. those greater than 0.5, none of the tests would predict such a run pair to have a significant difference. More interesting to us is the behavior of the tests for run pairs with lower p-values. Table 1 (bottom) shows the RMSE among the three tests for run pairs that all three tests agreed had a p-value greater than 0.0001 and less than 0.5. In contrast to all pairs with p-values 0.0001 (Table 1 top), these run pairs are of more importance to the IR researcher since they are the runs that require a statistical test to judge the significance of the per- formance difference. For these run pairs, the randomization and t tests are much more in agreement with each other than the bootstrap is with either of the other two tests. Looking at scatterplots, we found that the bootstrap tracks the t-test very well but shows a systematic bias to produce p-values smaller than the t-test. As the number of topics de- creases, this bias becomes more pronounced. Figure 1 shows a pairwise scatterplot of the three tests when the number of topics is 10. The randomization test also tends to produce smaller p-values than the t-test for run pairs where the t- test estimated a p-value smaller than 0.1, but at the same time, produces some p-values greater than the t-test’s. As Figure 1 shows, the bootstrap consistently gives smaller p- values than the t-test for these smaller p-values. While the bootstrap and the randomization test disagree with each other more than with the t-test, Figure 1 shows that for a low number of topics, the randomization test shows less noise in its agreement with the bootstrap com- pared to the t-test for small p-values.
PROCEDURE FOR DEALING WITH SAFETY ISSUES OR INCIDENTS 11.1 The Employer, the Employees and the Union agree that for the purposes of s. 81 of the WHS Act matters about work health and safety arising at the workplace shall be resolved in accordance with this procedure.
11.2 The Parties agree that for the purposes of this procedure and s. 81(3) of the WHS Act the following persons shall be the representatives of the following parties:
(a) the Principal Contractor (as defined in the WHS Act) - Site Manager or any other person nominated by the Principal Contractor
(b) the Employers - the Site Manager or any other person nominated by the Employer(s)
(c) The Employees - the Union or other representatives. (Collectively referred to as "Nominated Parties”)
11.3 The Nominated Parties agree that representatives shall be entitled to:
(a) inspect any work system, plant, substance, structure, or other thing relevant to resolving the issue
(b) consult with relevant Employees in relation to resolving the issue
(c) consult with the relevant PCBU (as defined in the WHS Act) about resolving the issue
(d) inspect and take copies of any document that is directly relevant to resolving the issue; and
(e) advise any person whom the representative reasonably believes to be exposed to a serious risk to his or her health and safety, emanating from an immediate and imminent exposure to a hazard of that risk.
11.4 The Nominated Parties and/or their representatives may commence the procedure by informing, either by themselves or their representative, the other Parties and/or representatives that:
(a) there is an issue to be resolved; and
(b) the nature and scope of the issue.
11.5 As soon as the Parties and/or their representatives are informed of the issue, the Nominated Parties and/or their representatives must meet or communicate with each other to attempt to resolve the issue.
11.6 The Nominated Parties and/or their representatives must have regard to all relevant matters including:
(a) the degree and imminent risk to the Employees or other persons affected by the issue.
(b) the number and location of Employees and other persons affected by the issue.
(c) the measures both temporary and permanent that must be implemented to resolve the issue.
(d) who will be responsible for implementing the resolution measures.
(e) whether the hazard or risk can be isolated; and
(f) the time that may elapse before the hazard or risk is permanently corrected.
11.7 Once the issue is resolved details of the issue and its resolution must be set out in writing with all Nominated Parties and/or their representatives to be satisfied that the agreement reflects the resolution of the issue with a copy given to all Nominated Parties and/or their representatives to the issue. The issue, once resolved, shall be recorded in the next safety committee meeting minutes with the agreed resolution.
11.8 The Nominated Parties and/or their representatives must make reasonable efforts to achieve a timely and final resolution of the issue. If within a reasonable time there is still no resolution, any of the Nominated Parties attempting to resolve the issue may then ask Work Health and Safety Queensland, and/or the QBCC, where applicable, to arrange for an inspector to attend the workplace to assist in resolving the issue.
11.9 Direction to cease work
(a) If -
(i) an issue concerning health or safety arises at a workplace or from the conduct of the undertaking of the Employer; and
(ii) the issue concerns work which involves an immediate threat to the health or safety of any person; and
(iii) given the nature of the threat and degree of risk, it is not appropriate to adopt the processes set out in clause 11.7 above
(b) the Employer and/or the health and safety representative for the designated work group in relation to which the issue has arisen may, after consultation between them, direct that the work is to cease.
(c) During any period for which work has ceased in accordance with such a direction, the Employer may assign any Employees whose work is affected to suitable and safe alternative work.
11.10 Fundamental to this process is a standing invitation for Union representatives to attend site to assist with all matters relating to health and safety.
11.11 Employees are not required to work in circumstances where the employee or a Union representative reasonably believes a safety law is being, or will be, contravened. Consultation between the relevant parties will occur throughout this procedure including with senior representatives of the Employer and the Union.
