Decision of the Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chairperson shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Board of Arbitration shall be final, binding and enforceable on all parties, and may not be changed. The Board of Arbitration shall not have the power to change this Agreement or to alter, modify or amend any of its provisions. However, the Board shall have the power to dispose of a grievance by any arrangement which it deems just and equitable.
Decision of Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chair shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Arbitration Board shall be final, binding, and enforceable on the parties. The Board shall have the power to dispose of a discharge or discipline grievance by any arrangement which it deems just and equitable. However, the Board shall not have the power to change this agreement or to alter, modify, or amend any of its provisions.
Recommendation The Sheriff recommends approval of the Board Order. The County Administrator concurs with the recommendation of the Sheriff. Should the Board of Commissioners concur with their recommendations, approval of the Board Order will implement that action. Respectfully submitted, /s/ XXXXX XXXXXX Xxxxx Xxxxxx County Administrator
Decisions of the Board The decision of the majority shall be the decision of the Board. Where there is no majority decision, the decision of the Chairperson shall be the decision of the Board. The decision of the Board of Arbitration shall be final and binding and enforceable on all parties, but in no event shall the Board of Arbitration have the power to change this Agreement or to alter, modify or amend any of its provisions. However, the Board shall have the power to dispose of any discharge or a discipline grievance by any arrangement which in its opinion it deems just and equitable.
Conclusion and Recommendations D. Evaluations for Offenders without a sex offense conviction shall answer the following additional referral questions in the evaluations:
Function of Committee The Committee shall concern itself with the following general matters:
Composition of the Committee The Committee will comprise: - one (1) retiree appointed by OPSEU CAAT Academic - one (1) retiree appointed by OPSEU CAAT Support - one (1) retiree appointed by the Ontario Colleges Administrative Staff Association (OCASA) - three (3) management representatives appointed by the Council - one (1) resource person appointed by OPSEU - one (1) resource person appointed by OCASA - one (1) resource person appointed by the Council Additionally, when necessary, representatives of insurance carriers shall attend meetings to provide information but shall not act as resource persons for any of the parties.
Composition of the Board At and following the Closing, each of the Partners and the Sponsor, severally and not jointly, agrees to take, for so long as such Party holds of record or beneficially owns any Registrable Securities, all Necessary Action to cause the Board to be comprised of eleven (11) directors nominated in accordance with this Article II, initially consisting of (i) seven (7) of whom have been nominated by the Partners, and thereafter designated pursuant to Section 2.1(b) or Section 2.1(d) of this Investor Rights Agreement (each, a “Partner Director”), at least four (4) of whom shall satisfy all applicable independence requirements (including at least two (2) of whom shall be sufficiently independent to serve on the audit and compensation committees of the Board), (ii) three (3) of whom have been nominated by the Sponsor, and thereafter designated pursuant to Section 2.1(c) or Section 2.1(d) of this Investor Rights Agreement (each, a “Sponsor Director”), at least one (1) of whom shall satisfy all applicable independence requirements (including being sufficiently independent to serve on the audit committee of the Board as a chair and the compensation committee as a member), and (iii) one (1) of whom has been jointly nominated by the mutual agreement of Sponsor and the Partners (the “Joint Director”), which Joint Director shall satisfy all applicable independence requirements. At and following the Closing, each of the Sponsor and the Partners, severally and not jointly, agrees to take, for so long as such Party holds of record or beneficially owns any Registrable Securities, all Necessary Action to cause the foregoing directors to be divided into three (3) classes of directors, with each class serving for staggered three (3) year terms. The initial term of the Class I directors shall expire immediately following PubCo’s 2022 annual meeting of stockholders at which directors are elected. The initial term of the Class II directors shall expire immediately following PubCo’s 2023 annual meeting of stockholders at which directors are elected. The initial term of the Class III directors shall expire immediately following PubCo’s 2024 annual meeting at which directors are elected.
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.
Scope of the Committee The Committee shall not have the power to bind the Union or its members, or the Employer to any decision or conclusion reached in discussion. The Committee shall not have jurisdiction over any matter contained in this Collective Agreement, including its administration or renegotiation. The Committee shall not supersede the activities of any other committee of the Union or of the Employer.
