Recommendations and Classification Appeals
Recommendations and Classification Appeals Sample Clauses
Related to Recommendations and Classification Appeals
Conclusions and Recommendations Based on our country-by-country analysis, 197 of the AEWA populations are already well-monitored both for population size and trend. Our prioritisation method allowed focusing on the AEWA conservation and management priorities (Priorities 1-2) and to consider cost effectiveness and feasibility (Priorities 3-6). Theoretically, the two- third target of the AEWA Strategic Plan can be just attained by focusing on the development of monitoring activities for Priority 1-5 populations (i.e. leaving out the 168 more widespread Priority 6 populations that would require more species-specific monitoring methods. Most of the Priority 1-5 populations would require improvement of the IWC though regional schemes focusing on the West Asian / East African flyway with possibly three subregional components in the Central Asia, Arabia and Eastern and Southern Africa. In the latter region, improvements in Tanzania and Mozambique are particularly important. In the Black Sea - Mediterranean - Sahelian flyway the focus should be primarily on the Sahel countries and especially on increasing the consistency of annual counts. The quality of monitoring is already better in the Black Sea and Mediterranean regions. In the East Atlantic, the ongoing capacity-building activities should continue and the consistency and representativity of site coverage should be further strengthened in most countries. Angola would require a major capacity improvement but primarily for the intra-African migrants on inland wetlands. It is also clear that the targets of the AEWA Strategic Plan cannot be achieved without complementing the IWC with periodic aerial surveys both in Western Africa as well as in Eastern and Southern Africa, by setting up a periodic offshore waterbird monitoring scheme in the Caspian Sea and by focusing in each country on a relatively small number of breeding bird species strategically selected in this report.
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.
Recommendations Please check off one or all of the areas below you believe should be addressed in order to prevent similar occurrences: Inservice Orientation Review nurse/resident ratio Change unit layout Float/casual pool Review policies & procedures Adjust RN staffing Adjust support staffing Replace sick calls/LOAs, etc. Input into how compliance recommendations are implemented Change Start/Stop times of shift(s). Please specify: Equipment/Supplies. Please specify: Other. Please specify:
ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan.
Review by the Bank of Procurement Decisions The Procurement Plan shall set forth those contracts which shall be subject to the Bank’s Prior Review. All other contracts shall be subject to Post Review by the Bank.
Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.
Client Classification 7.1. We shall not have an obligation to treat our clients in different classes depending on their knowledge and expertise.
Technical Objections to Grievances It is the intent of both Parties of this Agreement that no grievance shall be defeated merely because of a technical error, other than time limitations in processing the grievance through the grievance procedure. To this end, an arbitration board shall have the power to allow all necessary amendments to the grievance and the power to waive formal procedural irregularities in the processing of a grievance, in order to determine the real matter in dispute and to render a decision according to equitable principles and the justice of the case.
Claims Review Methodology a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject to the Quarterly Claims Review.
Review by the Association of Procurement Decisions The Procurement Plan shall set forth those contracts which shall be subject to the Association’s Prior Review. All other contracts shall be subject to Post Review by the Association.
