Rules of Evidence. Strict rules of evidence shall not apply. However, rules of evidence and procedures for conduct of hearings shall be guided by the standards in the American Arbitration Association Voluntary Arbitration Rules.
Rules of Evidence. Strict rules-of-evidence shall not apply.
Rules of Evidence. The Federal Rules of Evidence shall apply to any and all matters submitted to final and binding arbitration under this Agreement.
Rules of Evidence. Court rules provide that exhibits cannot be offered into evidence in legal proceedings unless a chain-of-custody can be shown. This is especially true for items subject to adulteration. To ensure admissibility of evidence, only law enforcement officers should seize or possess any items that are or may become, evidence. Only under exigent circumstances may National Guard personnel handle potential evidence.
Rules of Evidence. The Arbitrator will apply the Federal Rules of Evidence, but construe them liberally to allow for the admission of evidence that is helpful in resolving the matter(s) in dispute. Rulings on the admission of evidence made by the Arbitrator at the hearing will be final, binding, and not subject to any appeal.
Rules of Evidence. (I)Where the parties have an agreement on the evidence rules, the parties’ agreement shall prevail, unless the agreement cannot be implemented or is in conflict with the mandatory provisions of the laws applicable to the arbitral proceedings.
Rules of Evidence. Hearings contemplated by this procedure need not be formal and the rules of evidence applying in the District Courts need not be followed.
Rules of Evidence. The arbitrators shall render a written statement to the Parties setting forth the basis of his/her determination.
Rules of Evidence. The Military Rules of Evidence—other than Mil. X. Xxxx. 301, 302, 303, 305, 412, and Section V—shall not apply. Nor shall Mil. R. Evid. 412(b)(1)(C) apply. In applying these rules to a vacation hearing, the term ‘‘military judge,’’ as used in these rules, shall mean the hearing officer, who shall assume the military judge’s authority to exclude evidence from the hearing, and who shall, in discharging this duty, follow the procedures set forth in these rules. However, the hearing officer is not authorized to order production of communications covered by Xxx. R. Evid. 513 or 514.
Rules of Evidence. All written evidence must be made available (to all parties) at the hearing. • The basis for the evaluation of the position are the duties and responsibilities, as evidenced by: - The duties and responsibilities in the job description form, signed by the manager. - Examples of work in the job description form. - New, or additional information presented at a hearing in the form of job content or authority, or examples of work performed. The classification analyst and/or the panel may request verification by requesting such evidence be signed and authorized as legitimate duties or authority levels by the permanent head, or designate. • In the event that new information presented at a hearing has not been confirmed by the manager, it may be considered in rendering the decision. However, no decision shall be released if confirmation is required until it is received in writing by the classification analyst. • Words copied from a factor definition must be substantiated with examples and are not accepted outright. Similarly, if examples are copied from CDs where the job is very different, the out-of-scope manager may be requested to verify that such duties are, in fact, performed. MAINTENANCE OF THE CLASSIFICATION PLAN • In the event of manager-employee disagreement over job content due to new evidence presented at an appeal hearing, the appeal panel will render a decision based on the job content previously agreed by both the employee and manager. It is not the role of the panel to adjudicate disputes of job content. • Where there is a contradiction between check boxes and the ratings assigned due to the examples provided in the job description form, the panel shall base its decision on the examples. In this regard, the supervisor's signature on the job description form does not constitute agreement with the level checked, but rather that the examples provided are legitimate examples of work performed. It is not the role of the appellants, nor the manager/supervisor to interpret the job evaluation plan. This is the role of the appeal panel.
