Union Review of Competitive Actions Sample Clauses

Union Review of Competitive Actions a. The Union will be permitted to conduct a review of the merit promotion file for a bargaining unit position in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 7114(b)(4) and the appropriate provisions of the Privacy Act. b. The Union will provide the Employer with the name of the Union representative who is responsible for conducting the review and reason for the review on a case-by-case basis. The representative designated to conduct the review will not have been an applicant for the promotion file being reviewed, nor eligible for similar positions.
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Union Review of Competitive Actions. A. The Union will be permitted to review (i.e. audit) competitive selection actions taken under this Article for all bargaining unit positions, when the Union has reason to believe a discrepancy exists or when requested to do so by an employee. This may be done at any time after the vacancy announcement posting up to forty-five (45) calendar days after selection is made. B. The Union will make the request to the SPO. The Union will provide the SPO with an updated written designation identifying the names of the Union designated official time users who are responsible for conducting audits. Any changes to the list will be sent to the SPO in writing. The official time user designated to conduct the audit will not have been an applicant for the promotion package being audited. C. Employees who believe they were improperly excluded from the BQL may request a review of the promotion package through the Union audit described above. D. The SPO will make the pertinent records from that package available to the Union auditor within seven (7) work days of the receipt of the timely written request. The Union will treat information confidentially. E. The Union may request additional information during the course of the audit. F. If an employee was excluded from the BQL due to an error, the provisions of Section 14 of this Article will apply. G. Employees who elect to use the grievance procedure rather than the Union audit procedure must adhere to the provisions of Article 28, Grievance Procedure.
Union Review of Competitive Actions. The Union will be permitted to conduct audits of competitive selection actions taken under this Article when it has reason to believe a discrepancy exists or when requested to do so by an employee. The Union will provide the designated agency official with the names of the Union representatives who are responsible for conducting audits. Any changes to the list of designated representatives will be sent to the Agency in writing. The representative designated to conduct the audit will not have been an applicant for the promotion package being audited. Employees who believe they were improperly excluded from inclusion as best qualified may request a review of the promotion package through the Union process described below. If the employee chooses to use the Union procedure, he/she must make a written or oral request to the Union within 15 working days after the selection is announced to all employees. A Union request under Subsection (A.) above may be made within 120 days following the date of selection. The designated official responsible for the package will make all pertinent records from that package available either electronically or via hard copy to the Union auditor within 7 working days of receipt of the written request. The Union will treat the information confidentially. For purpose of this section, the aforementioned pertinent records shall include the vacancy announcement, training and awards, applications, occupational questionnaire, employee answers to the occupational questionnaire, the total overall score for the questions, selection certificates, declinations and information in the promotion package in accordance with Section 13.A. While the parties agree that there is no need to meet the statutory standards of 5 USC 7114 (b)(4) to obtain the information, e.g., particularized need, the Agency nonetheless is legally entitled to protect the privacy of the applicants involved in the action. If an error is discovered which resulted in an employee’s exclusion from a well- qualified group, the provision of Section 16 of this article will apply. If during the course of the audit additional information is determined necessary, such information shall be secured from the designated management official.
Union Review of Competitive Actions. A. The Union may review competitive selection actions taken under this Article when it has reason to believe a discrepancy exists or when requested to do so by an employee. B. The Union makes the request to the Chief Human Capital Officer or designee. The Union provides the Chief Human Capital Officer or designee with the names of the Union representatives who are responsible for conducting the reviews. Any changes to the designated representatives must be submitted in writing. The representative(s) designated to conduct the review must not have been an applicant for the promotion package being reviewed. C. Employees who believe they were improperly excluded from consideration may request review of the promotion package through the Union review process described below. D. If the employee chooses to use the Union procedure, they must make a written request to the Union within fifteen (15) business days after the selection is announced to all employees. A Union request under Subsection (A) above must be made within the same time limits E. The Agency makes the pertinent records from the package available to the Union within seven (7) business days of receipt of the written request. The Union treats the information confidentially and reviews it in a location designated by the Agency and in the presence of a designated Management official. F. If during the course of the review, additional information is determined necessary, such information is secured from the Agency’s designated Management official. G. Employees who elect to use the grievance procedure rather than the review procedure must initiate action in accordance with Article 24 Grievance Procedure.
Union Review of Competitive Actions. A. An employee who wishes to challenge a competitive action may seek the assistance of the Union in filing a grievance or requesting information on the competitive action. The Union may request information regarding the competitive selection packages pursuant to Article 4, Section 6

Related to Union Review of Competitive Actions

  • 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.

  • Transition Review Period In accordance with Article 35, Layoff and Recall, the Employer may require an employee to complete a transition review period.

  • Review of Personnel File Upon written authority from an employee, OC shall permit the President of the Union or their designate to review that employee's personnel file in the office in which the file is normally kept in order to facilitate the proper investigation of a grievance.

  • Review of Personnel Files Every member shall be allowed to review any of his/her personnel files except "confidential law enforcement records" and "trial preparation records" as defined in Ohio Revised Code Section 149.43 at any time, upon request and reasonable notice. Such request shall be made to the supervisor directly responsible for maintenance of such files. Review of the files shall be made in the presence of such supervisor or the supervisor's designated representative. For the Division master personnel file, the request shall be made to the member's Subdivision Deputy Chief or his/her designated representative. Any member, or the member's Lodge representative, may copy documents in the member's file. The City may levy a charge for such copying, which charge shall bear a reasonable relationship to actual costs. A member will be notified in writing any time records within his/her personnel, background, IAB, and/or payroll file(s) are requested, as a public records request pursuant to Ohio Revised Code Section 149.43, provided the City determines that the request is proper under applicable law. A member may request copies of any records provided under this paragraph, and these copies shall be provided at no cost to the member.

  • Procurement Related Complaints and Administrative Review 49.1 The procedures for making a Procurement-related Complaint are as specified in the TDS. 49.2 A request for administrative review shall be made in the form provided under contract forms.

  • Log Reviews All systems processing and/or storing PHI COUNTY discloses to 11 CONTRACTOR or CONTRACTOR creates, receives, maintains, or transmits on behalf of COUNTY 12 must have a routine procedure in place to review system logs for unauthorized access.

  • Dispute Resolution Mandatory Arbitration Class Action Waiver SAMPLE (a) Claims Subject to Arbitration. Except as expressly provided below, the parties agree that to the fullest extent permitted by applicable law, any dispute arising out of or relating in any way to this Agreement or a similar prior agreement, the Property or the relationship between Resident and Owner or Manager (including matters occurring prior to the date of this Agreement and disputes also involving third parties) (collectively, “Claims”) will, at the election of either party, be resolved by arbitration, including any dispute about arbitrability, such as scope and enforceability.

  • Arbitration Decisions Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the arbitrator(s) shall render a decision within ninety (90) Calendar Days of appointment and shall notify the Parties in writing of such decision and the reasons therefor. The arbitrator(s) shall be authorized only to interpret and apply the provisions of this LGIA and shall have no power to modify or change any provision of this Agreement in any manner. The decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding upon the Parties, and judgment on the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. The decision of the arbitrator(s) may be appealed solely on the grounds that the conduct of the arbitrator(s), or the decision itself, violated the standards set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act or the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act. The final decision of the arbitrator(s) must also be filed with FERC if it affects jurisdictional rates, terms and conditions of service, Interconnection Facilities, or Network Upgrades.

  • Exclusion Review Notwithstanding any provision of Title 42 of the United States Code or Title 42 of the Code of Federal Regulations, the only issues in a proceeding for exclusion based on a material breach of this CIA shall be whether Good Shepherd was in material breach of this CIA and, if so, whether: a. Good Shepherd cured such breach within 30 days of its receipt of the Notice of Material Breach; or b. the alleged material breach could not have been cured within the 30-day period, but that, during the 30-day period following Good Shepherd’s receipt of the Notice of Material Breach: (i) Good Shepherd had begun to take action to cure the material breach; (ii) Good Shepherd pursued such action with due diligence; and (iii) Good Shepherd provided to OIG a reasonable timetable for curing the material breach. For purposes of the exclusion herein, exclusion shall take effect only after an ALJ decision favorable to OIG, or, if the ALJ rules for Good Shepherd, only after a DAB decision in favor of OIG. Good Shepherd’s election of its contractual right to appeal to the DAB shall not abrogate OIG’s authority to exclude Good Shepherd upon the issuance of an ALJ’s decision in favor of OIG. If the ALJ sustains the determination of OIG and determines that exclusion is authorized, such exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the ALJ issues such a decision, notwithstanding that Good Shepherd may request review of the ALJ decision by the DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of OIG after an ALJ decision adverse to OIG, the exclusion shall take effect 20 days after the DAB decision. Good Shepherd shall waive its right to any notice of such an exclusion if a decision upholding the exclusion is rendered by the ALJ or DAB. If the DAB finds in favor of Good Shepherd, Good Shepherd shall be reinstated effective on the date of the original exclusion.

  • Review Scope The parties confirm that the Asset Representations Review is not responsible for (a) reviewing the Receivables for compliance with the representations and warranties under the Transaction Documents, except as described in this Agreement or (b) determining whether noncompliance with the representations and warranties constitutes a breach of the Eligibility Representations. For the avoidance of doubt, the parties confirm that the review is not designed to determine why an Obligor is delinquent or the creditworthiness of the Obligor, either at the time of any Asset Review or at the time of origination of the related Receivable. Further, the Asset Review is not designed to establish cause, materiality or recourse for any Test Fail (as defined in Section 3.05).

Draft better contracts in just 5 minutes Get the weekly Law Insider newsletter packed with expert videos, webinars, ebooks, and more!