External Comparability Clause Samples

The External Comparability clause establishes a standard for evaluating certain terms or conditions in a contract by referencing how similar terms are treated in comparable external situations or by industry norms. In practice, this clause may require that pricing, compensation, or performance metrics be assessed against those offered to other clients, customers, or within the broader market to ensure fairness and consistency. Its core function is to prevent one party from being disadvantaged by terms that are significantly less favorable than those generally available, thereby promoting equity and transparency in contractual relationships.
External Comparability. The prime guiding principle is that AECL’s compensation systems will be externally competitive so that the Company is able to attract and retain the necessary qualified people. Competitive is defined as within 3% of the relevant labour market, that is, where the Company recruits similar skills from and where employees who terminate go. For the CSE compensation system this was reflected by the comparison of the CSE 4 salary with the salary paid to level D engineers as reported by ▇▇▇.
View SourceView Similar (4)
External Comparability. The Union has demonstrated a wage gap between Woburn firefighters and the firefighters in the Union’s comparable communities in the 9-­‐10% range .2 While acknowledging that the 5 % increase awarded herein will not bridge that wage gap in a single contract term, the panel has also awarded a long-­‐awaited increase in the EMT stipend with the understanding that this will be calculated as an addition to base wages. Moreover, the panel acknowledges that its award to increase minimum ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ per piece will carry some cost, the amount of which will depend on how the City chooses to bring about that change.
View Source
External Comparability. The prime guiding principle is that CNL’s compensation systems will be externally competitive so that the Company is able to attract and retain the necessary qualified people. Competitive is defined as within 3% of the relevant labour market, that is, where the Company recruits similar skills from and where employees who terminate go. For the CSE compensation system this was reflected by the comparison of the CSE 4 salary with the salary paid to level D engineers as reported by ▇▇▇.
View Source

Related to External Comparability

  • Comparability The Parties will comply with all applicable comparability and code of conduct laws, rules and regulations, as amended from time to time.

  • Internal Control Effective control and accountability must be maintained for all cash, real and personal property, and other assets. Grantee must adequately safeguard all such property and must provide assurance that it is used solely for authorized purposes. Grantee must also have systems in place that provide reasonable assurance that the information is accurate, allowable, and compliant with the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2 CFR 200.303.

  • Internal Controls The Company shall maintain a system of internal accounting controls sufficient to provide reasonable assurances that: (i) transactions are executed in accordance with management’s general or specific authorization; (ii) transactions are recorded as necessary in order to permit preparation of financial statements in accordance with GAAP and to maintain accountability for assets; (iii) access to assets is permitted only in accordance with management’s general or specific authorization; and (iv) the recorded accountability for assets is compared with existing assets at reasonable intervals and appropriate action is taken with respect to any differences.

  • Reliability Reliability targets (Mean Time Between Failures (MTBF)) are defined in the technical specifications as set out in the Contract. Notwithstanding any possible application of penalties relating to reliability defined in the Contract, Goods shall remain covered by the warranty defined in this Article 16 as long as the reliability commitments have not been reached.

  • Internal Control Over Financial Reporting The Company and each of its Subsidiaries maintain a system of internal control over financial reporting (as such term is defined in Rule 13a-15(f) of the Exchange Act Regulations) that complies with the requirements of the Exchange Act and the Exchange Act Regulations and has been designed by the Company’s principal executive officer and principal financial officer and is sufficient to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with GAAP, including that (A) transactions are executed in accordance with management’s general or specific authorizations; (B) transactions are recorded as necessary to permit preparation of financial statements in conformity with GAAP and to maintain asset accountability; (C) access to assets is permitted only in accordance with management’s general or specific authorization; (D) the recorded accountability for assets is compared with the existing assets at reasonable intervals and appropriate action is taken with respect to any differences; and (E) the interactive data in eXtensible Business Reporting Language included or incorporated by reference in the Registration Statement is accurate and fairly presents the information called for in all material respects and has been prepared in accordance with the Commission’s rules and guidelines applicable thereto. The systems of internal control over financial reporting of the Company and its Subsidiaries are overseen by the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company in accordance with Nasdaq rules and regulations. Except as described in the Registration Statement, the Pricing Disclosure Package and the Prospectus, since the end of the Company’s most recent audited fiscal year, (i) there has been no material weakness in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting (whether or not remediated), (ii) there has been no change in the Company’s internal control over financial reporting that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company’s internal control over financial reporting and (iii) the Company has not been advised of (a) any significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls that could adversely affect the ability of the Company or any Subsidiary to record, process, summarize and report financial data, or any material weakness in internal controls, or (b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the internal controls of the Company and each of the Subsidiaries.