Position Audit Grievance Clause Samples

The Position Audit Grievance clause establishes a formal process for employees to challenge or appeal the results of a position audit, which typically reviews job duties and classifications. Under this clause, if an employee believes their position has been incorrectly evaluated or classified, they can file a grievance to have the decision reviewed by management or a designated committee. This process ensures that employees have a clear and fair avenue to address concerns about their job classification, helping to resolve disputes and maintain transparency in position evaluations.
Position Audit Grievance 
View SourceView Similar (6)

Related to Position Audit Grievance

  • Inspection & Audit Each party agrees that the relevant books, records (written, electronic, computer related or otherwise), including but not limited to relevant accounting procedures and practices of the party, financial statements and supporting documentation, and documentation related to the work product shall be subject, at any reasonable time, to inspection, examination, review, audit, and copying at any office or location where such records may be found, with or without notice by the State Auditor, Employment Security, the Department of Administration, Budget Division, the Nevada State Attorney General's Office or its Fraud Control Units, the State Legislative Auditor, and with regard to any federal funding, the relevant federal agency, the Comptroller General, the General Accounting Office, the Office of the Inspector General, or any of their authorized representatives.

  • OIG INSPECTION, AUDIT, AND REVIEW RIGHTS ‌ In addition to any other rights OIG may have by statute, regulation, or contract, OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) may conduct interviews, examine or request copies of ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ books, records, and other documents and supporting materials and/or conduct on-site reviews of any of ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ locations for the purpose of verifying and evaluating: (a) ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ compliance with the terms of this IA and (b) ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ compliance with the requirements of the Federal health care programs. The documentation described above shall be made available by ▇▇▇▇▇▇ to OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) at all reasonable times for inspection, audit, and/or reproduction. Furthermore, for purposes of this provision, OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) may interview ▇▇▇▇▇▇ and any of ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ employees or contractors who consent to be interviewed at the individual’s place of business during normal business hours or at such other place and time as may be mutually agreed upon between the individual and OIG. ▇▇▇▇▇▇ shall assist OIG or its duly authorized representative(s) in contacting and arranging interviews with such individuals upon OIG’s request. ▇▇▇▇▇▇’▇ employees and contractors may elect to be interviewed with or without a representative of ▇▇▇▇▇▇ present.

  • Position Review 18.3.1 Either an employee or the University may request an audit of the duties and responsibilities of a position he/she/it believes is not allocated to the proper class. Employees requesting such an audit are expected to notify the Union at the time of their request. 18.3.2 Job audits will be performed and reclassification decisions will be made by the University’s Human Resources Services staff according to the University’s Classification Process. The affected employee(s) and the Union will be notified of the outcome of a job audit in writing. In the event of a reallocation that results in removal of a position from the bargaining unit, the written notice will describe the manner in which the bargaining unit work is being distributed, including the classification and position(s) of any employee(s) absorbing work from the reallocated position. 18.3.3 If an employee disagrees with a classification decision made by the Human Resources staff, the employee may request review of that decision through the Director of OFM/State Human Resources within 30 (thirty) calendar days of receiving the final allocation decision from the University. Should the employee disagree with the Director’s decision, the employee may further appeal the matter to the Washington Personnel Resources Board within 30 (thirty) calendar days of being provided the written decision of the Director. The Board will render a decision, which will be final and binding. Decisions regarding appropriate classification will be reviewed in accordance with this Section and will not be subject to the grievance procedure specified in Article 40 of this Agreement.

  • Grievance Investigation The Employer agrees to supply to the Union the names of all applicants for a vacancy, or new position in the course of a grievance investigation.

  • Grievance Redressal In case of any grievance on shortfall penalty, the Contractor may appeal to the Director (Technical) of the Subsidiary Company. Director (Technical) and Director (Finance) shall jointly dispose off the appeal within 15 days by passing suitable order based on the merit of the case. No further committee shall be constituted for redressal of such grievance.