Position Reviews Clause Samples

The Position Reviews clause establishes a process for regularly evaluating an employee's job performance and role within the organization. Typically, this involves scheduled assessments where supervisors review the employee's achievements, areas for improvement, and alignment with organizational goals, often resulting in feedback or recommendations for development. The core function of this clause is to ensure ongoing communication about performance expectations and to provide a structured opportunity for both recognition and constructive feedback, thereby supporting employee growth and organizational effectiveness.
Position Reviews. (a) Where the responsibilities of a position have been significantly changed by Management or the position has changed over time, an employee may submit a request to EPCOR Human Resources for the review of the allocation of their position. The employee will complete a Position Description and submit it to their first-level management supervisor with a copy to Human Resources.
View SourceView Similar (4)
Position Reviews. Where the duties of a position have significantly changed, an employee, may submit a request to Human Resources for the review of the allocation of their position. The employee will complete a Position Description, and submit it to their first level Manager with a copy to Human Resources. (a) Within twenty-one (21) calendar days of receipt, the Manager must review and sign off the Position Description and forward it to Human Resources. The Manager sign-off is required to verify the accountabilities of the position which have changed and is for use in the classification. Human Resources will provide a copy of this completed document to the Union. (b) Within ten (10) calendar days of receiving the validated Position Description from the Manager, Human Resources will complete their review of the documentation and issue a decision. This decision will be communicated to the Union prior to both the employee and Manager. (c) Should the position allocation change, the date the signed validated Position Description arrives in Human Resources will be the effective date of any change; in most instances. In extenuating circumstances, where it can be demonstrated that, through no fault of the employee, there was a significant delay in forwarding the Position Description, an alternate date may be considered. Human Resources will review these circumstances with management, and determine if the date should be prior to the date received in their office.
View SourceView Similar (3)
Position Reviews. Where the duties of a position have significantly changed, an employee, may submit a request to their Manager for the review of the allocation of their position. The employee will consult with their Manager to review their position description. The employee, Manager, and Human Resources will meet to determine review process and timelines which will be established on a case-by-case basis. 21.01.01. CAPITAL POWER Human Resources will provide a copy of this completed document to the Union. 21.01.02. The position review decision will be communicated to the Union. 21.01.03. Should the position allocation change, the date the signed validated Role Profile arrives in Human Resources will be the effective date of any change.
View SourceView Similar (3)
Position Reviews. (a) Where the responsibilities of a position have been significantly changed by Management or the position has changed over time, an employee may submit a request to EPCOR Human Resources for the review of the allocation of their position. The employee will complete a Position Description and submit it to their first-level management supervisor with a copy to Human Resources. (b) Within twenty-one (21) calendar days of receipt, the management supervisor must review, verify and sign off the Position Description as submitted by the employee and forward it to EPCOR Human Resources. EPCOR Human Resources will provide a copy of this completed document to the Union. (c) Within ten (10) calendar days of receiving the verified Position Description from the management supervisor, EPCOR Human Resources will complete their review of the documentation and issue a written decision. This decision will be communicated to the employee and copied to the Union and the management supervisor. (i) Should the Union consider that the aforementioned changes to an existing position are such that they deem a new classification has been created, the Union will advise the Company of this decision and request that the rate of pay for that classification be negotiated. (ii) If the position under review is vacant, the Company may post the position immediately and any resulting negotiated increase to the rate of pay will be retroactive to the date of the appointment.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Position Reviews. Where the duties of a position have significantly changed, an employee, may submit a request to Human Resources for the review of the allocation of their position. The employee will complete a Position Description, and submit it to their first level Manager with a copy to Human Resources. (a) Within twenty-one (21) calendar days of receipt, the Manager must review and sign off the Position Description and forward it to Human Resources. Human Resources will provide a copy of this completed document to the Union. (b) Within ten (10) calendar days of receiving the validated Position Description from the Manager, Human Resources will complete their review of the documentation and issue a decision. This decision will be communicated to the Union prior to both the employee and Manager. (c) Should the position allocation change, the date the signed validated Position Description arrives in Human Resources will be the effective date of any change; in most instances. In extenuating circumstances, where it can be demonstrated that, through no fault of the employee, there was a significant delay in forwarding the Position Description, an alternate date may be considered. Human Resources will review these circumstances with management, and determine if the date should be prior to the date received in their office.
View Source

Related to Position Reviews

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • 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.

  • Periodic Reviews During January of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall review Executive's Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and additional benefits then being provided to Executive. Following each such review, the Company may in its discretion increase the Annual Salary, bonus, stock options, and benefits; however, the Company shall not decrease such items during the period Executive serves as an employee of the Company. Prior to February 28th of each year during the term hereof, the Board of Directors of the Company shall communicate in writing the results of such review to Executive.

  • 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.