Process for Review Clause Samples

Process for Review. (a) The Manager and/or the Employee recognize that a position needs to be reviewed: (i) The Manager notifies the Employee in writing, or (ii) An Employee makes a request in writing to the Manager that the allocation of their position be reviewed. (b) Within four (4) weeks, the Manager and the Employee (i) reach agreement on the PCQ and it is posted on the system to be approved by the Manager and submitted for review by the Senior Administrator, or (ii) If there is a failure to reach agreement, the Manager or the Employee may approach Human Resources and the Union for assistance. If consensus cannot be reached during this process, the PCQ as prepared by the Employee will be posted to the system for review by the Senior Administrator. (c) Within two (2) weeks of receipt, the Senior Administrator approves the PCQ or notifies the Employee and Manager in writing that it is not approved, and the reasons why. The PCQ can then be resubmitted by the Employee with agreed-changes, it can be abandoned, or the Senior Administrator or Employee can approach Human Resources and the Union for assistance. (d) If the Senior Administrator, Manager, and Employee cannot reach consensus, or in any event within two (2) weeks of the date the Employee receives notification that the completed PCQ referred to in 15.05 (b) is not approved by the Senior Administrator the Employee may refer the request and the completed PCQ to Human Resources for evaluation in consultation with the Senior Administrator. (e) Within twelve (12) weeks of receipt of the PCQ, Human Resources (i) Notifies the Employee (if applicable) and the Manager if changes are required in order for the PCQ to be scored. At this point, timelines are suspended until a revised PCQ is received, and (ii) Determines the scoring of the position, and (iii) Consults with the Union on the scoring of the position, and (iv) Notifies the Manager, Union, and Employee of the decision in writing.
View SourceView Similar (7)
Process for Review. ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ will work with ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ (the “Experts”) to perform a review of the above topics. Following such review, their joint recommendations will be submitted to the County and the County will implement those joint recommendations. A copy of the joint recommendations will also be provided to Disability Rights Advocates and Public Counsel (collectively “Plaintiffs’ Counsel”). To the extent Professors ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ and ▇▇▇▇▇▇▇ disagree, the following dispute resolution process shall apply and be final: a. Upon notification of a dispute between the Experts, see Section IV.E infra, the Parties shall meet and confer within 30 days and attempt in good faith to resolve the dispute. b. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute through the meet and confer process, either Party may submit the matter to Magistrate Judge ▇▇▇▇▇▇ ▇. ▇▇▇▇▇ for purposes of mediation. c. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute through mediation, they shall submit the matter to Magistrate Judge ▇▇▇▇▇-▇▇▇▇▇ ▇▇▇▇▇ (Judge ▇▇▇▇▇) in the form of letter briefs for decision. The Parties agree that in resolving any dispute, Judge ▇▇▇▇▇ will rely solely on applicable federal and state law and not the terms of this Agreement. This includes, but is not limited to, the ADA, Section 504, California Government Code § 11135, and the IDEA, as applicable. d. Either party may appeal Judge ▇▇▇▇▇’ decision to the Ninth Circuit. e. The District Court, in its discretion, may award fees to the prevailing party in accordance with the standard set forth in Christianberg Garment Co. v. E.E.O.C., 434 U.S. 412 (1978). If Plaintiffs are the prevailing party, the Court may, in its discretion, reduce the amount of attorneys' fees and costs awarded if it determines that the County’s position(s) were reasonable, in whole or in part.
View SourceView Similar (3)
Process for Review. If requested, the classifier will inform the Union of the standards and/or other materials used to classify the position. Materials/ standards used by the classifier but not available on the Internet or from the employee will be provided to the Union. The final signed classification/ position evaluation statement, if prepared, will be provided by the classifier to the Union, if requested.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Process for Review. A process for review of proposed procurements is used to avoid purchase of unnecessary or duplicative items.
View SourceView Similar (2)
Process for Review. (1) Department personnel will review all applications for completeness and timeliness. (2) All applications determined to be complete and postmarked on or before May 15 will be presented to the Fish and Wildlife Commission for approval. (3) Any application determined to be incomplete or not postmarked on or before May 15 will automatically be rejected and will not be considered by the Fish and Wildlife Commission.
View Source
Process for Review 
View SourceView Similar (2)

Related to Process for Review

  • GUIDELINES FOR REVIEWS We may provide you areas on the Site to leave reviews or ratings. When posting a review, you must comply with the following criteria: (1) you should have firsthand experience with the person/entity being reviewed; (2) your reviews should not contain offensive profanity, or abusive, racist, offensive, or hate language; (3) your reviews should not contain discriminatory references based on religion, race, gender, national origin, age, marital status, sexual orientation, or disability; (4) your reviews should not contain references to illegal activity; (5) you should not be affiliated with competitors if posting negative reviews; (6) you should not make any conclusions as to the legality of conduct; (7) you may not post any false or misleading statements; and (8) you may not organize a campaign encouraging others to post reviews, whether positive or negative. We may accept, reject, or remove reviews in our sole discretion. We have absolutely no obligation to screen reviews or to delete reviews, even if anyone considers reviews objectionable or inaccurate. Reviews are not endorsed by us, and do not necessarily represent our opinions or the views of any of our affiliates or partners. We do not assume liability for any review or for any claims, liabilities, or losses resulting from any review. By posting a review, you hereby grant to us a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, royalty-free, fully-paid, assignable, and sublicensable right and license to reproduce, modify, translate, transmit by any means, display, perform, and/or distribute all content relating to reviews.

  • Process for Recovery of Funding If the Funder, acting reasonably, determines that a recovery of Funding under section 5.1 is appropriate, then the Funder will give 30 Days’ Notice to the HSP. The Notice will describe: the amount of the proposed recovery; the term of the recovery, if not permanent; the proposed timing of the recovery;‌ the reasons for the recovery; and the amendments, if any, that the Funder proposes be made to the HSP’s obligations under this Agreement. Where the HSP disputes any matter set out in the Notice, the parties will discuss the circumstances that resulted in the Notice and the HSP may make representations to the Funder about the matters set out in the Notice within 14 Days of receiving the Notice. The Funder will consider the representations made by the HSP and will advise the HSP of its decision. Funding recoveries, if any, will occur in accordance with the timing set out in the Funder’s decision. No recovery of Funding will be implemented earlier than 30 Days after the delivery of the Notice.

  • Mechanisms for Cooperation Pursuant to Article 149 (Objectives), the Parties hereby establish a Committee on Cooperation comprising representatives of each Party.

  • Subcontracting for Medicaid Services Notwithstanding any permitted subcontracting of services to be performed under this Agreement, Party shall remain responsible for ensuring that this Agreement is fully performed according to its terms, that subcontractor remains in compliance with the terms hereof, and that subcontractor complies with all state and federal laws and regulations relating to the Medicaid program in Vermont. Subcontracts, and any service provider agreements entered into by Party in connection with the performance of this Agreement, must clearly specify in writing the responsibilities of the subcontractor or other service provider and Party must retain the authority to revoke its subcontract or service provider agreement or to impose other sanctions if the performance of the subcontractor or service provider is inadequate or if its performance deviates from any requirement of this Agreement. Party shall make available on request all contracts, subcontracts and service provider agreements between the Party, subcontractors and other service providers to the Agency of Human Services and any of its departments as well as to the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services.

  • Program Review The State ECEAP Office will conduct a review of each contractor’s compliance with the ECEAP Contract and ECEAP Performance Standards every four years. The review will involve ECEAP staff and parents. After the Program Review, the State ECEAP Office will provide the contractor with a Program Review report. The contractor must submit an ECEAP Corrective Action Plan for non-compliance with ECEAP Performance Standards. The Plan must be approved by the State ECEAP Office.