Open Discussion Sample Clauses

Open Discussion. The company and its employees are committed to open and xxxxx discussion between the management and employees on any matter.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Open Discussion. The Company and its Employees are committed to an open and xxxxx discussion between supervisors and Employees on any matter relating to employment conditions. If the Company and the Employees wish to develop a consultative committee they may do so. The consultative committee would discuss and review matters such as use of contractors within the business and opportunities for further full time positions and the use of Overseas or Interstate resources. The committee will meet on a quarterly basis. This does not prejudice the rights of the Employees to Union representation where necessary.
Sample 1
Open Discussion. “Le specificità in Piemonte del Settore Automotive, le prospettive e le proposte di azioni future” Moderatore: Ing. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx, xxx.xxxx-xxxxxxx.xx Responsabile “Innovation Point” presso AMMA - Aziende Meccaniche Meccatroniche Associate D8.4 Awareness Raising Workshop Regensburg Awareness raising workshop in Regensburg Date: 2012-03-13 Venue: Energy Agency Regensburg Number of participants: 55 Main target groups / nature of audience: Cluster members Main purpose: Introduction of the SAGE project and information on Cluster topics Main topics:  Presentation of the SAGE-project to the Cluster Community  Information on Cluster Activities & ongoing Projects  Networking Description of agenda and speakers: • Greeting (Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxx) • Actual Cluster themes: o Presentation of EU-Project SAGE „Safe and Green Road Vehicles“ (Xx. Xxxxxxxxx Xxxxx) o NEMO Network „Intelligent Charging Infrastructure“ (Xxx Xxxxx, Netzwerkmanagement IT-Inkubator Ostbayern) o Integration of E-Mobility into the Distribution Grid (Prof. Xx. Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, Univ. of Applied Sciences Regensburg) o Intelligent Voltage Control (Xxxxxxx Xxxxxx, REWAG) o E-Mobility at the City of Regensburg (Xxxx Xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Dept. of Economic Developement) o Hybrid bus – latest Development from Regensburg (Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxxx, AVL Software & Functions) o Bavarian E-Mobility showcase Region – actual Status (Xxxxx Xxxxxxxxx, EU Coordinator) o PG Elektrus – the exclusive e-Roadster from Regensburg (Xxxxxx Xxxxxx, PG Trade & Sales) Results (in short words please conclude on the results of the workshop): • The SAGE project was introduced to the Cluster community; their participation possibilities and the opportunities were explained; the Cluster involvement in WP 2, WP 3 and WP 7 was presented. The methodology of WP2 including the timeline for questionnaire, interviews, and regional strategic workshop was discussed. The cluster community is aware of the SAGE project. The workshop was combined with the first annual cluster meeting. The members were informed about Cluster projects and activities.
Sample 1
Open Discussion. The Company and its employees are committed to an open and xxxxx discussion between supervisors and employees on any matter relating to employment conditions without third party interference. This does not prejudice the rights of the employees to union representation where necessary. All parties will also assist in the consultation process if conflict or the need for counselling arises due to poor performance or attitude problems. This process will be conducted in accordance with current Industrial Relations regulations.
Sample 1
Open Discussion. In the second part of the seminar, an open discussion took place, analyzing in more detail the implications of the installation of smart meters and their proper and effective use, and elaborating concerns of the locals with regards to issues such as the improvement of the local electricity supply quality, the potential for energy saving, net metering opportunities and DSM. More precisely the following points were identified and were further discussed.  There was a concern on the workload and interventions required for the installation of the smart meter and DSM solution at the household level, with the need for a demonstration of the proposed solution being quite pronounced, in order for the local consumers to familiarize with its operation prior to installation. To this end, it was understood among the participants that the more data is collected in advance with regards to the characteritsics of each household (e.g. through questionnaires) the more effective the installation and adaptation of the proposed solution will be, aiming also to the development of a common, flexible and adaptable solution and not to a plethora of tailored ones. With regards to the familiarization of the locals with a demo, it was agreed that once Eurosol can provide a first prototype, this will be effectively used for further training of the locals.  At the same time, the idea of having a central display presenting the entire island and the Livadia community real-time electricity consumption (already measured from HEDNO in the project context) was much favoured by all seminar participants.  The problem of frequent power cuts and electricity supply shortcomings that in many cases damage electrical appliances of the locals was also stressed, in the sense of how could the DSM and smart meter solution provide protection against this phenomenon. It was commonly agreed that this should be communicated to Eurosol during the TILOS workshop.  In a parallel discussion, all participants were encouraged to analyze their electricity bills and identify the main sources of consumption along with the potential for energy saving under minimum interventions. At the same time, the net metering PV solution was mainly brought up by hotel owners, seeking for advise on how to reduce their electricity bills in a cost-effective manner. TILOS D8.2_Training Seminars for Smart Metering & DSM - 2nd Series  Finally, the concept of DSM under the operation of a smart grid locally was discussed, with the se...
Sample 1

Related to Open Discussion

  • Informal Discussion If an employee has a problem relating to a work situation, the employee is encouraged to request a meeting with his or her immediate supervisor to discuss the problem in an effort to clarify the issue and to work cooperatively towards settlement.

  • Informal Discussions The employee's concerns will be presented orally by the employee to the appropriate supervisor. Every effort shall be made by all concerned in an informal manner to develop an understanding of the facts and the issues in order to create a climate which will lead to resolution of the problem. If the employee is not satisfied with the informal discussion(s) relative to the matter in question, he/she may proceed to the formal grievance procedure.

  • Discussion Staff has reviewed the proposal relative to all relevant policies and advise that it is reasonably consistent with the intent of the MPS. Attachment B provides an evaluation of the proposed development agreement in relation to the relevant MPS policies.

  • Settlement Discussions This Agreement is part of a proposed settlement of matters that could otherwise be the subject of litigation among the Parties hereto. Nothing herein shall be deemed an admission of any kind. Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 408 and any applicable state rules of evidence, this Agreement and all negotiations relating thereto shall not be admissible into evidence in any proceeding other than to prove the existence of this Agreement or in a proceeding to enforce the terms of this Agreement.

  • Existing Discussions The Company agrees that it will immediately cease and cause to be terminated any existing activities, discussions or negotiations with any Persons conducted heretofore with respect to any Acquisition Proposal. The Company agrees that it will take the necessary steps to promptly inform the individuals or entities referred to in the first sentence hereof of the obligations undertaken in this Section 6.2. The Company also agrees that it will promptly request each Person that has heretofore executed a confidentiality agreement in connection with its consideration of acquiring it or any of its Subsidiaries to return or destroy all confidential information heretofore furnished to such Person by or on behalf of it or any of its Subsidiaries.

  • Results and Discussion Table 1 (top) shows the root mean square error (RMSE) between the three tests for different numbers of topics. These results show that all three tests largely agree with each other but as the sample size (number of topics) decreases, the agreement decreases. In line with the results found for 50 topics, the randomization and bootstrap tests agree more with the t-test than with each other. We looked at pairwise scatterplots of the three tests at the different topic sizes. While there is some disagreement among the tests at large p-values, i.e. those greater than 0.5, none of the tests would predict such a run pair to have a significant difference. More interesting to us is the behavior of the tests for run pairs with lower p-values. ≥ Table 1 (bottom) shows the RMSE among the three tests for run pairs that all three tests agreed had a p-value greater than 0.0001 and less than 0.5. In contrast to all pairs with p-values 0.0001 (Table 1 top), these run pairs are of more importance to the IR researcher since they are the runs that require a statistical test to judge the significance of the per- formance difference. For these run pairs, the randomization and t tests are much more in agreement with each other than the bootstrap is with either of the other two tests. Looking at scatterplots, we found that the bootstrap tracks the t-test very well but shows a systematic bias to produce p-values smaller than the t-test. As the number of topics de- creases, this bias becomes more pronounced. Figure 1 shows a pairwise scatterplot of the three tests when the number of topics is 10. The randomization test also tends to produce smaller p-values than the t-test for run pairs where the t- test estimated a p-value smaller than 0.1, but at the same time, produces some p-values greater than the t-test’s. As Figure 1 shows, the bootstrap consistently gives smaller p- values than the t-test for these smaller p-values. While the bootstrap and the randomization test disagree with each other more than with the t-test, Figure 1 shows that for a low number of topics, the randomization test shows less noise in its agreement with the bootstrap com- Figure 1: A pairwise comparison of the p-values less than 0.25 produced by the randomization, t-test, and the bootstrap tests for pairs of TREC runs with only 10 topics. The small number of topics high- lights the differences between the three tests. pared to the t-test for small p-values.

  • Discussions Within 14 days of the date of the notice under Clause 23.2 (Advance Notice) of this article, the Union and the Employer will commence discussions for the purpose of reaching agreement as to the effects of the technological change and in what way, if any, this agreement should be amended.

  • Positive Test Results In the event an employee tests positive for drug use, the employee will be provided, in writing, notice of their right to explain the test results. The employee may indicate any relevant circumstance, including over the counter or prescription medication taken within the last thirty (30) days, or any other information relevant to the reliability of, or explanation for, a positive test result.

  • No Existing Discussions As of the date hereof, the Company is not engaged, directly or indirectly, in any discussions or negotiations with any other party with respect to an Acquisition Proposal.

  • Positive Test Result Where there has been a positive test result in a confirmatory test and in any confirmatory retest (if the employee requested one), the Employer will do the following unless the employee has furnished a legitimate medical reason for the positive test result:

Time is Money Join Law Insider Premium to draft better contracts faster.