Request for Position Classification Review Sample Clauses

Request for Position Classification Review. (Full-Time and Part-Time) If an employee believes that the essential duties or another major element of his or her position has changed substantially, he or she should prepare a revised PDQ using “Track Changes” on the most recent version and the supervisor section must be completed. The PDQ must be signed by the employee and by the employee’s immediate supervisor. The changes to the work must be noted, and the PDQ must include the date when the noted work changes began in order to be considered for review. Once completed, the form should be submitted via email to the Human Resources Department for review and copied to all parties involved (supervisor/employee). PDQ’s which are incomplete will be returned. No incomplete forms will be considered for review. The Human Resources Department will convene a PDQ evaluation and classification panel on fixed, published dates at least six (6) times per year. The Hay panel will consist of no fewer than two (2) members trained in the Hay Group methodology with one (1) member representing the Union and at least one (1) member representing the Human Resources Hay Review Committee. The Panel will make every effort to reach a consensus on the status of each PDQ. If the panel concludes that the position should be assigned to a higher classification level, the employee will receive the minimum rate of pay for the classification level to which the position has been assigned, or a ten (10) percent increase in his or her current rate of pay not to exceed the maximum rate of pay for the new classification level, whichever amount is greater. The effective date of a position reclassification will be the date that the initially submits the PDQ to Human Resources for review. Human Resources will write the new job description based on the PDQ reviewed by the Hay Committee. The job description will be reviewed by the supervisor and the Union. An employee who disagrees with the outcome of a position evaluation and classification review may appeal within ten (10) working days of receipt of notification of the results by submitting a revised PDQ and written explanation of the basis of his or her disagreement to the Hay Appeal Panel. The PDQ evaluation and classification appeal panel will consider the employee’s appeal at the next separately scheduled meeting. The appeal panel will consist of one (1) member selected by the Union, one
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Request for Position Classification Review. If an employee believes that the essential duties or another major element of his or her position has changed substantially, they may request that his/her position be reviewed by the Hay Group for possible reclassification, by following the process below:

Related to Request for Position Classification Review

  • Classification Review (a) An Employee who has reason to believe that they are improperly classified due to a substantial change in job duties, may apply to the Department Director, or designate, to have the Employee’s classification reviewed. The Director, or designate, will review the Employee’s application and advise the Employee of the Employer’s decision.

  • Validation Review In the event OIG has reason to believe that: (a) Good Shepherd’s Claims Review fails to conform to the requirements of this CIA; or (b) the IRO’s findings or Claims Review results are inaccurate, OIG may, at its sole discretion, conduct its own review to determine whether the Claims Review complied with the requirements of the CIA and/or the findings or Claims Review results are inaccurate (Validation Review). Good Shepherd shall pay for the reasonable cost of any such review performed by OIG or any of its designated agents. Any Validation Review of Reports submitted as part of Good Shepherd’s final Annual Report shall be initiated no later than one year after Good Shepherd’s final submission (as described in Section II) is received by OIG. Prior to initiating a Validation Review, OIG shall notify Good Shepherd of its intent to do so and provide a written explanation of why OIG believes such a review is necessary. To resolve any concerns raised by OIG, Good Shepherd may request a meeting with OIG to: (a) discuss the results of any Claims Review submissions or findings; (b) present any additional information to clarify the results of the Claims Review or to correct the inaccuracy of the Claims Review; and/or (c) propose alternatives to the proposed Validation Review. Good Shepherd agrees to provide any additional information as may be requested by OIG under this Section III.D.3 in an expedited manner. OIG will attempt in good faith to resolve any Claims Review issues with Good Shepherd prior to conducting a Validation Review. However, the final determination as to whether or not to proceed with a Validation Review shall be made at the sole discretion of OIG.

  • Office of Inspector General Investigative Findings Expert Review In accordance with Senate Bill 799, Acts 2021, 87th Leg., R.S., if Texas Government Code, Section 531.102(m-1)(2) is applicable to this Contract, Contractor affirms that it possesses the necessary occupational licenses and experience.

  • Position Review ‌ The Employer may initiate a position review for a position it believes is improperly classified, and will inform the Union in writing when it has initiated a reallocation process for a bargaining unit position. An individual employee who believes that their position is improperly classified may request a review according to the following procedure:

  • INDEPENDENT ASSESSMENT COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSONS Xx. Xxxxxx Xxxxxxxxx Registered Nurses Association of Ontario 000 Xxxxxxxxxx Xxxxxx, Xxxxx 0000 Xxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Telephone: (000) 000-0000, ext. 216 Fax: (000) 000-0000 E-mail: xxxxxxxxxxxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xx Ms. Xxxxxxx Plain 0000 Xxxxxx Xxxx Xxxxxxxx, XX X0X 0X0 Telephone: (000) 000-0000 Email: xxxxxxx.xxxxx@xxxxxxxxx.xx LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN: EXTENDICARE SCARBOROUGH (Hereinafter referred to as the "Employer") AND: ONTARIO NURSES' ASSOCIATION (Hereinafter referred to as the "Union")

  • Client Classification 7.1. We shall not have an obligation to treat our clients in different classes depending on their knowledge and expertise.

  • Utilization Review We review health services to determine whether the services are or were Medically Necessary or experimental or investigational ("Medically Necessary"). This process is called Utilization Review. Utilization Review includes all review activities, whether they take place prior to the service being performed (Preauthorization); when the service is being performed (concurrent); or after the service is performed (retrospective). If You have any questions about the Utilization Review process, please call the number on Your ID card. The toll-free telephone number is available at least 40 hours a week with an after-hours answering machine. All determinations that services are not Medically Necessary will be made by: 1) licensed Physicians; or 2) licensed, certified, registered or credentialed health care professionals who are in the same profession and same or similar specialty as the Provider who typically manages Your medical condition or disease or provides the health care service under review. We do not compensate or provide financial incentives to Our employees or reviewers for determining that services are not Medically Necessary. We have developed guidelines and protocols to assist Us in this process. Specific guidelines and protocols are available for Your review upon request. For more information, call the number on Your ID card or visit Our website at xxx.xxxxxxx.xxx.

  • Claims Review Population A description of the Population subject to the Claims Review.

  • ADB’s Review of Procurement Decisions 11. All contracts procured under international competitive bidding procedures and contracts for consulting services shall be subject to prior review by ADB, unless otherwise agreed between the Borrower and ADB and set forth in the Procurement Plan. SCHEDULE 5 Execution of Project and Operation of Project Facilities; Financial Matters

  • Claims Review Methodology a. C laims Review Population. A description of the Population subject to the Quarterly Claims Review.‌

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