Workload Review. 133. When a problem of excessive workload arises, it must be addressed to ensure the long-term viability of the unit, including quality of patient care and employee satisfaction.26
Workload Review. (i) An employee who believes a review of their workload is warranted shall meet to discuss the concern with their immediate supervisor and if the concern is deemed valid, to identify possible methods to resolve the concern.
(ii) In the event that a resolution cannot be reached, the employee may refer the concern in writing to the next level manager. The decision, in writing, shall be provided to the employee within five (5) working days.
(iii) An employee who is dissatisfied with the decision in Article 62:03(f)(ii) may grieve the decision at Step 2 of the grievance procedure within five (5) working days from the date the employee received the decision. The college President or designate shall hold a hearing to discuss the grievance with the employee and the employee’s representative. The decision at Step 2 shall be final for such grievances.
Workload Review. A faculty member, who believes his/her workload to be excessive for any reason, including coordination and self-studies for accreditation, may request an administrative review by his/her xxxx or appropriate management supervisor. This review shall be completed within a reasonable period of time, and a written summary with recommendations shall be furnished to the faculty member, College, and the Faculty Association.
Workload Review. (i) An employee who believes a review of their workload is warranted shall meet to discuss the concern with their immediate supervisor and if the concern is deemed valid, to identify possible methods to resolve the concern.
(ii) In the event that a resolution cannot be reached, the employee may refer the concern in writing to the next level manager. The decision, in writing, shall be provided to the employee within five (5) working days.
(iii) An employee who is dissatisfied with the decision in (ii) above, may grieve the decision at Step 2 of the grievance procedure within five
Workload Review. 3.1 Any issues arising from an Academic Staff Member’s work planning and workload shall, in the first instance, be dealt with between the Academic Staff Member and their immediate Line Manager with a view to resolving the concerns. This shall include reviewing the recent history, current work planning and work load against this policy, procedures and guidelines and relevant Employment Agreement (where applicable). Advice and support may be requested from the Human Resources Department, the Academic Member of Staff’s Union or other colleagues. Where possible, resolutions of the issues shall be reached in consultation with the Academic Staff Member.
3.2 The Academic Staff Member may be required to record their work activities for a period of time (i.e. 1-2 weeks) to assist with the resolution process.
3.3 Workload issues shall be managed in a timely manner as agreed with the Academic Staff Member and others involved.
3.4 Where work related stress is diagnosed by a Medical Practitioner appropriate support and processes shall be initiated by the line manager, with advice from Human Resources and the Health & Safety Adviser. The Academic Staff Member may also self-refer to appropriate services.
Workload Review. Originally Signed September 19, 2019 The parties agree that during the life of this agreement, the Labour Management Committee under Article 7 will review concerns from Component 3 members related to workload, will review other current and historical information related to shifts in workload, and may make advisory recommendations to the Union and/or the University. LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING #10
Workload Review. A staff member who believes that the workload assigned to them by their Head of School (or equivalent) is inconsistent with the guidelines above, for example, it is:
a) inequitable – that is, given the staff member’s academic classification level and fraction of employment, their workload is not fair in comparison to the workloads of other staff in the School, or
b) unreasonable – that is, could not be expected to be completed by a staff member with the required knowledge and abilities within the 1725 hour limitation (pro-rata for part-time staff), or
c) unbalanced – that is, does not provide adequate opportunity to undertake a balanced range of workload elements, should in the first instance discuss the matter with their Head of School (or equivalent) to seek a variation in their workload allocation. If this does not lead to a resolution of their concern they may seek a review by their Pro Vice Chancellor. Allocation of activities in accordance with the Academic Workload Guidelines will be one aspect considered as part of the workload review.
Workload Review. If an Employee has concerns about ongoing excessive workload, or persistent additional hours beyond their scheduled shifts, they may request a workload review meeting with their Supervisor and a Union representative. This meeting will occur within seven (7) calendar days of the request, or if either the Employee or Supervisor is out of the office, as soon as practicable upon their return. The parties will review data related to the Employee’s workload and hours. If it is determined that the Employee’s workload or hours has been excessive on an ongoing basis, the parties will discuss possible actions for addressing the issue, including but not limited to temporary modifications in assigned tasks, additional staff support, providing additional resources to support the Employee’s work, or adjustments in workload. The Supervisor will document the issues presented and the outcomes of the meeting, within seven (7) calendar days of the meeting, and will provide a copy of that documentation to the Employee, Union representative, Departmental leadership, and the Human Resources Business Partner assigned to the area. After conclusion of the process defined in this paragraph, any disagreements arising under this paragraph may be reviewed, through Step 3 of the Grievance procedure outlined in Article XVI of this Agreement. No matter arising from this paragraph may be reviewed through Arbitration. In the event the workload concern cannot be resolved through the internal grievance process, the parties may enlist the assistance of a mediator to assist the parties in resolving the issue.
Workload Review a) A workload review is to be undertaken annually or where an emergent function is identified or where the annual workload of a kaimahi is proving to be inequitable, unsafe or unreasonable
b) A workload review is to be undertaken in accordance with Ara processes and procedures including Health and Safety
c) Without limiting the considerations which need to be taken into account in a workload review, the review will include assessment of the following matters:
i. the need to reallocate workload where it proves to be inequitable, unsafe, or unreasonable;
ii. the kaimahi agreed performance indicators as they relate to the allocated teaching duties and responsibilities;
iii. the kaimahi meeting of those performance indicators to date as well as any additional tasks/research which the kaimahi is undertaking either by agreement or by direction of the employer; and
iv. the kaimahi access to professional development.
Workload Review a) Supervisors are responsible for the ongoing management of workloads and shall monitor the workload of staff members to ensure that the allocation of work is fair and reasonable.
b) A staff member who believes that the workload assigned to them is:
i) inequitable – that is, not fair in comparison to the workloads of other staff in their work unit, or
ii) unreasonable – that is, could not be expected to be completed by a staff member with the required knowledge and abilities within ordinary working hours, or
iii) unbalanced – that is, does not provide adequate opportunity to undertake a balanced range of workload elements should in the first instance discuss the matter with their supervisor to seek a variation in their workload allocation. The staff member can seek the support of the relevant union at any stage of the process.
c) Every reasonable attempt shall be made to settle workload concerns informally and as quickly as possible.
