Hiring Decision Sample Clauses

Hiring Decision. In accordance with Article 3.02(c), the final hiring decision shall be the sole purview of the Employer. The Employer has the responsibility of informing the chosen candidate about the decision.
Sample 1Sample 2See All (7)
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Hiring Decision. Candidate selection is based upon qualifications, experience and past performance. SHARE seniority will be the determining factor for equally qualified candidates. The hiring manager notifies Human Resources of the selected candidate and provides documentation on an applicant evaluation form regarding the reason for their recommendation.
Sample 1Sample 2Sample 3
Hiring Decision. Selection is based upon qualifications, experience and past performance, including documented disciplinary history. Where internal candidates are equally qualified (i.e. they have the same qualifications, experience, and past performance), SHARE seniority will be the determining factor for selection. Employees who have been laid off, or who are facing layoff, and employees returning from Workers Compensation have preference over other internal candidates. If no internal candidates apply during the posting period who are reasonably determined to be qualified for the job, it may be filled by an external candidate.
Sample 1Sample 2
Hiring Decision. ‌ For my main test, to estimate the bias in hiring decisions caused by consultant-manager connections, I allow plan sponsors to choose from all the managers that have a product in the mandate asset category and have at least 15 months of non-missing returns during the 3 year period prior to the hire. This results in a large number of potential choices for the sponsor, sometimes as many as 2000 managers. This likely includes some managers who were not considered for the position, thereby increasing the total number of observations and reducing standard errors. As a robustness test, I restrict the number of managers that the plan sponsor chooses from, to 30. I create propensity scores for all the managers in the original dataset based on the base model 1 in Table 3. For each hiring decision, I pick up to 30 managers with a propensity score closest to the hired manager. With this new data, I redo the tests in Tables 3 and 4. The results are provided in Tables 13 and 14. As we can see, these results are very similar to Tables 3 and 4. A connection to the consultant considerably increases a manager’s probability of being hired. Connections also reduce the sensitivity of hiring decision to past performance and fee.
Sample 1
Hiring Decision i. The hiring decision is generally under the purview of the supervisor. There may be circumstances in which, within the guidelines stated herein and consideration of any Department Director or Human Resources recommendations, the BCC Administrator or Elected Official may exercise the authority to make the final hiring decision.
Sample 1
Hiring Decision. The Library will send the Union notice of the successful applicant after the applicant has accepted the position. An applicant who does not receive a vacant position or interview may request a conference with the Human Resources Officer to receive an explanation of the reasons the applicant was not selected.
Sample 1
Hiring Decision. Client shall base employment decisions or any actions on the Client’s Lawful policies and procedures and recognize that Credential Checks’ employees are not allowed to render any legal opinions regarding information contained in Background Screening Reports. Credential Check will xxxx a “flag” on various results including but not limited to criminal records, motor vehicle violations, discrepancy in information provided on employment verification from the application etc. Client agrees that it will not make any decisions based in part or whole on the presence (or lack of presence) of a flag on the report. Client agrees that it alone is making employment decisions, and that it will do so only (1) after reviewing the full consumer report, not just the flags, and (2) in conformity with all applicable laws. Client shall indemnify and hold Credential Check harmless for any claims arising out of its inclusion (or lack of inclusion) of a flag on the reports it receives from Credential Check.
Sample 1
AutoNDA by SimpleDocs
Hiring Decision. In accordance with Article 3.02(c), the final hiring decision shall be the sole purview of the Employer, who may accept or reject any recommendation made by the Committee under Article
Sample 1
Hiring Decision. 5.1 The Client acknowledges and agrees that it will remain the sole responsibility of the Client to screen, interview and hire a Carer/Domestic referred by the Nanny Care.
Sample 1

Related to Hiring Decision

  • Hiring Decisions Contractor shall make the final determination of whether an Economically Disadvantaged Individual referred by the System is "qualified" for the position.

  • Hearing Decision The decision of the Board shall be in writing and shall contain findings of fact and the personnel action approved, if any. The findings may reiterate the language of the pleadings or simply refer to them. The decision of the Board shall be certified to the Superintendent or designee who recommended the personnel action, and he/she shall enforce and follow this decision. A copy of the decision shall be delivered to the appellant or his/her designated representative personally or by registered mail. The decision of the Board shall be final.

  • Final Decision Concessionaire covenants that the decision of the Commissioner of Department, relative to the performance of the terms and conditions of this Agreement, shall be final and conclusive.

  • Shared Decision Making 33-1 Purpose The purpose of a shared decision making program is to create an atmosphere in which decision making is a collegial, shared, process that fosters an exchange of ideas and information necessary for effective professional practice and for improved student performance. The Association and District agree to continue pursuing jointly the implementation of legitimately recognized school councils as a foundation of a shared decision-making program. All provisions of this Agreement shall continue to be in full force and effect throughout the process.

  • Arbitration Decision The arbitrator’s decision will be final and binding. The arbitrator shall issue a written arbitration decision revealing the essential findings and conclusions upon which the decision and/or award is based. A party’s right to appeal the decision is limited to grounds provided under applicable federal or state law.

  • Arbitration Decisions Unless otherwise agreed by the Parties, the arbitrator(s) shall render a decision within ninety (90) Calendar Days of appointment and shall notify the Parties in writing of such decision and the reasons therefor. The arbitrator(s) shall be authorized only to interpret and apply the provisions of this LGIA and shall have no power to modify or change any provision of this Agreement in any manner. The decision of the arbitrator(s) shall be final and binding upon the Parties, and judgment on the award may be entered in any court having jurisdiction. The decision of the arbitrator(s) may be appealed solely on the grounds that the conduct of the arbitrator(s), or the decision itself, violated the standards set forth in the Federal Arbitration Act or the Administrative Dispute Resolution Act. The final decision of the arbitrator(s) must also be filed with FERC if it affects jurisdictional rates, terms and conditions of service, Interconnection Facilities, or Network Upgrades.

  • The Decision If mediation fails, or is not appropriate, and if the decision can be rendered after a short deliberation, the Arbitrator will do so. By meeting first with counsel to explain the framework of the Arbitrator’s decision, the parties are provided with an opportunity to influence the exact terms of resolution. Within the framework of settlement as outlined by the Arbitrator, the parties can work out exact terms which best suit the specifics of the case. Such an opportunity should not be wasted by continuing to argue the merits of the case.

  • Negotiation; Alternative Dispute Resolution The Parties will attempt in good faith to resolve any dispute or controversy arising out of or relating to the performance of services under this Agreement. If the Parties are unable to resolve the dispute, then, pursuant to San Francisco Administrative Code Section 21.36, Contractor may submit to the Contracting Officer a written request for administrative review and documentation of the Contractor's claim(s). Upon such request, the Contracting Officer shall promptly issue an administrative decision in writing, stating the reasons for the action taken and informing the Contractor of its right to judicial review. If agreed by both Parties in writing, disputes may be resolved by a mutually agreed-upon alternative dispute resolution process. If the parties do not mutually agree to an alternative dispute resolution process or such efforts do not resolve the dispute, then either Party may pursue any remedy available under California law. The status of any dispute or controversy notwithstanding, Contractor shall proceed diligently with the performance of its obligations under this Agreement in accordance with the Agreement and the written directions of the City. Neither Party will be entitled to legal fees or costs for matters resolved under this section.

  • Construction Change Directive A written order prepared and issued by the District, the Construction Manager, and/or the Architect and signed by the District and the Architect, directing a change in the Work.

  • Final Decisions The Contracting Officer will issue a final decision as required by 33.211 if—

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