office of personnel – Traduction en Anglais – Dictionnaire Keybot

Spacer TTN Translation Network TTN TTN Login Deutsch English Spacer Help
Langues sources Langues cibles
Keybot      30 Résultats   12 Domaines
  www.theblu.hu  
Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source
John Berry, directeur du United States Office of Personnel Management
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir monecole.gc.ca comme domaine prioritaire
John Berry, Director, United States Office of Personnel Management
  parl.gc.ca  
Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source
En d'autres termes, on a scindé en trois l'ancien système de la fonction publique. Le premier volet est l'Office of Personnel Management (bureau de gestion du personnel). C'était le bureau qui se chargeait de l'embauche et de la gestion des employés.
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir parl.gc.ca comme domaine prioritaire
In fact, in 1978, when the Civil Service Reform Act happened, one of the things at least we appreciated about the new system was that they separated the functions of the organization. In other words, they split our old civil service system into three pieces. The first piece was the Office of Personnel Management. That was the office that was dealing with employment and management of employees. That was one function. Then we had another function, the special counsel. The special counsel was supposed to be the office to help the whistle-blowers. That was very separate. And then we had a third function, which was the Merit Systems Protection Board, which was the adjudicative process. Essentially, that was the place these cases were going to be tried.
  2 Résultats scc.lexum.org  
Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source
44 La Cour suprême des États‑Unis a cependant refusé d’écarter entièrement la préclusion en droit public (du moins en théorie), notamment dans les arrêts Office of Personnel Management c. Richmond, 496 U.S. 414 (1990), p.
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir scc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire
44 Decisions in which the U.S. Supreme Court has however refused to rule out public law estoppel entirely (at least in theory) include Office of Personnel Management v. Richmond, 496 U.S. 414 (1990), at p. 423, and United States v. Pennsylvania Industrial Chemical Corp., 411 U.S. 655 (1973).  Circuit courts which have allowed estoppel against the government in exceptional circumstances are referred to in United States v. Asmar, 827 F.2d 907 (3rd Cir. 1987), at p. 911, note 4. Professors Davis and Pierce, supra, suggest at p. 231 that a successful claim for equitable estoppel in the United States would have to involve at least the following characteristics: “(1) unequivocal advice from an unusually authoritative source; (2) reasonable reliance on that advice by an individual; (3) extreme harm resulting from that reliance; and (4) gross injustice to the individual in the absence of judicial estoppel”.
  www.horizons.gc.ca  
Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source
Par exemple, le Bureau de l'administration du personnel des États-Unis (US Office of Personnel Management) a récemment mis sur pied un laboratoire d'innovation pour tester des moyens d'augmenter l'efficacité grâce à l'utilisation de nouvelles technologies.
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir horizons.gc.ca comme domaine prioritaire
Dan Ariely, the author of Predictably Irrational, has stressed the importance of experimentation, stating that governments have a responsibility to test expensive policy approaches before implementing them (Ariely, Dan. 2012. Horizons interview, April 26.) Government agencies internationally have been establishing Innovation Labs to engage in this type of policy experimentation (see Table 1). For instance, the US Office of Personnel Management recently established Innovation Lab to test ways to increase efficiency through the use of emerging technologies. In Denmark, MindLab has been experimenting with creative physical spaces, visual technology and workshop approaches by bringing end users and public servants from different departments together to collaborate to find solutions. Supported by three government departments, they have addressed a range of policy and program design challenges including reducing red tape for taxpayers, improving financial literacy among youth, and retention of foreign workers through social networks.
  2 Résultats csc.lexum.org  
Montrer texteMontrer source en cacheMontrer URL avec texte source
44 La Cour suprême des États‑Unis a cependant refusé d’écarter entièrement la préclusion en droit public (du moins en théorie), notamment dans les arrêts Office of Personnel Management c. Richmond, 496 U.S. 414 (1990), p.
Comparer pages textesComparer pages HTMMontrer URL avec texte sourceMontrer URL avec langue cibleDéfinir csc.lexum.org comme domaine prioritaire
44 Decisions in which the U.S. Supreme Court has however refused to rule out public law estoppel entirely (at least in theory) include Office of Personnel Management v. Richmond, 496 U.S. 414 (1990), at p. 423, and United States v. Pennsylvania Industrial Chemical Corp., 411 U.S. 655 (1973).  Circuit courts which have allowed estoppel against the government in exceptional circumstances are referred to in United States v. Asmar, 827 F.2d 907 (3rd Cir. 1987), at p. 911, note 4. Professors Davis and Pierce, supra, suggest at p. 231 that a successful claim for equitable estoppel in the United States would have to involve at least the following characteristics: “(1) unequivocal advice from an unusually authoritative source; (2) reasonable reliance on that advice by an individual; (3) extreme harm resulting from that reliance; and (4) gross injustice to the individual in the absence of judicial estoppel”.