New Search
r <br /> <br /> 11 Please provide any additional information or comments that you think should be <br /> ~ considered in this review. <br /> i <br /> A review of whaf is stated in the U. S. Dept. of Labor Bureau of Labor Statistics <br /> ~ Occupational Outlook Handbook should be considered. It clearly states that Engineering <br /> Technicians and Inspectors are two different occupations and yet we are providing the <br /> level of expertise expected of both in addition to being competent surveyors. <br /> A thorough study of potential re-classification should include a comparison of the duties <br /> of Engineering Technicians with other similar classifications within the Public Works <br /> Engineering, such as Land Use Review Technicians. <br /> If you would like to be considered for ~ <br /> an onsite visit by HRRS, please check here. <br /> (Please note: Timelines may not allow us <br /> to conduct all onsite visits) <br /> Required Signatures <br /> EMPLOYE 'S SIGNATURE: DATE <br /> i <br /> cr 2~Z5~o <br /> ~C~- <br /> SUPERVISOR COMMENTS <br /> Please review the employee's statements for accuracy; provide additional <br /> information, if necessary, to fully explain the scope of the position. Any <br /> significant changes should be discussed between the employee and supervisor <br /> I have reviewed & discussed this questionnaire with David and minor modifications have <br /> been which reflect our collective responses. <br /> Engineering Technician Position Review 21 January 2004 <br /> <br />