See City of Cambridge, 5 MLC 1291, 1293 (1978). It is inexplicable that the Association failed to request to bargain. Town of Milford, 15 MLC 1247, 1252-54 (1988) With this knowledge, the Association had almost three (3) months to request to bargain over the role of Unit D members in the Advisory and it did not.

City of Cambridge, 5 MLC 1291, 14 1293, MUP-2799 (September 27, 1978). 15 Here, Union and the Employer had negotiated contractual language in Article XVI 16 (K) of Unit As 2018-2019 and 2019-2022 CBAs whereby both the Union and the 17 Employer each would appoint three members to the JLMS to discuss potential changes 18 to the Adams Advisory Program.

General Counsel and Records Access Officer Cambridge Health Alliance 1493 Cambridge Street Cambridge, MA 02139 Dear Attorney Fuqua: I have received the petition of Sara Eardley, of AIM Targeted Intelligence, appealing the response of the Cambridge Public Health Commission (Commission) to a request for public records. G. L. c. 66, 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On February 25, 2023, Ms.

City Solicitor Cambridge Public Schools 135 Berkshire Street Cambridge, MA 02141 By email only: mbayer@cambridgema.gov RE: Open Meeting Law Complaint Dear Attorney Bayer: This office received a complaint from Anna Shin on December 18, 2024, alleging that the Graham & Parks School Council (the Council) violated the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, 18-25.

Fuqua (BBO No. 644332) Associate General Counsel Cambridge Health Alliance 1493 Cambridge Street Cambridge, MA 02139 617-591-4425 afuqua@challiance.org Dated: July 12, 2012 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document by first-class U.S. mail and email (sdomesick@comcast.net) upon counsel for the Union, Stephen R.

Associate General Counsel Cambridge Health Alliance 1493 Cambridge Street Cambridge, MA 02139 617-591-4425 afuqua@challiance.org Dated: December 2, 2011 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I certify that I served a copy of the foregoing document by first-class U.S. mail and email (sdomesick@comcast.net) upon counsel for the Union, Stephen R. Domesick, Esq.; 7599 Seashell Crest Lane; Lake Worth, FL 33467-6972; on,this 2" ty December 2011. Vn Pender

The Union is the exclusive representative for approximately three hundred bargaining unit members employed by the City of Cambridge (City) in Units A, B, C, D, E, F, and G. Article | Recognition of the parties Agreement, designates the Units as follows: A. Public Works units including the non-clerical library and Print Shop employees; B. Clerical Unit; C. Traffic and Parking Unit; D. Electrical Department; E. Parking Control Officers; F.

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass.App.Ct. 300, 304 (1997). Reasonable justification means the Appointing Authority's actions were based on adequate reasons supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an 13 unprejudiced mind, guided by common sense and by correct rules of law. Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928). Commissioners of Civil Service v.

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commn, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300, 303-305, rev. den., 428 Mass. 1102 8 (1997).

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commn, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300, 303-305, rev. den., 428 Mass. 1102 (1997).

City of Cambridge, 27 MCSR 379 (2014); Higgins v. Boston Public Schools, 25 MCSR 416 (2012); Sullivan v. City of Boston, 20 MCSR 11 (2007) Since I conclude that Boston is correct that MMs and MM1 properly are grouped together in the same title, the Commission lacks jurisdiction to hear an appeal by Mr. 6 Mr.

Civil Service Commn 78 Mass.App.Ct. 182, 190-91 (2010); City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commn, 43 Mass.App.Ct. 300, 303-305, rev.den., 428 Mass. 1102 (1997) (Commission must not substitute its judgment for a valid exercise of appointing authority discretion, but civil service law gives the Commission some scope to evaluate the legal basis of the appointing authoritys action, even if based on a rational ground.) See also Town of Reading v.