City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commn, 43 Mass.App.Ct. 300, 304, rev.den., 426 Mass. 1102 (1997). See also Police Dept of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass.App.Ct. 411, rev.den., 726 N.E.2d 417 (2000); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commn, 38 Mass.App.Ct. 473, 477 (1995); Town of Watertown v.

Id. at 800, quoting City of Cambridge, 43 Mass.App.Ct. at 304. The Commissions role in applying the just cause standard in matters involving the abolition of a position for reasons of economics and efficiency is more narrow than the scope of review to be applied in disciplinary actions. See School Comm. of Salem v. Civil Service Commn, 348 Mass. 696, 699 (1965); see also Debnam v.

City of Cambridge, 35 MLC 183, 186 (2009); Town of Ipswich, 11 MLC 1403, 1411 (1985); City of Boston, 8 MLC 1113, 1115 (1981). It is undisputed that when the parties agreed to negotiate extensions for the four-day workweek and part-time work schedule pilot programs, the Union made it clear that it would want to memorialize the terms of those programs in a written and executed agreement.

E.g., City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission. 43 Mass.App.Ct. (1997) 300, 303-305, (Commission may 682 N.E.2d 923, rev.den., 428 Mass. not substitute its judgment for a valid 1102, 687 N.E.2d 642 exercise of appointing authority discretion, but the 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.).

City of Cambridge and Cambridge Police Superior Officers Association, 23 MC 28, 37 (1996). Information about a proposed change acquired by union officers or agents will be imputed to the union. City of Cambridge, 5 MLC 1291, 1293 (1978). The Law does not require, however, that the public employer provide the union with direct, explicit notice of a proposed change to satisfy the first prong of the asserted defense.

City of Cambridge and Cambridge Police Superior Officers Association, 23 MC 28, 37 (1996). Information about a proposed change acquired by union officers or agents will be imputed to the union. City of Cambridge, 5 MLC 1291, 1293 (1978). The Law does not require, however, that the public employer provide the union with direct, explicit notice of a proposed change to satisfy the first prong of the asserted defense.

May 11-12, 2023; American Academy of Arts & Sciences, 136 Irving Street, Cambridge, MA EXPENSES RELATED TO INCIDENTAL HOSPITALITY Identify the person or organization that offered to reimburse, pay or waive Healey-Discoll Transition, Inc. Nonprofit Corporation expenses.

Nolan, Attorney for NEPBA, Inc., hereby certify that on this date, a copy of the foregoing Withdrawal of Charge was served upon Heather Hall, Esquire, 40 Thorndike Street, Cambridge, MA 02141, by email. Dated: July 17, 2014 Gary G. Nolan, Esq. BBO #634907 133 Merrimack Street Lowell, MA 01852 Tel. (978) 454-3800 f

Cambridge, MA 02141 Re: Service of Process at Middlesex House of Correction and Jail/Massachusetts Correctional Institutions Dear Mr. Rodrigues: Please consider this letter as the Unions formal notice that the Union objects to the employer's unilateral change in the established conditions of employment that are mandatory subjects of bargaining without affording the Union proper notice and opportunity to bargain in accordance with M.G.L.c.1S0E.

City of Cambridge, 31 MCSR 90 (2018) (currently pending appeal in Superior Court). In Andrade, the City, approximately six weeks prior to the expiration of Mr. Andrades probationary period, placed him on paid administrative leave after he was arrested for a domestic assault and battery. Mr. Andrade never returned to performing his duties as a firefighter and the City terminated him several months later. The City never notified Mr.