Department of Correction, 35 MCSR 87 (2022). Mr. Hurley asserted that Employer B was not a credible reporter of facts, did not know him as well as he claimed, and had limited knowledge of his activities. Further, Mr. Hurley asserts that Employer B cannot be deemed credible due to his financial dispute with the family business. I am not persuaded. Employer Bs opinion did not stand on its own, but was considered in conjunction with Mr.

Department of Correction, 34 MCSR 431 (2022); Blanchette v. City of Methuen, 34 MCSR 431 (2021); Connor v. Andover Police Dept., 30 MCSR 439 (2017); Dale v. Town of Wilmington, 28 MCSR 466 (2015), affd sub nom. Town of Wilmington v. Civil Service Commn, Suffolk Sup. Ct. C.A. 2015CV2963 (2016). CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, Appellants appeal under Case No. G2-23-193 is dismissed nisi, to become effective on August 10, 2024.

. - Representing the National Correctional Employees Union, Local 106 Decision (cont'd) SCR-12-1511 DECISION AND DIRECTION OF ELECTION Summary The issue in this case is whether three disputed positions should be included in a bargaining which unit at the Franklin County Sheriffs Department is the subject of a petition that the International (Sheriffs Brotherhood Department), of Correctional Officers (IBCO) filed and which is currently represented

Drug Enforcement Administration, fitness for duty evaluations for public safety personnel including the Massachusetts Department of Correction, and consulting for civilian personnel deployed in international conflict situations. (Exhs. 12 & 13; Testimony of Dr. Zeizel) 39. Dr. Zeizel reviewed the prior evaluations by Drs. Scott, Beck and Gutheil, as well as selected information he obtained, primarily from Det.

Department of Correction, 59 Mass.App.Ct. 1110 (2004) (unpublished), affirming, 14 MCSR 361 (2001); Dallas v. Commissioner of Public Health, 1 Mass.App.Ct. 768, 771 (1974) citing Sullivan v. Commissioner of Commerce & Dev., 351 Mass, 462, 465 (1966).

Department of Correction, 21 MCSR 647, 688 (2008). This principle is particularly apt when the applicant is under consideration for a promotion to a superior position. Justification for Bypass Applying these principles to the facts of this appeal, the MBTA Police Department, by a preponderance of the evidence, has shown that it had reasonable justification for bypassing Mr. Noble for appointment as an MBTA Police Officer. Mr.

Department of Correction, 26 MCSR 502 (2013), in which Mr. Riveras termination was reversed subject to a physical exam based on doubts raised by differing medical reports 10 whether Mr. Rivera could perform the essential functions of the job.6 In Rivera, there was a dispute at the time of the hearing regarding whether Mr. Rivera could perform the duties and responsibilities of a correction officer. Here, there is no such dispute. Mr.

Department of Correction, 27 MCSR 471 (2014) (unanimously concluding that DOC failed to show a nexus 8 between the Appellants criminal conduct from 20 years prior and his current ability to perform the essential job duties of a correction officer); Stylien v. Boston Police Dept, 31 MCSR 154, 209 (2018) (bypass appeal allowed due to lack of evidence, and failure to show a pattern of criminal behavior or poor driving habits).

The state Department of Correction (DOC) sought maintenance reallocation to Counsel III for six (6) Counsel IIs in its Legal Department without first obtaining HRDs approval.12 Three (3) of the six (6) Counsel II reclassification requests were mistakenly approved prior to being reviewed.

See Department of Correction and MCOFU, 42 MLC 109 (2015)(Citing Higher Education Coordinating Council, 23 MLC 90, 92 (1996)( In certain circumstances where job duties have traditionally been shared by bargaining unit members and non-unit employees, the Commission has held that the work in question will not be recognized as exclusively bargaining unit work.).