Fax Number 112 Sohier Rd Beverly, MA 01915 6. 978-232-9449 Employee Organization (if any): AFT Massachusetts Local 1315 (AFL-CIO) 8. 7. Representative to contact 9. Telephone Number Harold Jones, Associate Counsel | 617-423-3342 x258 Address (street and No., city/town, state, and ZIP code) 10, Fax Number 38 Chauncy St - Suite 402 Boston, MA 02111 617-423-0174 11. This charge is filed against (check one) 12.

See City of Beverly v. Civil Serv. Commn, 78 Mass.App.Ct. 182, 189 (2010). In its review, the commission is to find the facts afresh, and in doing so, the commission is not limited to examining the evidence that was before the appointing authority. Id. at 187 (quoting City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 726, 728, rev. den., 440 Mass. 1108 (2003)). The commissions task, however, is not to be accomplished on a wholly blank slate.

City of Beverly, 78 Mass.App.Ct. 182, 187 (quoting City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 726, 728, rev. den., 440 Mass. 1108 (2003)). The commissions task, however, is not to be accomplished on a wholly blank slate. Falmouth v. Civil Serv. Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006).

City of Beverly v. Civil Service Commn, 78 Mass. When considering allegations of misconduct, there must be a credible basis for the allegations that presents 4 legitimate doubt about a candidates suitability, but the appointing authority is not required to prove to the commissions satisfaction that the applicant in fact engaged in the serious alleged misconduct :... Id. at 189-90.

City of Beverly v. Civil Service Commission, 78 Mass. App. Ct. 182, 187 (2010). Bypass cases must be decided by a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of the evidence requires the Commission to determine whether, on the basis of the evidence before it, the Appointing Authority has established that the reason assigned for the bypass of an appellant were more probably than not sound and sufficient. Mayor of Revere v.

City of Beverly v. Civil Service Commn, 78 Mass.App.Ct. 182, 189, 190-191 (2010) citing Falmouth v. Civil Serv. Commn, 447 Mass. 824-826 (2006). The Commission owes substantial deference to the appointing authoritys exercise of judgment in determining whether there was reasonable justification shown. Beverly citing Cambridge at 305, and cases cited. ANALYSIS There is no evidence that the decision to bypass Mr.

City of Beverly v. Civil Service Commission, 78 Mass. App. Ct. 182, 190-191 (2010). In order to prevail in a bypass case, the Appellant must demonstrate that the reasons offered by the Appointing Authority were untrue, apply equally to the selected candidate and the bypassed candidate, are incapable of substantiation, or are a pretext for other, impermissible reasons. Borelli v. MBTA, G-1160, 1 MCSR 6.

City of Beverly v. Civil Service Commission, 78 Mass. App. Ct. 182, 187 (2010). M.G.L. c. 31, s. 2(b) requires that bypass cases be determined by a preponderance of the evidence. A preponderance of the evidence requires the Commission to determine whether, on the basis of the evidence before it, the Appointing Authority has established that the reasons assigned for the bypass of an appellant were more probably than not sound and sufficient.

Ct. 726, 728 (2003) (citations omitted), See also, City of Beverly v. Civil Service Commission, 78 Mass. App. Ct. 182, 188 (2010) (same). 2. The Requirement of Just Cause The Legislature has granted civil service protection to employees of redevelopment authorities.

City of Beverly v. Civil Service Commn, 78 Mass.App.Ct. 182, 189, 190-191 (2010) citing Falmouth v. Civil Serv. Commn, 447 Mass. 824-826 (2006) and ensuring that the appointing authority conducted an impartial and reasonably thorough review of the applicant. The Commission owes substantial deference to the appointing authoritys exercise of judgment in determining whether there was reasonable justification shown.