Our friends from the City of Worcester have generously agreed to help us make calls but we still need 10 volunteers. Please let me know if you, or a member of your team, can help support this initiative. Many thanks!

BOARD OF PFRAMINGHAMA 01702 1 1937-12-02 00 135-04-5655-5 SNOW ST SOUTH MID 7 BISHOP STFRAMINGHAMA 01702 72115-456 2019-01-11 05775000 135-05-7008-92 BLANDIN STONEGATE83 9 SPEEN STNATICK MA 01760 66388-318 2015-11-16 03175000 135-04-7731-10 ROXANNASOUTH MID 7 BISHOP STFRAMINGHAMA 01702 72115-456 2019-01-11 05775000 135-04-8851-12 ROXANNASOUTH MID 7 BISHOP STFRAMINGHAMA 01702 72115-456 2019-01-11 05775000 142-23-5905-120 LELAND 120 LELAND 997 MILLBU WORCESTE

Role: WITNESS Driver's License: MEftCEDO~ RODRTGO 203 ARLINGTON ST FRAMINGHAM MA 81702 Employer Name: Address Name: lnc Age: 38 Sup Age: 38 Heighl; MARIO MONTENEGRO Z60 BEAVER ST framin ham MA 01702 Employer Name: SAMBA W~5T Type of Victim; Address Inc Age: 45 Sup Age: 45 Height: 5'06 ***~' DAWSON RD WORCESTER MA 81606 Employer Name: Sex: M Role: WITNESS Drivels License: Phone: Weight: Race: 175 W Role: WITNESS Driver's License; DpSREIS~ WENDERSON

WAKEFIELD WAKEFIELD MIDDLEBOROUGH MIDDLEBOROUGH PLYMOUTH PLYMOUTH MARLBOROUGH MARLBOROUGH MARLBOROUGH BOXBOROUGH BOXBOROUGH BOXBOROUGH ORANGE ORANGE ORANGE NORTHBOROUGH NORTHBOROUGH OAKHAM OAKHAM OAKHAM MILLBURY AUBURN SUTTON SUTTON SUTTON WRENTHAM LANESBOROUGH LANESBOROUGH LANESBOROUGH BILLERICA BILLERICA BILLERICA PLYMOUTH ORANGE ORANGE HUDSON HUDSON HUDSON FAIRHAVEN FAIRHAVEN FAIRHAVEN STURBRIDGE STURBRIDGE FRAMINGHAM FRAMINGHAM WORCESTER FRAMINGHAM WORCESTER

City of Worcester v. Labor Relations Commission, 438 Mass. 177, 180 (2002). To decide whether a subject properly falls within the scope of bargaining, the Board balances a public employers interests in maintaining its managerial prerogative to effectively govern with the resulting impact on employees terms and conditions of employment. Town of Danvers, 3 MLC 1559, 1571, MUP-2292, 2299 (April 6, 1977).

City of Worcester v. Labor Relations Commission, 438 Mass 177, 180 (2002). To decide whether a subject properly falls within the scope of bargaining, the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board (CERB) balances a public employers legitimate interests in maintaining its managerial prerogative to effectively govern against the impact on employees terms and conditions of employment.

See, City of Worcester v. Labor Relations Commission, 438 Mass. 177, 182 (2002). Moreover, this is not a situation where a core managerial function decision resulted in a change in job duties or work load such that impact bargaining may be required. See, Boston v. Boston Police Patrolmen's Association, 403 Mass. 680, 685 (1989).

Dismissal (contd) MUP-19-7509 Moreover, although the CERB has accepted the principle that egregious misrepresentations, consistent with a lack of good faith, may establish a violation of the duty to bargain in good faith, IAFF, Local 1009 and City of Worcester, 2 MLC 1238, MUPL2018 (December 15, 1975), the Union has failed to provide any evidence or even allege that, during the course of bargaining, it relied to its detriment on false statements in

See City of Worcester v. Labor Relations Commission, 438 Mass. 177 (2002). In addition, the Union arguments regarding its Town Charter and Home Rule do not establish that the Town committed a prohibited practice under the Law.

City of Worcester, 16 MLC (1986). 15 15 the public (1988); Town upon the change, 1327, 1333 (1989). * Or no later than November 10, 2011, as explained. 10 no further 1667, 1670 Town inquiry of and is With respect to the flex time, it is clear the parties contemplated a flex time policy. See Attachment 2.

City of Worcester, MUPL-10-4686 (2013), citing Boston School Committee, 36 MLC 38, 52 (2009). An agreement, furthermore, is void under the doctrine of mutual mistake if the mistake affects a basic assumption on which the contract was made. City of Boston, MUP-06-4699 (2011), citing Covich v. Chambers, 8 Mass. App. Ct. 740, 749 (1979).