See Town of Marblehead, 1 MLC 1140, 1145, MUP-667 (September 23, 1974); see also City of Boston/Deer Island House of Correction, 19 MLC 1613, 1616, MUP-7322 (December 24, 1992). Irrespective of how the Union might choose to frame the violation, the Employer did not violate the Law by denying or restricting access to members of the bargaining units.

Town of Marblehead, 12 MLC 1667, 1672 (1986). The Department ordinarily orders the employer to restore and maintain the status quo ante until the completion of all bargaining obligations. Town of Ludlow, 17 MLC at 1203.

Town of Marblehead, 12 MLC 1667, 1672 (1986). The Department ordinarily orders the employer to restore and maintain the status quo ante until the completion of all bargaining obligations. Town of Ludlow, 17 MLC at 1203.

Ct. 169, 174 (1999); City of New Bedford, 38 MLC 239, 248, MUP-09-5581 and MUP-09-5599 Massachusetts 1269, Board Town of Marblehead, of Regents, 12 MLC 15 MLC 1265, 1667, 1670, MUP-5370 contract will not be lightly inferred. SUP-2959 (April 3, 2012); (Nov. (Mar. 28, 1986). 18, 1988); A waiver by There must be clear and unmistakable showing that such waiver occurred through the bargaining process or the specific language of the agreement.

Massachusetts Board of Regents, 15 .1LC 1265, 1269 (1988); Town of Marblehead, 12 MLC 1667. 1670 (1986). The initial inquirs focuses upon the language of the agreement. Town of Mansiield. 25 MLC 8 14, 15 (1998). If the language clearly, unequivocally and specifically permits the employer to make the change, no further inquiry is necessary. City of Worcester, 16 MLC 1327, 1333 (1989).

The CERB finds adverse impact where the bargaining unit has lost positions, Town of Marblehead, 12 MLC 1667, 1670, n.4, MUP-5370 (March 28, 1986); and/or where the employees in the bargaining unit have lost an opportunity to perform work in the future, City of Gardner, 10 MLC at 1220.

Town of Marblehead, 12 MLC 1667, 1670 (1986). Applying these principles to the contract clause at issue here, | conclude that the language of Article XXV, which provides the employer the right to relieve employees from duty because of a lack of funds, is not ambiguous. Rather, it constitutes a clear and unmistakable waiver of the right to bargain over a layoff decision when a reduction in force is caused by a lack of funds.

Peabody School Committee, 28 MLC 19, 21, MUP-2073 (June 21, 2001); Town of Marblehead, 12 MLC at 1670.

Inhabitants ofthe Town of Marblehead, 68 F.2d 875, 877 (1st Cir. 1934). Under settled Massachusetts law, a broad release is to be given effect even if the parties did not have in mind all the wrongs which existed at the time of the release. See Naukeag Inn, Inc. v.

Thus, while the Board placed dispatchers into their own bargaining unit instead of in a wall-to-wall city-wide unit in City of Somerville, 24 MLC (1998), it also denied petitions seeking units in Town of Marblehead, 27 MLC MCR-09-5360 dispatchers UMass (April 5, 2010). and Lowell, uniformed to sever dispatchers 142, MCR-4799 from CAS-3217 civilian wall-to-wall (2001) and City of Worcester, And, critical to this case, it granted a petition severing

City of Leominster, 23 MLC 62, 18 65 (1996); Town of Marblehead, 12 MLC 1667, 1670 (1986). A waiver to the statutory right to bargain over a particular subject cannot be inferred lightly, but must be shown clearly, unmistakably, and unequivocally and cannot be found on the basis of a broad, but general, management rights clause. School Committee of Newton v. Labor Relations Comm., 388 Mass. at 569.