Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1596, MUP-7514 (December 22, 1992). The Commonwealth Employment Relations Board (CERB) does not analyze the motivation behind the conduct, Town of Chelmsford, 8 MLC 1913, 1916, MUP-4620 (March 12, 1982), affd sub nom. Town of Chelmsford v. Labor Relations Commission, 15 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (1983), or whether Complaint and Partial Dismissal (cont'd) MUP-17-6000 the coercion succeeded or failed.

Compare Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 34 MLC 115, 119, SUP-03-5023 (April 11, 2008) (rejecting Commonwealths argument that change in inmates exercise schedule did not require bargaining, where change required correction officers to assume additional responsibilities without changing their schedule) to Town of Winchester, 42 MLC at 332-333 (affirming H.O. dismissal of complaint where Union failed to demonstrate any impact on workload by the hiring

Andover Education Assoc., 40 MLC 1 (2013) (finding an e-mail to approximately sixty bargaining unit members about contract negotiations was protected) citing Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1597 (1992), Burgess was interrogated about her e-mail urging employees to wear purple in support of Union negotiations and that such support be dedicated to a particular member who was recently unfairly disciplined.

Town of Winchester, MLC 1591, 1596, MUP-7514 (December 22, 1992). The Commonwealth Employment Relations Board (CERB) does not analyze the motivation behind the conduct, Chelmsford, 19 Town of 8 MLC 1913, 1916, MUP-4620 (March 12, 1982), aff'd sub nom., Town of Chelmsford v. Labor Relations Commission, 15 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (1983), or whether the coercion succeeded or failed. Groton-Dunstable MLC 1551, 1555-1556, MUP-6748 (March 20, 1989).

Quincy School Committee, 27 MLC 83, 91 (2000), citing, Town of Athol, 25 MLC 208, 212 (1999); Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1595 (1992). Absent a showing of animus, an employer may still violate the Law, if it discharges or takes other adverse action against an employee while he or she is engaging in protected activity, provided that the employee's own conduct does not remove him or her from the Law's protection.

Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1596, MUP-7514 (December 22, 1992). The Commonwealth Employment Relations Board (CERB) does not analyze the motivation behind the conduct, Town of Chelmsford, 8 MLC 1913, 1916, MUP-4620 (March 12, 1982), affd sub nom. Town of Chelmsford v. Labor Relations Commission, 15 Mass. App. Ct. 1107 (1983), or whether the coercion succeeded or failed.

Quincy School Committee, 27 MLC 83, 91, 14 MUP-1986 (December 29, 2000); Town of Athol, 25 MLC 208, 212, MUP-1448 (June 11, 15 1999); Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1595, MUP-7514 (December 12,1992); 16 Groton-Dunstable Regional School Committee, 15 MLC 1551, 1555, MUP-6748 (March 17 20, 1989). The focus of a Section 10(a)(1) analysis is the effect of the employers conduct 18 on reasonable employees exercise of their Section 2 rights.

Contrast, Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1596, MUP-7514 (Dec. 12, 1992) (CERB held that union officials who drafted and distributed letters to make the public aware of concerns about certain working conditions were engaged in concerted, protected activity). Consequently, without more evidence, the Union and the individual Charging Parties are unable to satisfy their prima facie cases on this issue.

Andover School Committee, 40 MLC 1, 11, 5 MUP-12-2294 (July 2, 2013) (citing Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1597, MUP-7514 6 (December 22, 1992)).

Contrast, Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1596, MUP-7514 (Dec. 12, 1992) (CERB held that union officials who drafted and distributed letters to make the public aware of concerns about certain working conditions were engaged in concerted, protected activity). Consequently, without more evidence, the Union and the individual Charging Parties are unable to satisfy their prima facie cases on this issue.

Andover School Committee, 40 MLC 1, 11, 5 MUP-12-2294 (July 2, 2013) (citing Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1597, MUP-7514 6 (December 22, 1992)).

Contrast, Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1596, MUP-7514 (Dec. 12, 1992) (CERB held that union officials who drafted and distributed letters to make the public aware of concerns about certain working conditions were engaged in concerted, protected activity). Consequently, without more evidence, the Union and the individual Charging Parties are unable to satisfy their prima facie cases on this issue.

Andover School Committee, 40 MLC 1, 11, 5 MUP-12-2294 (July 2, 2013) (citing Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1597, MUP-7514 6 (December 22, 1992)).

Furthermore, the rulings that the investigator cites to, Quincy School Committee, 27 MLC 83, 91, MUP-1986 (December 29, 2000); Town of Athol, 25 MLC 208, 212, MUP-1448 (June 11, 1999); Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1595, MUP-7514 (December 12, 1992); Groton-Dunstable Regional School Committee, 15 MLC 1551, 1555, MUP-6748 (March 20, 1989), involved employees bringing claims under their rights guaranteed under Section 2.

See, e.g., Quincy School Committee, 27 MLC 83, 91, MUP-1986 (December 29, 2000)(emphasis added); Town of Athol, 25 MLC 208, 212, MUP-1448 (June 11, 1999); Town of Winchester, 19 MLC 1591, 1595, MUP-7514 (December 22,1992); Groton-Dunstable Regional School Committee, 15 MLC 1551, 1555, MUP-6748 (March 20, 1989) and cases cited therein."