Town ofFalmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823, 857 N.E.2d 1053, 1059 (2006) and cases cited. Even if there are past instances where other employees received more lenient sanctions for similar misconduct, however, the Commission is not charged with a duty to fine-tune employees suspensions to ensure perfect uniformity. See Boston Police Dept v. Collins, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 408, 412 (2000).
The Commission is guided by "the principle of uniformity and the 'equitable treatment of similarly situated individuals' " as well as the "underlying purpose of the civil service system 'to guard against political considerations, favoritism and bias in governmental employment decisions.' " Town ofFalmouth v.Civil Service Comm'n., 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006) and cases cited.
See, e.g., Town ofFalmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823, (2006); Police Dept of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass.App.Ct. 411, rev.den., 726 N.E.2d 417 (2000); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commn, 38 Mass App.Ct.473,477 (1995); Town of Watertown v. Arria, 16 Mass.App Ct. 331,334, rev.den.,390 Mass. 1102, (1983).
Town ofFalmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006) and cases cited. The role of the Commission is to determine "whether the appointing authority has sustained its burden of proving that there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority." City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commn, 43 Mass.App.Ct. 300, 304, rev.den., 426 Mass. 1102 (1997). See also City of Leominster v.
Town ofFalmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006) and cases cited. The role of the Commission is to determine "whether the appointing authority has sustained its burden of proving that there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority." City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commn, 43 Mass.App.Ct. 300, 304, rev.den., 426 Mass. 1102 (1997). See also City of Leominster v.
Town ofFalmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006). In so doing, the Commission must uphold the appointing authoritys action if the Commission finds there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the appointing authority made its decision. Id. at 824; City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App.
Town ofFalmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006). In so doing, the Commission must uphold the appointing authoritys action if the Commission finds there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the appointing authority made its decision. Id. at 824; City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App.
Town ofFalmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). The issue for the Commission is "not whether it would have acted as the appointing authority had acted, but whether, on the facts found by the commission, there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the Appointing Authority made its decision." Watertown v.
Dolan, Esq., Lighthouse Legal Counsel, LLC., 775 East Falmouth Highway, East Falmouth, MA 02536. Thank you. Very truly yours, GP ph RB Kheteg ) Joseph L DeLorey General Counsel IDijc ce: Metro Office (for distribution) 8 Beacon Street * Boston, MA 02108 617-367-6000 www.afscme93.org QED az o/ | F
Lighthouse Legal Counsel, LLC DLA Agent 4 Lf Wel rs Saal SUlomit 775 East Falmouth Highway East Falmouth, MA 02536 occ UX \pe Teer 508.332.1492 office i yy toda 508.287.7944 cell ] S codes Please 4 . ale : Wt i O to 9 0) clayp 6 jack@Ilcounsel.com Please note that this message and any attachments may contain information that is CONFIDENTIAL and PRIVILEGED and/or may constitute ATTORNEY WORK PRODUCT.
B 127920 Lighthouse Legal Counsel, LLC 775 East Falmouth Highway East Falmouth, MA 02536 508-332-1492 office 508-287-7944 cell jack@llcounsel.com CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that a true copy of the foregoing Answer of Town of Dedham has been e-mailed this day to opposing counsel, Attorney Meghan Ventrella, at mventrella@afscme93.org. Date: May V