Massachusetts Parole Board, 42 Mass. App. Ct. 584, 587 (1997). This burden is heightened by the due weight the court is required to accord the agencvs specialized knowledge, technical competence, experience, and any discretionary authority conferred on it by statute. lodice v. Architectural Access Board, 424 Mass. 370, 375-376 (1997), citing G.L.c. 30A, 14(7); Arnone v. Comm r of the Dept. of Social Services, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 33, 34 (1997).
On or about February 19, 2013, the Employer, acting through the Parole Board, unilaterally implemented the LS/CMI assessment, a risk assessment tool. The implementation of this risk assessment tool significantly increased the workload of virtually all members of the Parole Officer bargaining unit, represented by the Coalition of Public Safety ("COPS"). This was implemented unilaterally without negotiating to impasse or resolution with COPS.
, 172(m) provides in pertinent part: Notwithstanding this section or chapter 66A, the following shall be public records: (1) police daily logs, arrest registers, or other similar records compiled chronologically; (2) chronologically maintained court records of public judicial proceedings; (3) published records of public court or administrative proceedings, and of public judicial administrative or legislative proceedings; and (4) decisions of the parole
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). 3 Applicable Civil Service Law Section 2(b) of G.L. c. 31 addresses appeals to the Commission regarding persons aggrieved by "... any decision, action or failure to act by the administrator, except as limited by the provisions of section twenty-four relating to the grading of examinations ...."
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005) 4 Analysis In the context of civil service hiring and promotions, a bypass refers to a decision by an appointing authority (here, the Town of Barnstable) to make an original or promotional appointment of one or more candidate(s) other than the highest-ranking available candidate(s), as determined by the candidates place on a certification which reflects his or her performance (score) on the applicable
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). cf. Milliken & Co., v. Duro Textiles LLC, 451 Mass. 547, 550n.6, (2008); Maimonides School v. Coles, 71 Mass.App.Ct. 240, 249, (2008). See also Iannacchino v. Ford Motor Company, 451 Mass. 623, 635-36, (2008) (discussing standard for deciding motions to dismiss); cf. R.J.A. v.
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). cf. Milliken & Co., v. Duro Textiles LLC, 451 Mass. 547, 550n.6, (2008); Maimonides School v. Coles, 71 Mass.App.Ct. 240, 249 (2008) Specifically, a motion to dismiss for lack of standing must allowed when the appellant fails to raise above the speculative level sufficient facts plausibly suggesting that Ms.
, 172(m) provides in pertinent part: Notwithstanding this section or chapter 66A, the following shall be public records: (1) police daily logs, arrest registers, or other similar records compiled chronologically; (2) chronologically maintained court records of public judicial proceedings; (3) published records of public court or administrative proceedings, and of public judicial administrative or legislative proceedings; and (4) decisions of the parole
, 172(m) provides in pertinent part: Notwithstanding this section or chapter 66A, the following shall be public records: (1) police daily logs, arrest registers, or other similar records compiled chronologically; (2) chronologically maintained court records of public judicial proceedings; (3) published records of public court or administrative proceedings, and of public judicial administrative or legislative proceedings; and (4) decisions of the parole
Massachusetts Parole Board, 18 MCSR 216 (2005). See also Mangino v. HRD, 27 MCSR 34 (2014) and cases cited (The notion underlying the summary decision process in administrative proceedings parallels the civil practice under Mass.R.Civ.P.56, namely, when no genuine issues of material fact exist, the agency is not required to conduct a meaningless hearing.); Morehouse v.