See Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 29 MLC 63, 66 (2002), citing Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Labor To establish a violation of the Law, the Relations Commission, 404 Mass. 124, 127 (1989). Union must show: 1) the employer changed a pre-existing condition of employment; 2) that the change had an impact on a mandatory subject of bargaining; and 3) the change was implemented without prior notice or an opportunity to bargain. Id.

City of Holyoke, 35 MLC at 156; Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 MLC 155, 159, MUP-1498 (June 4, 2001).

He is and has been for many years a correction officer at the Suffolk County Sheriffs Department. He has had experience working with female inmates. (Testimony of the Appellant; Decision on Motions for Summary Decisions (Decisions on Motions)) 2.

See Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 14 Oakes contends that the term days in Article 3 of the 2015-2018 CBA refers to business days and that his grievance was timely filed.

Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 MLC 155, 160 (2001); Quincy School Committee, 27 MLC 83, 92 (2000). The charging party bears the burden of proving that, but for the protected activity, the employer would not have taken the adverse action. Athol-Royalston Regional School Committee, 28 MLC 204, 214 (2002); Town of Athol, 25 MLC at 211.

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department and In addition, the Union is regularly provided with organizational charts and employee lists detailing the existence of the seven Asset Protection regions, seven Asset Protection assistant regional managers, and seven Asset Protection supervisors.

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department and AFSME, Council 93,29 MLC 21, 34-35 (2002). In addition, the Union is regularly provided with organizational charts and employee lists detailing the existence of the seven Asset Protection regions, seven Asset Protection assistant regional managers, and seven Asset Protection supervisors.

Board of Higher Education and AFSCME, Council 93, Local 1067, AFL-CIO, 33 MLC 156, 158 (February 22, 2007) (citing Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 30 MLC 1, 6 (2003); City of Boston/Boston Public Library, 26 MLC 215, 216-217 (2000)). If the evidence is insufficient to find an agreement, or if the parties hold differing good faith interpretations of the language at issue, the [DLR] will conclude that no repudiation has occurred.

Chief Justice for the Administration and Management of the Trial Court, 33 MLC at 185-186 (quoting Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 29 MLC 53, 69 (2002), citing, San Diego Newspaper Guild, Local 95 of the Newspaper Guild, AFL-CIO, CLC v. NLRB, 548 F.2d 863 (9" Cir. 1977)).

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 29 MLC 63, 69 (2002). In cases where an employer claims that the release of personnel files are exempt from disclosure pursuant to the personnel files exemption to the public records law, the employer must harmonize its statutory obligations and provide exempt information through the use of certain judicially-approved safeguards on disclosure. Association, 2009 WL 4005279, *5 (2009). City of Newton v.

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 30 MLC 1 (2003); City of Boston, 26 MLC at 217. The June 2019 agreement does not include ambiguous language. The parties agreed to a process for implementing mandatory overtime. There are no limits imposed on how many times an employee may be called to perform mandatory overtime in a three-month period.