The Civil Service Commission held it had no jurisdiction over plaintiffs-appellants' appeal because it found them to be similarly situated to all other Educational Specialists in The Division of Inmate Training and Educational; and, therefore, their reclassification requests were governed by the collective bargaining process under Massachusetts law. The state courts affirmed the Commission's decision.

COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION 100 Cambridge Street, Suite 200 Boston, MA 02114 (617) 979-1900 JOHN ADAMS, Appellant v. D1-20-114 DEPARTMENT OF STATE POLICE, Respondent Appearance for Appellant: Daniel J. Moynihan, Esq. Mark A. Russell, Esq. Law Office of Daniel J. Moynihan, P.C. 271 Main Street, Suite 302 Stoneham, MA 02180 Appearance for Respondent: Suzanne Caravaggio, Esq. Daniel Brunelli, Esq.

L. c. 30A, 14 to appeal a determination by the Civil Service Commission (the Commission) affirming a decision of the Massachusetts Human Resources Division (HRD) to bypass Gailliard for appointment to the position of Field Parole Officer. The matter is before the court on Gailliards. motion for judgment on the pleadings. For the reasons set forth below, the decision of the cae coe R. Commission is affirmed and Gailliards motion is DENIED.

No agreement was reached. 2 These Civil Service Commission decisions were attached to the Joint Motion to Reopen the Record. 3 The City and the Unions dispute whether to characterize the issue as involving an examination or process. Unless obvious by context, the terms are used interchangeably. 5 19.

The 2002 promotional process was modified by the City following complaints by the Unions at the Civil Service Commission. See BPSOF et al v. BPD, |-02-6-6 et al, 21 MCSR 59 (2008) & 21 MCSR 237 (2008). Specifically, the City agreed to remove the Performance Review System component. See id.

No agreement was reached. 2 These Civil Service Commission decisions were attached to the Joint Motion to Reopen the Record. 3 The City and the Unions dispute whether to characterize the issue as involving an examination or process. Unless obvious by context, the terms are used interchangeably. 5 19.

The 2002 promotional process was modified by the City following complaints by the Unions at the Civil Service Commission. See BPSOF et al v. BPD, |-02-6-6 et al, 21 MCSR 59 (2008) & 21 MCSR 237 (2008). Specifically, the City agreed to remove the Performance Review System component. See id.

No agreement was reached. 2 These Civil Service Commission decisions were attached to the Joint Motion to Reopen the Record. 3 The City and the Unions dispute whether to characterize the issue as involving an examination or process. Unless obvious by context, the terms are used interchangeably. 5 19.

The 2002 promotional process was modified by the City following complaints by the Unions at the Civil Service Commission. See BPSOF et al v. BPD, |-02-6-6 et al, 21 MCSR 59 (2008) & 21 MCSR 237 (2008). Specifically, the City agreed to remove the Performance Review System component. See id.

Pickards separation from City service in September, 2012, including but not limited to any and all appeals to the Civil Service Commission. S. Pickard agrees that he has been fully and fairly represented by the Union in this matter. S. Pickard represents that he has had the opportunity to thoroughly discuss 6. the terms of this agreement with his Union and counsel of his own choosing.

completed form: WAIVER OF RIGHT TO APPEAL DISCIPLINARY ACTION I wish to submit the attached grievance under Article 23, Grievance Procedure and Article 22, Arbitration of Disciplinary Action, appealing my demotion, suspension or discharge effective on and pursuant to Article 22, Section 4 of the Agreement between the NAGE and the Commonwealth of Massachusetts dated __ and all rights to appeal this disciplinary action to any other forum including the Civil

Civil Service Commission, 43 must be respected. See Cambridge v. Police Department of Boston Mass. App. Ct. 300, 304 (1997) and 3 (2000). Collins, 49 Mass. App. Ct. 408, 411-41 Department if the stay is not ordered the 5. There is likely irreparable harm to r requires that Fitzgibbon sion's orde in several respects.

[hereby waive any and all rights to appeal this disciplinary action to any other forum including the Civil Service Commission. I have not initiated any other appeal of this disciplinary action. Date Employee Signature Union Representative Signature af ) FE _NaTIONAL ASSOCIATION OF GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES AFFILIATED WITH THE SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION, AFL/CIO Lo E : Quincy, MA 02169 .