Rossman and Rossman 8 Essex Center Drive Peabody, MA 01960 Appearance for Respondent: Matthew J. Buckley, Esq. City of Revere 281 Broadway Revere, MA 02151 Commissioner: Angela C. McConney1 SUMMARY OF DECISION The City of Revere had just cause to suspend the Appellant for five days where he twice refused the Fire Chiefs order to file a report immediately.

Box 3075 Peabody, MA 01961-3075 Commissioner: Christopher C. Bowman SUMMARY OF DECISION Even when viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the Appellant, his resignation as a police officer from the Lynn Police Department was done voluntarily. The Appellants resignation was not, as he alleges, a result of coercion, fraud or duress.

See, e.g., City of Peabody, 23 MLC 84 (1996) (recognition clause excluding all Board of Health employees did not apply to newly-created Board of Health position). 22 23 We also find, however, that the recognition clause does more than simply exclude existing Finance Department employees, 43 it excludes future Finance Department employees as well.

In this regard, this case is somewhat similar to the Boards decision in City of Peabody, 23 MLC 84 (1986). In that case, the parties had long-standing recognition language excluding positions at the Citys Board of Health. Thereafter, about thirteen (13) years after signing that recognition language, the City created the position of school health aide within the Board of Health.

In this regard, this case is somewhat similar to the Boards decision in City of Peabody, 23 MLC 84 (1986). In that case, the parties had long-standing recognition language excluding positions at the Citys Board of Health. Thereafter, about thirteen (13) years after signing that recognition language, the City created the position of school health aide within the Board of Health.

See, e.g., City of Peabody, 23 MLC 84 (1996) (recognition clause excluding all Board of Health employees did not apply to newly-created Board of Health position). 22 23 We also find, however, that the recognition clause does more than simply exclude existing Finance Department employees, 43 it excludes future Finance Department employees as well.

In this regard, this case is somewhat similar to the Boards decision in City of Peabody, 23 MLC 84 (1986). In that case, the parties had long-standing recognition language excluding positions at the Citys Board of Health. Thereafter, about thirteen (13) years after signing that recognition language, the City created the position of school health aide within the Board of Health.

In this regard, this case is somewhat similar to the Boards decision in City of Peabody, 23 MLC 84 (1986). In that case, the parties had long-standing recognition language excluding positions at the Citys Board of Health. Thereafter, about thirteen (13) years after signing that recognition language, the City created the position of school health aide within the Board of Health.

Moreover, mandatory subjects include criteria for granting leave, Commomwvealth of Massachusetts, 21 MLC 1637 (1995); policies that provide for the discipline of employees who violated them, City of Lowell, 28 MLC 126 (2001); City of Peabody, 9 MLC 1447 (1982); and polices affecting and performance evaluations. Town of Danvers, 3 MLC 1559 (1977).

Quincy School Committee, 27 MLC at 91 (citing City of Peabody, 25 MLC 191, 193, MUP-9861 (May 21, 1999)). Proof of illegal employer motivation is not required. Quincy School Committee, 27 MLC at 91 (citing City of Boston, 8 MLC 1281, 1284, MUP-3891 (August 17, 1981)). A public employer violates Section 10(a)(3) of the Law by retaliating or discriminating against an employee who engages in activity protected by Section 2 of the Law.

conditions in arranging the 466 Mass. at 215-216. supervisor also resulted elimination of regularly scheduled overtime does not alter our conclusion. in the Because the eliminated overtime here resulted from the decision to eliminate the SSI title, this case is distinguishable from City of Peabody, 9 MLC 1447, MUP-4750, MUP-4767 (October 15, 1982) where the Board found that the City unlawfully failed to bargain over its decision to cease its practice

In City of Peabody, the City sought to terminate its long- standing practice of paying twenty minutes of its officer's lunchbreak on an overtime basis. The overtime was not strictly related to operational needs. The otlicers worked the same number of hours and the employer simply agreed to start paying twenty minutes of the lunch break on a time and a half basis.

The Purchase and Sale Agreement can be found in Attorney OKeefes closing file at his office in Peabody, MA. While the Appellant does not have sufficient information with which to state with certainty that Mr.

Accord, City of Peabody, 28 MLC 19, MUP-2073 (June 21, 2001) (contract did not expressly or by necessary implication allow the school committee to change employee work schedules by implementing an unpaid block of downtime); Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 18 MLC 1220, SUP-3426 (November 20, 1991) (involuntary reassignments did not constitute mere transfer of employee from one work location to another, but rather, reduction in force; and contractual

Accord, City of Peabody, 28 MLC 19, MUP-2073 (June 21, 2001) (contract did not expressly or by necessary implication allow the school committee to change employee work schedules by implementing an unpaid block of downtime); Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 18 MLC 1220, SUP-3426 (November 20, 1991) (involuntary reassignments did not constitute mere transfer of employee from one work location to another, but rather, reduction in force; and contractual

City of Peabody, 9 MLC 1447, MUP-4750 (November 17, 1982). Here, the Union did not show that the Employer imposed a fee for information requested pursuant to 150E. The Union requested the information pursuant to 150E and the Public Records Law.