In Investigation Re: 2009 Review and Selection of Reserve Police Officer in the City of Methuen, I-09-290 (2009), the Commission found that the Police Chiefs involvement in a hiring process in which her niece was a candidate tainted the appointment process. The Commission 18 effectively rescinded the appointment of the Police Chiefs niece and ordered a new review process. In Minoie v.

City of Methuen, 20 MCSR 215 (2007) (failure to disclose prior charge); Tracy v. Cambridge Police Dept, 18 MCSR 221 (2005) (multiple charges exhibits patterns of behavior); Thames v. Boston Police Dept, 17 MCSR 125 (2004) (improper to bypass based on pending charges, but bypass upheld based on long history of arrests and applicants own testimony); Soares v.

Fairburn & McQuillan 240 Pleasant Street Methuen, MA 01844 RE: MUP-18-6687, Town of Dracut Dear Ms. DeRenzis and Mr. McQuillan: On June 14, 2018, AFSCME, Council 93, Local 1404 (Union), filed a charge of prohibited practice with the Department of Labor Relations (DLR) alleging that the Town of Dracut (Town) had violated Sections 10(a)(3) and 10(a)(1) of Massachusetts General Laws, Chapter 150E (the Law).

Respectfully submitted, TOWN OF DRACUT, Respondent ter J.MQuillan, BBO# 340180 240 Pleasant St., Methuen, MA 01844 Tel. 978-682-9707 Fax 978-682-9460 pjmequillan@comcast.net DATED: July 3, 2018 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE upon the Charging Party by electronic mail and mailing the same, first-class postage prepaid, its attorney of record, Sean Cronin, Esq. of AFSCME Council 93,

City of Methuen, 28 MCSR 345 (2015); Morris v. Braintree Police Dept, 27 MCSR 656 (2014); Monagle v. City of Medford, 23 MCSR 267 (2010); Mainini v. Town of Whitman, 20 MCSR 647, 651 (2007); Belanger v. Town of Ludlow, 20 MCSR 285 (2007); Horvath v. Town of Pembroke, 18 MSCR 212 (2005); Fairbanks v. Town of Oxford, 18 MCSR 167 (2005); Saborin v.Town of Natick, 18 MCSR 79 (2005); Sihpol v. Beverly Fire Dept, 12 MCSR 72 (1999); Bannish v.

City of Methuen, 28 MCSR 345 (2015 (Employees whose immediate family members are seeking appointment should have no role in any part of the review and selection process . . .). See also, Lima v. City of Somerville, 30 MCSR 103 (2017); Dorney v. Wakefield Police Dept, 29 MCSR 405 (2016); Civil Service Commn v. Town of Braintree (Investigation), 19 28 MCSR 114 (2015); Civil Service Commn v.

Methuen, MA 01844 Tel. 978-682-970 Fax 978-983-8981 pjmcequillan@comcast.net DATED: January 11, 2019 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that I served a copy of the foregoing RESPONDENT'S RESPONSE TO CHARGING PARTY'S WRITTEN SUBMISSION upon the Charging Party by electronic mail to its attorney of record, Thomas E. Horgan, Hanley Law Offices, LLC, Marina Bay, 308 Victory Road, Quincy, MA 02171, this 11% day of January, 2019..

In the matter of: City of Methuens review and selection of Reserve Police Officer Candidates in the Fall of 2008, CSC Case No. I-09-290 (2010), the Commission found that the Police Chiefs direct involvement in the review and selection process, which included her niece and nieces fiance, compromised the Citys ability to ensure open consideration of all candidates for the position of reserve police officer.

Fairburn & McQuillan 240 Pleasant Streeet Methuen, MA 01844 RE: MUP-18-6636 TOWN OF DRACUT AND N.E.P.B.A. Dear Mr. Nolan and Mr. McQuillan: The Department of Labor Relations (Department) has received, docketed and reviewed the above-referenced charge.

City of Methuen, 28 MCSR 345 (2015); Morris v. Braintree Police Dept, 27 MCSR 656 (2014). In this case, insufficient objective procedures were incorporated into the interview process here to insulate the candidates from Chief dEntremonts personal biases that favored Officer M and worked against Officer Holland. The interview panelists played only an advisory role. There were no objective scoring criteria.

DOMPRESS wath eps : EXHIBIT : Sedtember 24, 2021 fe ra Ryan Dorgan 6 Copper Beach Lane Methuen, MA 01844 * DD. ? a ne NOTICE OF FOUR-DAY SUSPENSION Dear Officer Dorgan: You are hereby suspended for four (4) days without pey for your conduct on May 18, 2021. On this date, while on duty in the 8-3 unit, you entered a dark storage room and in the remained in the dark room for approximately three-and-one-half (3.5) hours.