Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 MLC 155, 159, MUP-1498 (June 4, 2001).

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 30 MLC 14, 6, MUP-2630 and MUP-274 7 (August 19, 2003). If the evidence is insufficient to support the finding of an agreemen t, or if the parties hold differing good faith interpretations of the language at issue, then the Board will conclude that no repudiation has occurred. Id.

Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 30 MLC 1, 6, MUP-2630 and MUP2747 (August 19, 2003). If the evidence is insufficient to support the finding of an agreement, or if the parties hold differing good faith interpretations of the language at issue, then the CERB will conclude that no repudiation has occurred. Id. Here, the Union argues that it came to an agreement with the Town to allow bargaining unit members to work paid details in Newton.

The Union and Charging Parties argued during the investigation that this meeting violated Boutins Weingarten rights. 2 Unlike the Unions charge, the individuals charges did not specify that the Section 10(a)(1) allegation was derivative. 1 See Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 28 MLC 253, 259, MUP-2840 (January 30,2002) (In determining whether an employer has unlawfully denied union representation to an employee during an investigatory interview

Decision MUP-20-7800 et al. 1 additional basis to infer, under the fourth part of the prima facie analysis, that the discipline 2 was unlawfully motivated. 3 Finally, unlawful motivation may be inferred from evidence that the employer 4 treated the Charging Parties differently than it treated other similarly-situated employees. 5 See, e.g., Town of Carver, 35 MLC at 50-51; Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 6 MLC 155, MUP-1498 (June 4, 2001).

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 27 MLC 155, 159, MUP-1498 reasons Circumstantial factors may include: shifting and inconsistent MLC 1001, 1006, MUP-5656 for an employers action, Everett Housing Authority, 13 given for the adverse action, (June 4, 1986); the insubstantiality of the reasons SUP-3081 (May 19, 1988); the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 14 MLC 1743, 1749, activity.

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 30 MLC 1, 6, MUP-2630 and MUP2747 (August 19, 2003). If the evidence is insufficient to support the finding of an agreement, or if the parties hold differing good faith interpretations of the language at issue, then the Board will conclude that no repudiation has occurred. Id.

See Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 29 MLC 63, 66 (2002), citing Commonwealth of Massachusetts v. Labor Relations Commission, 404 Mass. 124, 127 (1989). To establish a violation of the Law, the 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.

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 208, 211 (1999).

See In the Matter of Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 2012 WL 6017964 at Page 5 (MA LRC 2012). In the instant case, Mr.

Labor Relations Ct. 404 (1992); Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 MLC 155, MUP-1498 (June 4, 2001). CONCLUSION For the reasons stated above, | find that the Unions charge is time-barred and dismiss the Complaint. Because | have dismissed the Complaint as time-barred, it is unnecessary to decide whether the Employer's conduct substantively violated Section 14 10(a)(5) and, derivatively, Section 10(a)(1) of the Law. 15 SO ORDERED.

See MUP 01-2979, Suffolk County Sheriff's Department and AFSCME Council 93, Local 1134 where the Labor Relations Commission determined that 21 prohibiting cell phone possession by jail officers at the jail did not violate sections 10(a) (5) or 10(a) (1) derivatively. Registrar Gilson testified that you can tell when someone has understanding of FERPA, common topic in Registrars office.