See also Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 39 MLC 99, 100, SUP-095493/5496 (October 25, 2012) (no impact bargaining obligation where overtime shifts determined right before the start of the next shift based on staffing needs because overtime considered ad hoc and not regularly scheduled).

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 30 MLC A. 1, 6 (2003). The Teachers Request for Payment of her Uncovered Medical Expenses Cannot Form the Basis of a Prohibited Practice Charge. Here, there is no dispute that the Teachers request that the School Committee pay her uncovered medical expenses related to her abortion does not involve wages, hours, standards of 19 productivity, or any other term or condition of her employment.

Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 30 MLC 1 (2003).10 Here, there can be no plausible doubt that the parties manifested their assent to an agreement resolving the Business Technology class size grievance in the words that Superintendent Laverty will make a recommendation to the Finance Sub-Committee in support of a second instructor in Business Technology.

Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 MLC 155, 159, MUP-1498 (June 4, 2001). 12 Absent direct evidence of unlawful motivation, several factors may suggest unlawful 13 motivation, including the timing of the alleged discriminatory act in relation to the In so holding, we do not rely on the inference of knowledge that the Hearing Officer drew that Mountain knew about Haskins conduct because DiOrio and Webster were aware of it and shared their knowledge

Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 MLC 155, 159, MUP-1498 (June 4, 2001). Finally, if the employer produces one or more lawful reasons for taking the adverse action against the employee, the charging party must establish that but for the protected activity, the employer would not have taken the adverse action. Id. The Employer does not dispute that Fimognari, engaged in protected, concerted activity.

Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 30 MLC 1, 6, MUP-2630 (August 19, 2003).

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.

See Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, On August 21, 2017, McCarthy commented on 28 H.O. Decision (contd) MUP-17-6076 this protected activity when he informed Lamberis that Stuart was trying to take money out of his pocket. The Association maintains that the City violated Section 10(a)(1) of the Law when McCarthy employee.

Suffolk County Sheriff's Department, 29 MLC 63, 68 (2002). The relevance of the requested information must be determined by the circumstances that exist at the time the union makes the request, not by the circumstances that exist at the time an arbitrator finally vindicates the union's right to the requested information. City of Lynn, 27 MLC at 61, citing Providence and Mercy Hospitals v.

If the employer produces one or more legitimate reasons, the charging party must establish that but for the protected taken the adverse action. activity, the employer would not have Id. at 565-566; Suffolk County Sheriffs Department, 27 MLC 155, 159, MUP-1498 (June 4, 2001). Activity Protected under Section 2 of the Law The parties agree that Kim engaged in activity protected under Section 2 of the Law.

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).