Carpenter Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01702 Leominster, MA 01453 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01701 Abington, MA 02351 Framingham MA, 01702 Framingham MA, 01702 Abington, MA 02351 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01701 Framingham, MA 01701 Framingham, MA 01701 Natick, MA Framingham, MA 01702 Natcik, MA 01760 Fitchburg, MA 01420 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01701

City of Leominster, 23 M.L.C. 62, 66 (1996)(citing Hanson School Committee, 5 M.L.C. 1671(1979)). While BPS clearly evidenced its desire to reach agreement with the Union in continuing to meet for discussions regarding a successor agreement, it was not willing to compromise its position at mediation or fact-finding.

See also City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 726, 728, rev.den., 440 Mass. 1108 (2003); Police Dept of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass.App.Ct. 411, rev.den., 726 N.E.2d 417 (2000); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commn, 38 Mass.App.Ct. 473, 477 (1995); Town of Watertown v. Arria, 16 Mass.App.Ct. 331, rev.den., 390 Mass. 1102 (1983).

Ct. 331 (1983) and City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). G.L. c. 71 37G (a)-(c) provide, in pertinent part: (a) The power of the school committee or any teachers or any other employee or agent of the school committee to maintain discipline upon school property shall not include the right to inflict corporal punishment upon any pupil.

Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). The Commission determines that the City has acted properly and within its discretion based upon the policy considerations embodied in its rules of conduct when it determined that the Appellants comments to a citizen in this case constitute unbecoming conduct and did bring disrepute or disrespect upon an individual officer or the Police Department.

City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is justified when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law. City of Cambridge at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928). Commissioners of Civil Service v.

City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is justified when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law. City of Cambridge at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928). Commissioners of Civil Service v.

See also City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 726, 728, rev.den., 440 Mass. 1108 (2003); Police Dept of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass.App.Ct. 408, 411, rev.den., 726 N.E.2d 417 (2000); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commn, 38 Mass App.Ct. 473, 477 (1995); Town of Watertown v. Arria, 16 Mass.App.Ct. 331, rev.den., 390 Mass. 1102 (1983).

City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). The proper inquiry for determining if an action was justified 16 16 is, whether the employee has been guilty of substantial misconduct which adversely affects the public interest by impairing the efficiency of the public service. Murray v. Second Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 389 Mass. 508, 514 (1983). School Committee of Brockton v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass. App.

Commn, 78 Mass.App.Ct. 182, 187 (2010) (quoting City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 726, 728, rev. den., 440 Mass. 1108 (2003)).