City of Somerville, 23 MLC 256, 259 (1997); Cityof To determine whether there has been a calculated displacement of unit work, the Commission considers whether unit members have traditionally performed an ascertainable percentage of the work and whether the employer has taken action that results in a significant reduction in that percentage, with a corresponding increase in the percentage of the work performed by non-unit personnel.

City of Somerville, 23 MLC 256, 260, MUP-8160 (May 2, 1997) (no calculated displacement of work where bargaining unit member continued to perform shared work and the record showed no non-unit personnel actually assumed responsibility for the specific work the bargaining unit member previously performed nor did the record show any increase in shared work performed by non-unit personnel).

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, 46 MLC 207, SUP-16-5594 (2020) (citing City of Somerville, 44 MLC 123, 125, MUP-16-5023 (2018)). To establish a unilateral change violation, the charging party must show that: (1) the employer altered an existing term or condition of employment; (2) the change affected a mandatory subject of bargaining; and (3) the change was implemented without prior notice and an opportunity to bargain.

City of Somerville v. Somerville Municipal Employees Assn, 20 Mass.App.Ct. 594, 598, 481 N.E.2d 1176, 1180-81, rev.den., 396 Mass. 1102, 484 N.E.2d 103 (1985) citing McLaughlin v. Commissioner of Pub. Works, 204 Mass. 27, 29, 22 N.E.2d 613 (1939).

City of Somerville, G1-11-145 at 17 (Nov. 29, 2012)(citation and internal quotation marks omitted). It follows all the more strongly that a bypass will not be upheld when a reason offered by the appointing authority for bypassing a candidate applies more strongly to the successful candidate. See Ex. 6 (Mr. Seongs letter to CSC, alleging that successful candidates driving record was worse and more recent).

Town of Greenfield, 32 MLC Relations Commission, 133, 149 (2006) (citing City of Somerville v. Labor 53 Mass. App. Ct. 410, 412 (2001)).

See generally, G.L.c.31,1 & 6; City of Somerville v. Somerville Mun. Emply. Assn, 20 Mass.App.Ct.594, rev.den., 396 Mass. 1102 (1985) (vacating arbitrators award of back pay to employees who had not been promoted in accordance with civil service law); Gillespie v. Boston Police Dept, 24 MCSR 170 (2011)(temporary promotion); OConnor v. Boston Police Dept, 22 MCSR 550 (2009) (same). Ms.

Sea City of Somerville, \cAS=2008 Jan. at 8-9, 1 MLC 1234, 1236.

Thus, while the Board placed dispatchers into their own bargaining unit instead of in a wall-to-wall city-wide unit in City of Somerville, 24 MLC (1998), it also denied petitions seeking units in Town of Marblehead, 27 MLC MCR-09-5360 dispatchers UMass (April 5, 2010). and Lowell, uniformed to sever dispatchers 142, MCR-4799 from CAS-3217 civilian wall-to-wall (2001) and City of Worcester, And, critical to this case, it granted a petition severing

City of Somerville, 47 MLC 59, 61 MUP-17-5980 (October 2, 2020) (citing Southeastern Regional School Committee, 7 MLC 1801, MUP-2970 (February 2, 1981). CERB has explained that [c]onduct which is physically intimidating, egregious or disruptive of the employer's business is beyond the pale of protection. Harwich School Committee, 2 MLC 1095, 1100 MUP-720 (August 26, 1975).

In support of its position, the Union points to a host of prior CERB decisions, including City of Somerville, 47 MLC 59, MUP-17-5980 (October 2, 2020); Town of Bolton, 32 MLC 13, MUP-01-3255 (June 27, 2005); City of Lawrence, 15 MLC 1162, MUP-6086 (September 13, 1988); Dighton School Committee, 8 MLC 1303, MUP-4233 (August 26, 1981); City of Haverhill, 8 MLC 1690, MUP-4204 (December 16, 1981).

.); City of Somerville, 47 MLC 59 (CERB, 2020) (communication by union president discussing potential for bargaining unit to refrain from voluntary training protected concerted activity unless the communication lost its protected status on account of being unlawful, violent, disruptive or indefensibly disloyal, or physically intimidating). 135.

Benoit, Esq. 310 Highland Avenue Somerville, MA 02144 Commissioner: Donald Marquis DECISION ON HRDS MOTION FOR SUMMARY DECISION Pursuant to the provisions of G.L. c. 31, 2(b), the Appellants Paul Faggiano, Robert Jones and Frank Cappuccio (hereinafter "Appellants") seek an order to overturn the decision of the states Human Resources Division (hereinafter HRD) not to release a promotional certification list for the position of Lieutenant in the Medford

, MA 02145 Framingham MA, 01701 Braintree, MA 02184 Millbury, MA 01527 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham MA, 01702 Somerville MA, 01702 Somerville, MA 02144 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01702 Framingham, MA 01702 Samir B.