Ruben Carmona Superintendent of Schools Somerville Public Schools 8 Bonair Street Somerville, MA 02145 Dear Dr. Carmona: I have received the petition of Elizabeth Eldridge appealing the response of the Somerville Public Schools (School) to a request for public records. See G. L. c. 66, 10A; see also 950 C.M.R. 32.08(1). On October 5, 2023, Ms.

Long, City Clerk City of Somerville 93 Highland Avenue Somerville, MA 02143 617 625-6600 x4110 FAX 617 625-4239 http://www.somervillema.gov/ jlong@somervillema.gov

Long, City Clerk City of Somerville 93 Highland Avenue Somerville, MA 02143 617 625-6600 x4110 FAX 617 625-4239 http://www.somervillema.gov/ jlong@somervillema.gov One Framingham - Focused on the Future Please be advised that the Massachusetts Secretary of State considers e-mail to be a public record, and therefore subject to public access under the Massachusetts Public Records Law,M.G.L. c. 66 10.

McCarthy West Springfield Mayor William Reichelt Westfield Mayor Don Humason Weymouth Mayor Robert Hedlund Woburn Mayor Scott Galvin Worcester Mayor Joseph Petty MMA MMA Executive Director Geoffrey Beckwith Communications and Membership Director Candace Pierce 24 Lowell Street Peabody, MA 01960 70 Allen Street Pittsfield, MA 01201 1305 Hancock Street Quincy, MA 02169 281 Broadway Revere, MA 02151 93 Washington Street Salem, MA 01970 93 Highland Avenue Somerville

As of the date of his appeal to the CSC, Sheas name has been placed. on the eligibility list for hiring for both positions in the cities of Somerville and Medford and in the town of Winchester In seeking to be designated as a disabled veteran for purposes of civil service employment, Shea claims eligibility pursuant to a portion of the governing statute which defines the term veteran for purpose of preference in employment selection.

City of Somerville, 44 MLC 123, 125 (MUP-165023) (January 30, 2018) citing Newton, 29 MLC at 190. The initial inquiry focuses upon the language of the contract. Id., citing Town of Mansfield, 25 MLC 14, 15, MUP-1567 (August 4, 1998)). If the language clearly, unequivocally and specifically permits the public employer to make the change, no further inquiry is necessary.

City of Somerville, 44 MLC 123, 125, MUP-16-5023 (January 30, 2018).

City of Somerville, 44 MLC 123, 125, MUP-16-5023 (January 30, 2018).

City of Somerville, 23 MLC 256, 259 The work of all of the directors is shared work. Each director is responsible for assigning overtime, crafting policies to meet institute demands, and overseeing work at WDC. This work, performed by each director, is shared across the facility. As the work is shared work, traditionally performed by members of unit 2 and managers, the work in question is not exclusively bargaining unit work.

See Radochia v City of Somerville, 25 MCSR 559 (2012) (PAR.09(2) removal should not be used as a routine substitute for bypassing an individual). This action should be reserved for exceptional circumstances, situations that are on their face disqualifying, i.e. felony convictions, significantly adverse driving histories, extremely poor employment histories, etc. Connelly v Boston Police Dept, 21 MCSR 111, 113 (2008).

City of Somerville, 20 MCSR 484 (2007) (physical altercation in parking lot after work); Rivers v. Town of Williamstown, 19 MCSR 425 (2006) (police officer in barroom fight with fellow officer); Yukl v. Town of Montague, 14 MCSR 131 (2001) (appellant rammed fellow police officers car and wielded a crowbar); Leitch v. Town of Franklin, 12 MCSR 61 (1999) (firefighter tampered with co-workers gear, provoking fight). See also Tosca v.

City of Somerville, G2-19-178 (2020). See Frost v. Town of Amesbury, 7 MCSR 137 (1994)(Commission upholds bypass where applicant's answers to situational questions were unsatisfactory); LaRoche v. Department of Correction, 13 MCSR 159 (2000)(Commission upholds bypass where applicant's answers to situational scenarios did not comply with department policies and procedures and failed to demonstrate an ability to lead); McMahon v.

City of Somerville, 34 MCSR 162 (2021). In that matter, the Appellant was afforded a two hour and three-minute interview to discuss his entire application in depth. Id. at 164. The Appointing Authority was able to point to several concerning answers provided by the Appellant. Id. at 16467. The interview was recorded, and the interview panel met after the interview to review the candidate, after which they made a unanimous decision. Id. at 164.

Lastly, the Union points to a complaint that the DLR issued in City of Somerville, MUP-18-6422, noting that the investigator in that case found probable cause to issue a complaint based on the Respondent's affirmative defense in a federal district court proceeding that it had operated a work period that entitled it to the partial public safety exemption under section 207(k).