Ct. 1103 (2016), See G.L. c. 150E 9; City of New Bedford v. CERB, 2016 WL4495837 (restricting an employer's ability to implement even proposals comprehended within its pre-impasse proposals where there has been resort to the impasse procedures and no declaration has been issued that the collective bargaining process is completed).

City of New Bedford, 15 MLC 1732, 1737, MUP-6488 (May 31, 1989) (citing Town of Natick, 11 MLC 1434, MUP-5319 (February 19, 1985)). As a practical matter, the City did not transfer bargaining unit work to Ferry on July 1, 2014 as alleged. Based on the record presented, the City merely re-hired Ferry to continue performing the same duties that she had performed in preceding years.

City of New Bedford, 29 MCSR 471 (2016); Morley v. Boston Police Dept, 29 MCSR 456 (2016); Lucas v. Boston Police Dept, 25 MCSR 420 (2012) (mistake about appellants characterization of past medical history). ANALYSIS Somerville established by a preponderance of the evidence that the decision to bypass the Appellant was made after a thorough review of his suitability and was reasonably justified.

City of New Bedford, 29 MCSR 471 (2016); Morley v. Boston Police Dept, 29 MCSR 456 (2016); Lucas v. Boston Police Dept, 25 MCSR 420 (2012) (mistake about appellants characterization of past medical history). ANALYSIS The decision of the FRPD to bypass the Appellant was far from perfect.

Mead, Talerman & Costa, LLC 227 Union Street New Bedford, MA 02740 liz@mtclawyers.com RE: Open Meeting Law Complaint Dear Attorney Lydon: This office received two complaints alleging that the Marblehead Board of Health (the Board) violated the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, 18-25. We receive the first complaint from Mark Pelletier on February 8, 2022. We received the second complaint from Allen Waller on March 7, 2022.

Perry Perry, Hicks and Deshaies, LLP 388 County Street New Bedford, MA 02740 Dear Attorney Perry: This office reviewed an Open Meeting Law complaint from Ms. Linda Lally, dated January 19, 2012, alleging that the Southeastern Regional Planning and Economic Development District Board of Commissioners (the "Board") violated the Open Meeting Law, G.L. c. 30A, 18-25.

City Hall, Room 203 133 William Street New Bedford, MA 02740 Commissioner: Christopher C. Bowman DECISION Pursuant to G.L. c. 31, 43, the Appellant, Ruth Aubertine (Ms. Aubertine), filed a timely appeal with the Civil Service Commission (Commission) on May 30, 2013, contesting the decision of the New Bedford School Department (NBSD) to suspend her for two days without pay from her position as Principal Clerk at the Normandin Middle School.

Kim Kimberly Sylvia Staff Representative AFSCME Council 93 46 Foster Street New Bedford, MA 02740 774-202-8069 (office phone) 508-991-4266 (fax) From: Tim Burke Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 3:43 PM To: Kim Sylvia Ce: Martha Gallagher ; localunion1990@gmail.com; 'TZessin@k-plaw.com' ; Timothy Barrow Subject: RE: Leader

City of New Bedford, 29 MCSR 471 (2016) (honest mistakes in answering ambiguous questions on NBPD Personal History Questionnaire); Morley v. Boston Police Dept, CSC No. G1-16-096, 29 MCSR 456 (2016) (candidate unlawfully bypassed on misunderstanding appellants responses about his combat experience); Lucas v. Boston Police Dept, 25 MCSR 420 (2012) (mistake about appellants characterization of past medical history).

Because of this substantial error, the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board (Board) should review the dismissal of this charge.3 2 Commonwealth of Massachusetts, Stoughton, 19 MLC 1149, 8 MLC 1499, 1512 (1981); Town of 1158 (1992); City of New Bedford, 38 MLC 239, 250 (2012). 3 The DLR also cited City of Marlborough, MUP-04-4263 (2006) to support its conclusion that seeking the assistance of a mediator without an impasse does not constitute a prohibited

Town of Stoughton, Massachusetts, 8 MLC 19 MLC 1149, 1158 (1992)(citing Commonwealth of 1499, 1512 (1981 )); see also, City of New Bedford, 38 MLC 239, 250 (in unilateral change analysis, the Board held that the parties were not at impasse even after the union had filed a Section 9 mediation petition).