City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commn, 43 Mass.App.Ct. 300, 303-305, rev.den., 428 Mass. 1102 (1997) (emphasis added) However, the governing statute, G.L.c.31,2(b), gives the Commissions de novo review broad scope to evaluate the legal basis of the appointing authority's action and it is not necessary for the Commission to find that the appointing authority acted arbitrarily and capriciously.

City of Cambridge, 30 MLC 31, 32, MUP-01-3033 (September 3, 2003)(Citations omitted). Consequently, | dismiss this portion of the Union's charge.

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300, 303 Justified means 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. Jd, at 304.

City of Cambridge v. Civil Serv. Commn, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300, 304 (1997); G. L.c. 7, 41. Itis the Commissions duty to hear any appeals brought by an employee of the commonwealth objecting to any provision of the classification affecting his office or position[.] G. L.c. 7, 497 An employees request for employment reclassification is initially handled by the agency for which he/she works, i.c., by the appointing authority.

See City of Cambridge, 5 MLC 1291, 1293, MUP-2799 (September 27, 1978). An employer is not required to individually notify union officers or agents. Compare City of Boston, 32 MLC 173, 176, MUP-02-3623 (June 2, 2006) (finding notice when change was announced in newsletter emailed to entire bargaining unit including the personal email of a union representative), 5 Complaint and Partial Dismissal (cont.)

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300, 682 N.E.2d 923, 925 (1997). In this context, justification means 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. 682 N.E.2d at 926, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v, Judge of First Dist. Court of Eastern Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482, 160 N.E. 427 (1928).

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300,304 (1997). See Town of Watertown v. Arria, 16 Mass. App. Ct. 331 (1983); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commission, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 8 473, 477 (1995); Police Department of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003).

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300, 304 (1997). See Town of Watertown v. Arria, 16 Mass. App. Ct. 331 (1983); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commission, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 473, 477 (1995); Police Department of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003).

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300, 304 (1997). See Town of Watertown v. Arria, 16 Mass. App. Ct. 331 (1983); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commission, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 473, 477 (1995); Police Department of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003).

City of Cambridge v. Civil Service Commission, 43 Mass. App. Ct. 300,304 (1997). See Town of Watertown v. Arria, 16 Mass. App. Ct. 331 (1983); McIsaac v. Civil Service Commission, 38 Mass. App. Ct. 473, 477 (1995); Police Department of Boston v. Collins, 48 Mass. App. Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003).