- Department of Correction Captain Examination Investigation 12/10/15
- Maccarone, Paul v. City of Lawrence 8/25/11
The Appellant "died on the vine" as the eligible list upon which his name expired prior to the City making a promotional apopintment for Fire Captain. He is not entitled to any relief. Appeal dismissed.
- MacEachern, Dirk v. Department of Conservation and Recreation 9/1/16
- Mackie, Shawn v. City of Lawrence 2/21/13
- Mackin, Gregory v. Boston Fire Department 2/21/13
- Maher, Sean and 13 Others v. City of Worcester 4/19/12
- Maloof, Paul v. Town of Randolph 5/8/08
An Appellant can not appeal a termination when he is only a provisional employee and does not have civil service status. Appellant held the position of a Youth Coordinator in the Town of Randolph; a position that does not require a civil service examination. Appeal dismissed.
- Mandracchia, Daniel v. City of Everett and HRD 2/5/09
Issue of voluntary reinstatement when there is an active eligibility list.
- Mangino, Michelle v. Human Resources Division 1/9/14
- Manning, John v. City of Peabody 5/2/13
- Marciano, Michael v. Woburn Public Schools 10/22/09
Appellant failed to state a claim upon which his appeal could be heard. His contention that he was prohibited from bidding on another position is not a subject matter for which the Commission has jurisdiction to hear. Appeal dismissed.
- Marqus, Albert v. City of Waltham 5/20/10
The Appellant's appeal was untimely and he did not provide sufficient reason to toll the time period for filing his appeal. Appeal dismissed.
- Martin, Thomas v. City of Woburn - Related Superior Crt. Decision 7/17/13
- Martin, Thomas v. Woburn Fire Department (on reconsideration) 1/10/13
- Martin, Thomas v. Woburn Fire Department 7/26/12
- Martucci and Toledo v. Human Resources Division 4/21/11
HRD erroneously denied the Appellants the ability to sit for a promotional examination by misinterpreting Section 59 and an Appeals court decision. Appeals allowed.
- Maurice, Evens v. Human Resources Division 4/30/15
- McAuliffe, Thomas, Human Resources Division 6/12/08
Where the Appellant claimed that the Personnel Administrator failed to act upon his request that HRD update the Classification Specification for the Tax Auditor I, II, III positions for the DOR, the Commission found that he had no standing to file an appeal because he had been aggrieved. Moreover, while HRD is required by statute to establish and maintain classification plans for Commonwealth employees, it is not required to do so under Chapter 31. Appeal dismissed.
- McCarthy et al v. Boston Police Department - Related Superior Court Decision 2/27/17 file size 1MB
- McCarthy, Joel et al v. Boston Police Department 5/14/15
- McDaid-Harris and Sims et al v. City of Peabody 7/1/10
The Appellants were able to show only that the Town improperly used "out-of-grade" appointments to fill lieutenant positions for a limited period. Relief granted commensurate with harm to three Appellants.
- McDermott, Timothy v. City of Fitchburg 4/2/15
- McDonald, James v. City of Lynn 4/8/10
The Appellant is not an aggrieved person and the Commission opted not to exercise its discretion to order the relief requested.
- McElroy, Jonathan v. City of Fall River 12/3/09
City properly calculated the Appellant's seniority date in decided which firefighters to lay off. Appeal dismissed.
- McKenna, Kevin v. Boston Housing Authority - Related Superior Court Decision 8/28/09
- McKenna, Kevin v. Boston Housing Authority 7/19/07 (Affirmed by Superior Court)
Appeal dismissed as untimely.
- McKenzie, Peter v. Human Resources Division 4/2/15
- McNamara, Donna v. Human Resources Division 6/26/14
- McPhail, Paul v. Human Resources Division 1/9/14
- McQueen, Antonio v. Boston Public Schools 9/25/08
Appellant’s posting to East Boston High School was simply a move to a different geographical location which constituted a reassignment and not a transfer as required to gain protection under c. 31 Section 35. Thus, the Appellant lacked jurisdiction to bring forth the appeal. Appeal dismissed.
- Mejias and Allen v. City of Boston 5/31/12
- Mejias et al v. City of Boston 9/8/11
- Melson, John v. City of Boston 1/28/10
Appellant was on active military duty when his name appeared on 2 Certifications for the position of firefighter. Thus, he could not be considered for appointment. "310 Relief" granted. Appellant's name to appear at the top of the next Certification to ensure he is given at least one consideration for the position of firefighter in the City of Boston. Appeal allowed.
- Merced, Sixto v. Boston Police Dept. & HRD 2/4/16
- Merced, Sixto v. Boston Police Dept. & HRD 3/17/16
- Methuen Fire Department Investigation Findings and Orders 1/28/10
- Methuen Fire Department Investigation Interim Order 12/10/09
The Commission, own its own initiative, has opened up an investigation into the review and selection process related to reserve firefighters in the City of Methuen in 2008 and 2009.
- Methuen Fire Department Investigation Notice of Hearing and Procedural Order 12/24/09
- Methuen Police Department Investigation Findings, Conclusions and Orders: Methuen's Review and Selection of Reserve Police Officers 8/20/09
The process used to review and select reserve police officers in 2008 / 2009 violated civil service law and rules. Various orders entered by Commission as a result of investigation.
- Methuen Police Department Investigation Interim Order 7/9/2009
On its own initiative, the Commission opened an investigation into the hiring of reserve police officers in the Fall of 2008.
- Methuen Reserve Firefighter Selection Investigation Conclusion 1/27/11
- Methuen Reserve Police Officer Selection Investigation Conclusion 1/27/11
- Michel, Harry v. City of Waltham 8/25/11
The Commission refused to reopen an old case and grant the Appellant a retraoctive seniority date which he intended to use to buy creditable service toward his retirement. Request denied.
- Monagle, Richard v. Medford Fire Department 4/5/07
Appellant sought review of the Medford Fire Departments decision not to allow him to retake HRDs physical abilities test after the City determined he lost the opportunity to re-take the PAT after failing his initial PAT and not retaking the PAT that same day. The Commission found that there was no evidence that HRD or the City actually required this practice. In fact, the HRD waiver form signed by the Appellant was specifically designed for applicants to waive their right to wait 16 weeks before re-taking the PAT. HRD ordered to reschedule and allow Appellant to retake the PAT.
- Moniz, Lori & City of Taunton Joint Request for Relief 9/24/09
Joint request for retroactive seniority date as a permanent full-time police officer denied.
- Monk, Robert v. City of Salem and Human Resources Division 9/8/11
- Monzon, Andrew v. Human Resources Division 12/3/09
Appellant could not show he was aggrieved through no fault of his own when he failed to take the physical abilities test administered by HRD despite being notified via email. Appeal dismissed.
- Myrthil, Fabienne v. City of Malden 10/13/16
- Nano, Brian v. Department of Correction 4/19/12
- Napoli, Daniel v. Human Resources Division 8/13/09
Appellant's request for relief denied as he could not show that he failed to appaer for required Physical Abilities Test through no fault of his own.
- Navin, Ryan v. Human Resources Division 4/17/14
- Nee, John v. Human Resources Division 6/12/08
The Commission set an interim order to HRD to allow Appellant to take a specific promotional examination as by not doing so would cause Appellant irreparable harm. Whether or not the results for that re-take examination can be used to include the Appellant in a subsequent eligibility would be determined in the final disposition of Appellant’s appeal before the Commission.
- Nee, John v. Human Resources Division 8/11/11 file size 1MB
HRD's decision to deny the Appellant's appeal regarding his training and experience credit was well supported and the Appellant is not aggrieved. Examination appeal dismissed.
- Newburyport Investigation: 2004 Reserve Police Officer Appointments 11/13/14
- Newton, John and 5 others v. Town of Greenfield 8/26/10
The Town has agreed to stop using "out-of-grade" appointments which are not permitted under the civil service law. Relief granted to next sergeant to be appointed in the form of a retroactive seniority date.
- Nicholas, Gregory v. Human Resources Division 7/7/16
- Nicholas, Thomas v. HRD 12/11/14
- Nichols, Christopher v. Town of Norwell 4/26/07
Appellant had no right to appeal the Town’s decision to remove him from his assignment as Police Prosecutor position within the Norwell Police Department because he was never permanently promoted to such a position. The Appellant was a tenured police officer at all times even though he had been given a stipend and designated a non civil service position with the title of Police Prosecutor. Appeal dismissed.
- Nordstrom, Lisa v. Human Resources Division 8/20/15
- Norton, Paul v. City of Melrose 9/18/08
Appellant appealed the decision by the City to deny his benefits under the Leave with Pay for Incapacitated Employees general law section 111F. However, this type of dispute which would seem to turn on expert medical opinions about the nature of the employee’s injuries and whether the injuries are work related or not, is not typically handled by the Commission. It would be more logical for Appellant to seek relief with the Division of Industrial Accidents or other such agency. Appeal dismissed.
- Novia, Martin v. City of New Bedford 11/21/07
The City had reasonable justification for discharging the Appellant for unauthorized leave of absence after denying a request for leave. In actuality, the Appellant was attempting to purchase retirement time credit for his military service by requesting the Commission reinstate him to his job for just one day before he retires. Additionally, his appeal was untimely by at least 18 months. Appeal dismissed.
- O'Connell, Arthur v. Human Resources Division 2/4/16
- O'Connor, Gillespie and Hopkins v. Boston Police Department 11/12/09
City violated civil service law by filling vacancies through out-of-grade appointments, as opposed to requesting a certification for temporary appointments. Relief granted to 1 Appellant who has shown that he was aggrieved.
- O'Donoghue and Trieu v. Human Resources Division 8/7/14
- O'Neill, Brandon v. Human Resources Division 3/17/16
- O'Neill, Stephen v. City of Lowell and HRD - Related Appeals Court Decision 2/15/11
- O'Neill, Stephen v. City of Lowell and HRD - Related Superior Court Decision 11/12/09
Superior Court Affirmed Commission's decision.
- O'Neill, Stephen v. City of Lowell and HRD 12/11/08 (Affirmed by Superior Court on 11/12/09)
Appellant challenged and requested an investigation into whether a police promotional exam was fair specifically regarding his education and experience scoring, but Appellant’s appeal was not timely filed with the Commission. Appeal dismissed.
- O'Neill, Steven v. City of Lowell & HRD 1/22/15
- O'Neill, Steven v. City of Lowell - Related Superior Court Decision 2/26/16
- O'Sullivan, Timothy v. Brookline School Department - Related Appeals Court Decision 6/21/13
- O'Sullivan, Timothy v. Brookline School Department - Related Superior Court Decision 8/15/11
- O'Sullivan, Timothy v. Brookline School Department 9/23/10 (Affirmed by Superior Court on 8/15/11)
Termination appeal related to unauthorized leave of absence improperly before the Commission. Limited right of appeal to HRD. Appeal dimissed.
- O'Toole, John v. Human Resources Division 8/7/08
Appellant and HRD filed a Joint Petition for relief under chapter 310 and after taking administrative notice of the history of the extensive prior Commission proceedings involving the civil service status of other former police officers in the now-defunct BMPD, the Commission found relief at that time was not warranted. Joint Petition denied.
- O'Toole, John v. Human Resources Division 9/25/08
Appellant sought reinstatement to his former position in the Boston Municipal Police Department. The Commission found that since no available positions that existed at the time he made inquiry of HRD, he had no reinstatement rights under Section 46, and is not a person aggrieved in order to bring the appeal. Appeal dismissed.
- O'Toole, Robert v. Newton Fire Department 10/7/09
Appellant's request for relief denied. He could not show that he was aggrieved through no fault of his own. Further, there was no vacacny to be filled prior to the expieration of the eligible list.
- Ojeda, Eddie v. City of Pittsfield 1/8/09
An Appellant is not entitled to receive the contributions made to their retirement account if they choose to remain employed by the City after being suspended. In this case, the Appellant was provided with accurate information from the City regarding that issue and made a voluntary decision to resign. The Appellant tendered his resignation and the City accepted, hence the Commission had no jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Appeal dismissed.
- Oster, David v. Town of Watertown 12/7/06
Where the Appellant and his Firefighter Union have selected binding arbitration to grieve and assert that the Fitness for Duty evaluation was in violation of the collective bargaining agreement between the union and the Town of Watertown, the Commission has no jurisdiction to also hear the matter. Appeal dismissed.
- Ottomaniello and Lukasik v. City of Springfield 5/31/12
- Owens, Robert v. Boston Public Schools 11/21/07
Appellant who alleged that he was forced to resign had in truth entered into a settlement agreement with Boston Public Schools in which he, in exchange for $4000, agreed to resign his position as a senior custodian and release the Appointing Authority from any and all claims related to his employment. Consequently, the Commission would not override such a valid agreement. Appeal dismissed.
- Oxford Procedural Order re: Review and Selection of Int. Police Officers 9/22/11
- Oxford Reserve Police Officer Investigation 9/30/11 file size 1MB
- Pacheco, Michael v. Human Resources Division 10/16/14
- Paicos, Adam v. Town of Maynard 4/2/15
- Paicos, Adam v. Town of Maynard 9/18/15
- Paiva, Victor v. Department of Correction 6/11/15
- Paradis, Scott v. Town of Arlington 3/13/08
A Joint Motion for Relief was sought for Appellant who had subsequently passed a second Physical Abilities Test after being hired by the Town and told he needed to re-take the exam since too much time had lapse since his last PAT. The Commission so ordered HRD to establish Appellant’s civil service seniority date to the day he began performing duties as an Arlington Police Officer.
- Pathiakis & 5 Others v. Andover 12/11/14
- Patruno, Tyrone v. City of Chicopee 2/2/17
- Patterson, Ralph v. Town of Plymouth 11/20/08
Appellant appealed the decision by the Plymouth Police Dept. to terminate him due to Appellant allegedly producing sub-standard written work-product. The Commission determined that Appellant was on a probationary period commencing upon graduation, thus the delivery of termination letter by the Police Dept. failed to comply with the statutory requirements because it was two days after Appellant’s probationary period. Appeal allowed and Appellant to be reinstated to his position as patrolmen with no loss of pay and benefits.
- Pavone, Jill v. Human Resources Division 12/10/15
- Pearson, Carl v. City of Brockton 7/2/09
The Appellant appealed his termination to the Commission which has no jurisdication to hear the appeal as the Appellant is not a tenured civil service employee. Rather, he was a provisional employee. Appeal dismissed.
- Pearson, Darlene v. Human Resources Division 6/8/17
- Pepicelli, Ho and O'Connor v. City of Cambridge 2/8/07
Appellants were members of the now-former Boston Municipal Police Dept. at the time of their appeals were filed, sought appointment to the Cambridge Police Dept. by way of lateral transfer, but it is the City’s prerogative to decide to do so. There is no affirmative obligation on the City to consent to a voluntary transfer request submitted by an employee. Appeals dismissed.
- Perkins, Dennis v. City of Attleboro Procedural Order 4/7/10
Relates to procedural issues regarding the authorization and issuance of subpoenas.
- Persampieri, Sprague & Schroeder v. Human Resources Division 4/30/15
- Peters, Michael v. Human Resources Division 10/21/10
The Appellant has failed to show that, even if granted the E&E credit he is seeking, that it would have increased his overall test score. Thus, appeal is moot and dismissed.
- Picard, Charles v. City of Quincy 8/11/11
The City did not violate civil service law and rules regarding labor service promotions and demotions. Appeal dismissed.
- Pomeroy, Brian v. Town of West Springfield & HRD 5/1/14
- Pomeroy, James v. City of Newton 7/9/15
- Porcaro and Hallisey v. City of Brockton 12/2/10
The Appellant's request for a retroactive seniority date was denied as they did not show that they were aggrieved and/or that there was any violation of civil service law. Their appeals relied on violations of the CBA. Appeals denied.
- Provencher, Rosemary v. Lynn Public Schools 9/25/08
Appellant claimed that she had a right to bump a provisional clerk/stenographer based on the positions in which they were tenured, but based upon a recent Supreme Judicial Court ruling Appellant did not have bumping rights. Appellant, based upon her higher seniority date in a lower title, does not give her a right to bump an individual from her provision position of clerk/stenographer. Appeal dismissed.
- Pugsley, Sean v. Boston PD and HRD 11/3/11
- Pulchansingh, Scott v. Human Resources Division 7/9/15
- Quaglietta and 11 Others v. City of Lawrence 7/1/10
Appellants have shown that their civil service seniority date should be the date upon which they began performing the duties of a full-time police officer in Lawrence. Appeal allowed.
- Quaglietta and 11 Others v. City of Lawrence 8/26/10
- Quincy Labor Service Appointments Investigation Results 3/7/13
- Quincy Labor Service Appointments Investigation 9/20/12
- Quinlan, Patrick v. City of Lowell 9/23/10
Termination appeal related to unauthorized leave of absence improperly before the Commission. Limited right of appeal to HRD. Appeal dimissed.
- Quinones-Prendergast, Marilyn v. Human Resources Division 7/14/11
The Appellant failed to notify HRD of an address changed. She is not aggrieved through no fault of her own. Appeal dismissed.
- Somerville Police Captain Appointment Investigation Request 6/25/15