Discipline Appeal Decisions G-N

The State Police has shown through a preponderance of the evidence that the Appellant engaged in misconduct that justified his termination as a State Trooper. Appeal Dismissed.

The State Police was unable to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the Appellant engaged in the alleged misconduct which resulted in a 30-day suspension. Appeal allowed.

DOC had reasonable justification for terminating the Appellant for several rule violations including his failure to disclose his close relationship with an inmate and bringing contraband into the facility. Disciplinary appeal dismissed.

The Appellant was able to show that there was disparate treatment in regard to discipline imposed. 1-day suspension overturned. Appeal allowed.

The City was justified in disciplining the Appellant after he contacted the DEA regarding a joint investigation with the City without going through the chain of command. Disciplinary appeal dismissed.

The City was justified in suspending the Appellant for insubordination toward a superior officer. Disciplinary appeal dismissed.

The Town had just cause to terminate the Appellant from his position as a police officer.

3-2 majority decided that the Appellant's behavior was not willful misconduct as he did not intend to break the window which he threw a softball at. Appeal allowed.

3-2 majority of Commission decided that DOC had, by a preponderance of the evidence, been untruthful during an internal investigation. Disciplinary appeal dismissed.

1-day suspension upheld regarding an incident which resulted in a citizen filing a complaint.

DOC failed to prove that the Appellant’s posting on a website violated the rules and regulations regarding workplace violence, although the posting was inappropriate and insensitive. Appeal allowed in part; 60-day suspension reduced to 5 days if the Appellant has not engaged in any misconduct over a 2-year period.

Appointing Authority was justified in suspending the Appellant for 5-days after he ignored repeated warning regarding a pattern of calling in sick on nights and weekends. Appeal Dismissed.

DOC did not provide sufficient evidence to show that a 1-day suspension was reasonably justified. The hearing officer found that the Appellant complied with all DOC rules regarding the production of medical documentation in a timely manner. Appeal allowed.

The Appellant, who has a significant disciplinary history, failed to comply with DOC's rules and regulations regarding time and attendance. 1-day and 3-day suspensions for two separate incidents were justified. Discipline appeals dismissed.

The testimony before this Commission established by a preponderance of the credible and reliable evidence in the record that the Appellant lost his temper on the day in question and acted in a provocative and disruptive manner. Suspension upheld / appeal dsimissed.

The Appellant appeals the decision of the Department of Correction to terminate him for violating various rules and two policies concerning security and sexual misconduct. The Commission found that two violations alleged did not occur. Nonetheless, there was just cause for discipline and termination is warranted. Appeal dismissed.

The Appellant's violated DOC zero-tolerance policy regarding domestic violence. A 3-day suspension was justified. Discipline appeal dismissed.

The Town had reasonble justification for suspending the Appellant for two days for use of excessive speed in driving his cruiser to the scene of a car accident. Discipline appeal dismissed.

The City was unable to show by a preponderance of the evidence that the Appellant engaged in the alleged misconduct which resulted in his 1-day suspension. Appeal allowed.

The Boston Police Department has shown that the Appellant failed to perform her duties as a school crossing guard and violated several rules and regulations thus justifying her termination. Appeal dismissed.

The Town had just cause to terminate an employee with a lengthy disciplinary history who left the worksite without permission. Discipline appeal dismissed.

By a 3-2 vote, the Commission concluded that the Appellant was not guilty of "deliberate misconduct" in regard to alleged violations of accurately reporting his detail / overtime pay. Appeal allowed; 15-day suspension overturned.

The State Police did not show that the Appellant violated its policy regarding a detail assignment and there was evidence of disparate treatment regarding the discipline imposed for other charges. Appeal allowed in part.

DOC did not show that the Appellant violated DOC rules regarding a shift swap with a co-worker. Appeal allowed; suspension overturned.

The BPD had reasonable justification to suspend the Appellant for 1 day for failing to complete a use of force report after striking a citizen with his radio, causing a laceration on the citizen's face. Discipline appeal dismissed.

The Commission does not have jurisdiction to hear an appeal of a suspension from a housing authority employee. Appeal dismissed.

DOC was justified in terminating the Appellant after she associated numerous times with a parolee and failed to notify DOC. Disciplinary appeal dismissed.

By a 3-2 vote, the Commission concluded that the Appellant did not engage in misconduct in regard to the "badging" process of fellow state troopers at Logan Airport. Appeal allowed; suspension overturned.

The Commission denied the Appellant's request to enforce a prior order as it determined that the Department of State Police was complying with the order.

The Town did not show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the Appellant engaged in the misconduct alleged. Further, the Town's decision appeared to be tainted by reasons not related to basic merit principles. Appeal allowed. 50-day suspension overturned.

The Appellant's untruthfulness and actions that constituted violation of the Town's sexual harassment policy provided the Town with just cause for terminating the Appellant as a police officer. Discipline appeal dismissed.

BPD did not show that the Appellant failed to promptly respond to an officer's call for assistance. 1-day suspension overturned.

DOC was justified in suspending the Appellant for one day for his documented tardiness. Appeal denied / dismissed.

The City had just cause to terminate the Appellants as a reserve and permanent firefighter respectively when it was determined that they did not meet the residency requirement as they did not reside in Somerville one year prior to taking the civil service examination, as required. Appeals dismissed.

Superior Court affirmed Commission's decision to uphold termination of 1 police officer for off-duty conduct and modify downward the penalty of two other officers involved in the same incident

The Town had reasonable justification to discipline the Appellant for failing to comly with a lawful order of a superior officer. A modification of the penalty is warranted because part of the discipline was related to the Appellant's "defiance" during a union-management discussion. Appeal allowed in part.

DOC had reasonable justification to suspen the Appellant after he failed to promptly notify DOC officials that an inmate sought to blackmail him. Disciplinary appeal dismissed.

The Commission has no jurisdiction to hear this appeal. The 1-day suspension in her provisional provision does not impact her permanency in a lower title. Further, a reclassification to a higher title does not equate to permanency in the higher title. Appeal dismissed.

The BPD has shown that there was reasonable justificaton for suspending the Appellant for 1 day for violating a rule relating to calling in via radio whenever you are in pursuit of a suspect. Discipline appeal dismissed.

DOC had just case to terminate the Appellant for an off-duty incident that occurred while this correction officer was in uniform. Discipline appeal dismissed.

Discipline appeal was not timely filed. Dismissed.

Discipline appeal dismissed as it was untimely.

City was justified in suspending the Appellant for 30 days for intimidating and harassing a fellow employee. Discipline appeal denied / dismissed.

Decision on Appointing Authority's Motion to Dismiss. Appellant was a permanent civil service employee provisionally promoted to a higher civil service position and subsequently terminated. Commission addressed issued of jurisdiction under this fact pattern. Since the termination would impact his lower permanent civil service title, the Commission has jurisdiction to hear the appeal. Full hearing to be scheduled.

While the City showed reasonable justification for disciplining the Appellant, there were multiple reasons that warranted the Commission modifying the termination to a 19-month suspension. Appeal allowed in part.

Where the Appellant acknowledges that he violated a Last Change Agreement, he can not show that he was prejudiced by the Town's failure to provide him with a hearing prior to his termination. Section 42 appeal dismissed.

Commission decision affirmed by Superior Court

The Appellant's appeal is dismissed as untimely.

The Appellant's lengthy disciplinary history coupled with his most recent misconduct provided just cause for his termination. Disciplinary appeal dismissed.

The Appellant's continued insubordination gave the School Department just cause to terminate the Appellant as a custodian. Appeal dismissed.

There was reasonable justification to discipline the two supervisors for failing to report the unauthorized visits of a female to the control room. Sullivan and Christie appeals dismissed. There was not reasonable justification to discipline Monteiro, a CO I. Appeal allowed.

The City was justified in suspending the Appellant for 1 day after the Appellant failed to stay and cover the next shift when he was required to do so. Discipline appeal dismissed.

The Town has not shown that the Appellant submitted a false medical incident report, the basis for the discipline. Appeal allowed; suspension overturned.

There was reasonable justification to discipline the Appellant for having an unauthorized inmate in the library.

The City, by a preponderance of the evidence, has shown that the Appellant violated a last chance agreement and termination was justified. Appeal dismissed.

City was justified in terminating the Appellant for his role in a fellow employees's car being struck with a BB-gun. Appeal denied / dismissed.