Close Menu
Legal MagLegal Mag
  • Home
  • Legal News
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
  • Regulation
  • Technology
  • More
    • Firms
    • Law Practice
    • Trending
    • Press Release
What's On

Seven charged in $100M California jewelry heist, largest in US history

June 19, 2025

States challenge bankrupt 23andMe’s right to auction genetic information

June 11, 2025

Jimmy Buffett’s widow battles co-trustee over $275 million trust

June 6, 2025

Longtime Hardee’s franchisee sues chain over franchise agreement dispute

May 29, 2025

Apple warns ruling in App Store case may cost ‘substantial sums annually’

May 8, 2025
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Facebook X (Twitter) Instagram
Legal MagLegal Mag
Newsletter
  • Home
  • Legal News
  • Intellectual Property
  • Litigation
  • Regulation
  • Technology
  • More
    • Firms
    • Law Practice
    • Trending
    • Press Release
Legal MagLegal Mag
Home » State Appellate Court Rejects Police Officer’s Claim That Day-to-Night Shift Resulted in Adverse Employment Action
Litigation

State Appellate Court Rejects Police Officer’s Claim That Day-to-Night Shift Resulted in Adverse Employment Action

News RoomBy News RoomMay 28, 20241 Min Read
Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Share
Facebook Twitter LinkedIn Pinterest WhatsApp Email

The Massachusetts Appeals Court recently reinstated a labor relations department’s decision for a police officer’s claim of retaliation for engaging in union activity after determining that the union failed to prove the police department’s transfer of the sergeant to night patrol from the day shift constituted an adverse employment action.

A three-judge panel for the appeals court unanimously said Sgt. John Babcock, of the Newton Police Department, transferring departments did not constitute an adverse action under his union’s collective bargaining agreement. The panel said the move aligned with the union’s agreement between it and the department since he received an increase in compensation and also did not prove the change resulted in any other modification to the terms and conditions of his employment.

Share. Facebook Twitter Pinterest LinkedIn Tumblr Email
Previous ArticleAI Deepfakes: Unauthorized Depictions and Protection of Property Rights to Name, Image and Likeness
Next Article Former GE Legal Chief to Join Paul Weiss

Related Posts

Miami Judge Threatened: Perpetrator Gets 20 Years in Prison

August 23, 2024

Lawsuit Says NYS Assembly Refuses To Certify Ex-Legislative Director’s $100K Harassment Judgment

August 23, 2024

Judge Grants Sanctions Request Against IT Consulting Company Following ‘Egregious’ Document Production Behavior

August 23, 2024
Latest Articles

States challenge bankrupt 23andMe’s right to auction genetic information

June 11, 20250 Views

Jimmy Buffett’s widow battles co-trustee over $275 million trust

June 6, 20252 Views

Longtime Hardee’s franchisee sues chain over franchise agreement dispute

May 29, 20253 Views

Apple warns ruling in App Store case may cost ‘substantial sums annually’

May 8, 20253 Views
Stay In Touch
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Instagram
  • YouTube
  • Vimeo
Don't Miss

The 2024 Am Law 100: Ranked by Gross Revenue

By News RoomApril 16, 2024

For the full 2024 Am Law 100 report, click here. For more ways to analyze the…

The 2024 A-List: Top 20 Firms

August 6, 2024

Defending Claims Where Extreme Weather Is to Blame: Our Changing Climate’s Impact on Civil Litigation

July 18, 2024
© 2025 Legal Mag. All Rights Reserved.
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms of use
  • Advertise
  • Contact

Type above and press Enter to search. Press Esc to cancel.