Commonwealth of
Massachusetts
Department of Labor Relations
FY2024 ANNUAL REPORT
July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2024
Philip T. Roberts
Director
Commonwealth of Massachusetts
Department of Labor Relations
Lafayette City Center
2 Avenue de Lafayette
Boston, MA 02111
Telephone: 617-626-7132
FAX: 617-626-7157
Email: efile.dlr@state.ma.us
Website: www.mass.gov/dlr
 TABLE OF CONTENTS
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY .........................................................................................................3
OVERVIEW OF DLR SERVICES ..............................................................................................5
1. Processing Prohibited Practice Charges .......................................................................5
2. Hearings and Appeals ...................................................................................................6
3. Representation Issues ...................................................................................................6
4. Labor Dispute Mediation .............................................................................................7
5. Grievance Arbitration ...................................................................................................8
6. Investigation, Prevention and Termination of Strikes ..................................................8
7. Litigation ......................................................................................................................9
8. Other Responsibilities ..................................................................................................9
SELECTED CERB DECISIONS JULY 1, 2023, TO JUNE 30, 2024 ...........................................11
SELECTED LITIGATION JULY 1, 2023, TO JUNE 30, 2024 .....................................................17
STATISTICAL REPORTS ........................................................................................................28
STAFF LIST..........................................................................................................................35
ADVISORY COUNCIL ...........................................................................................................36
BUDGET ..............................................................................................................................37
Page 2 DLR FY 2024 Annual Report
 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On November 14, 2007, pursuant to Chapter 145 of the Acts of 2007, the Legislature reorganized
the Commonwealth’s neutral labor relations agencies into the Division of Labor Relations (“DLR”).
On March 11, 2011, under Chapter 3 of the Acts of 2011, “An Act Reorganizing the Executive
Office of Labor and Workforce Development,” the DLR’s name was changed from the Division of
Labor Relations to the Department of Labor Relations.
The DLR protects employees’ rights to organize and choose bargaining representation and
ensures that employers and unions benefit from, and comply with, the Commonwealth’s collective
bargaining statutes and regulations. To carry out this mission, the DLR conducts elections, hears
representation cases, investigates and hears unfair labor practice cases, resolves labor disputes
through mediation and arbitration, and issues orders in cases that parties are unable to resolve
through alternative dispute resolution methods. The DLR comprises: (1) hearing officers,
arbitrators, mediators, and support staff; (2) the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board
(“CERB”), an appellate body responsible for reviewing hearing officer orders and issuing final
decisions; and (3) the Joint Labor Management Committee (“JLMC”), a committee that includes
labor and management representatives and uses its procedures to encourage municipalities and their
police officers and firefighters to agree directly on terms to resolve collective bargaining disputes or
on procedures to resolve these disputes.
In support of its mission, the DLR provides many services, including:
o Processing Prohibited Practice Charges
o Representation Petitions and Elections
o Written Majority Authorization Petitions
o Unit Clarification Petitions
o Interest Mediation
o Mediation of Prohibited Practice Charges
o Grievance Mediation
o Grievance Arbitration
o Investigation, Prevention and Termination of Strikes
o Litigation
As reflected in the charts beginning on page 28 of this report, during the past fiscal year, the
DLR opened 552 new cases, a 20% decrease from FY2023, and closed 645 cases, a 12% decrease
from FY2023. The majority of those cases were unfair labor practice (“ULP”) cases. At the end of
FY2024, the DLR had approximately 429 open cases at various stages of case processing, including
administrative and judicial appeals. The inventory of cases on the DLR’s open docket at the end of
FY2024 is approximately 6% lower than the previous year. The DLR has continued to issue timely
probable cause determinations this year. On average, in FY2024, the DLR issued probable cause
Page 3 DLR FY 2024 Annual Report
 determinations in 49 days and hearing officer decisions in 248 days1 after the record was closed and
briefs were filed.
The DLR also continued providing mediation services to facilitate settlements in all case
classifications in FY2024. In addition to contract mediation, grievance mediation, and traditional
unfair labor practice mediation, mediators continued to provide expedited mandatory mediation
services in all ULP Level I cases. The DLR’s mediation services help facilitate better relationships
between parties and provide significant cost-savings. During this past fiscal year, DLR mediators
conducted 259 contract mediation sessions and 75 unfair labor practice mediation sessions.
During the past fiscal year, the CERB issued 5 Hearing Officer Appeal decisions, 13
representation case decisions, and decided 14 requests for review of Investigators’ dismissals of
charges for lack of probable cause. In addition, the CERB issued decisions in 2 strike investigation
petitions.
During the past fiscal year, there were 32 JLMC cases filed. The JLMC mediators conducted 61
contract mediations and 4 Section 3(a) hearings.
In FY2024, the DLR continued its work with a consortium of small executive branch agencies,
including the State Ethics Commission, the Department of Mental Health, and the Department of
Criminal Justice Information Services, with the assistance of the Executive Office of Technology
Services and Security (“EOTSS”), to procure a common case management platform. This common
platform will allow DLR to integrate its web-based forms and e-filing application with its case and
document management systems. The project includes improved search functionality of the DLR’s
web-based public document repository and online dashboards that provide real-time case
management information. The new platform will be implemented utilizing a multi-phase approach;
the first phase launched in August 2024.
1
Note that the DLR had one particularly complicated matter which took over two years to resolve. That single outlier is
not included in the above average. If the outlier were included, the DLR’s average time to decision would be calculated at
389 days based on that single case.
Page 4 DLR FY 2024 Annual Report
 OVERVIEW OF DLR SERVICES
In order to provide prompt and fair resolution of labor disputes, the DLR provides the following
services:
1. Initial Processing and Investigation of Prohibited Practice Charges
The majority of DLR cases are unfair labor practice cases filed pursuant to G.L. c. 150A or G.L.
c. 150E. Charges of prohibited practice may include various allegations, including, for example,
allegations that an employer discriminated or retaliated against an employee because the employee had
engaged in activities protected by law; allegations that an employer or employee organization failed to
bargain in good faith; or allegations that an employee organization failed to properly represent a member
of the bargaining unit.
After an initial review to determine if a case is properly before the DLR and that it meets the
DLR’s filing requirements, the Director will determine whether the case should be deferred to the
parties’ own contractual grievance procedure. A case that is properly before the DLR will be classified
as a Level I or Level II case based on its relative impact to the public. Level I cases, where resolution
of the dispute has the greatest urgency, will be processed first; the time frame for completion of the
investigation will be within 60 days, depending on the level of urgency. During the past year, all
COVID-related cases were assigned a Level I priority. Cases with less urgency are assigned a Level II
priority and investigated between 60 and 90 days from the filing date.
During the investigation, the investigator is statutorily obligated to explore whether settlement
of the charge is possible. If such discussions do not result in settlement, the investigator will proceed
with a probable cause investigation. During the investigation, the parties are expected to present
evidence from individuals with first-hand knowledge. The intent of the probable cause investigation is
to have both parties present all evidence and, as a result, most investigations have the record closed at
the end of the investigation. In FY2024, all investigations were conducted remotely via videoconference.
After a record is closed, an investigator will issue a probable cause determination, which is
generally a written dismissal or a Complaint of Prohibited Practice. The investigator may also direct
the charge to an alternative dispute resolution mechanism (including deferral to the parties’ own
grievance/arbitration procedure). Cases dismissed following an investigation may be appealed to the
CERB. If affirmed by the CERB, appeals can be made to the Massachusetts Appeals Court.
If the probable cause determination results in a Complaint of Prohibited Practice, the case will
be scheduled for a hearing on the merits to determine whether the respondent violated the law as alleged
in the Complaint. The DLR will once again evaluate and differentiate the cases as Level I or Level II
cases. Cases identified as Level I Complaint cases will be scheduled for hearing as soon as practicable,
considering caseload and staffing, and depending on the level of urgency. In addition, because the DLR
mandates mediation in all Level I cases, mediation must take place before the hearing. Cases identified
as Level II cases are generally scheduled within a year from the date of the Complaint.
2. Hearings and Appeals
Page 5 DLR FY 2024 Annual Report
 After the hearing is scheduled on a Complaint of Prohibited Practice, but before it takes place,
the DLR requires the parties to file a Joint Pre-Hearing Memorandum and attend a Pre-Hearing
Conference to clarify the issues for hearing.
The Prohibited Practice Hearing is a formal adjudicatory process. Parties to the proceeding have
the right to appear, to examine and cross-examine witnesses, to produce evidence, and to otherwise
support or defend against the Complaint. All hearings are conducted in person. Sworn testimony is
recorded and transcribed and, at the close of the hearing, the parties often provide the Hearing Officer
with post-hearing legal briefs. The Hearing Officer then issues a written decision, determining whether
a violation of the Law has occurred.
If a party disagrees with the Hearing Officer’s decision, the party can appeal to the CERB by
filing a Request for Review. In most cases, both sides will file briefs with the CERB in support of their
respective positions. After review of the record and consideration of the issues, the CERB will issue its
decision, generally within six months after the appeal is filed. Once the CERB issues its decision, the
decision is final and can be appealed only to the Massachusetts Appeals Court. DLR’s attorneys are
authorized by statute to defend CERB decisions at the Appeals Court.
3. Representation Issues
In all cases that involve representation issues, i.e., representation or decertification petitions,
written majority authorization petitions, and unit clarification cases, the DLR is statutorily mandated to
determine an “appropriate” bargaining unit. To make that determination, the CERB considers
community of interest among the employees, the employer’s interest in maintaining an efficient
operation, and the employees’ interest (or lack thereof) in representation.
In all cases, the DLR assists and encourages the parties to reach an agreement concerning an
appropriate unit. In FY2024, the DLR resolved 77% of its unit clarification cases through voluntary
agreement over the scope of the bargaining unit and in 83% of election cases, elections were conducted
after voluntary agreement over the scope of the bargaining unit. When no agreement is reached, a DLR
Hearing Officer conducts a hearing, after which the CERB issues a written decision in the first instance
based on the hearing record. The CERB will either dismiss the petition or define the bargaining unit and
direct an election. There is no right to a court appeal from a representation decision.
a. Representation Petitions and Elections
The DLR is also responsible for conducting secret ballot elections for employees to determine
whether they wish to be represented by a union. Elections are conducted whenever: (1) an employer
files a petition alleging that one or more employee organizations claim to represent a substantial number
of employees in a bargaining unit; (2) an employee organization files a petition, accompanied by an
adequate showing of interest, alleging that a substantial number of employees wish to be represented by
the petitioner; or (3) an individual files a petition accompanied by an adequate showing of interest,
alleging that a substantial number of employees in the bargaining unit no longer wish to be represented
by the current employee organization. Depending on the size of the unit and the relative cost, the DLR
Page 6 DLR FY 2024 Annual Report
conducts elections either on location or through mail-in ballots, however, in FY2024, all elections were
conducted by mail.
In FY2024, the DLR docketed 33 representation petitions and conducted 12 elections, involving
208 voters. A chart detailing these representation elections is available in the Case Statistics section of
this Report.
b. Written Majority Authorization Petitions
The Card Check Law (Chapter 120 of the Acts of 2007) provides that the DLR “shall certify to
the parties, in writing, and the employer shall recognize as the exclusive representative for the purposes
of collective bargaining of all the employees in the bargaining unit, a labor organization which has
received a written majority authorization . . ..” A union that provides the DLR (or a designated neutral)
with proof of majority support (50% + 1) of an appropriate bargaining unit will be certified by the DLR
as that bargaining unit’s exclusive bargaining representative without an election. The DLR-issued
regulations provide respondents with the right to file objections and challenges prior to a certification.
Since the Card Check Law requires certification within 30 days, the DLR works with the parties to
expedite all written majority authorization petitions.
In FY2024, 33 written majority authorization petitions were filed. The DLR issued certifications
in 26 petitions that were supported by a total of 479 written majority authorization cards. A chart
detailing the written majority authorization certifications issued in FY2024 is available in the Statistical
Reports section of this Report.
c. Unit Clarification Petitions (CAS)
A party to an existing bargaining relationship may file a petition with the DLR seeking to clarify
or amend an existing bargaining unit or a DLR certification. Currently, the DLR investigates such
petitions through a written investigation procedure and the CERB issues decisions resolving such cases.
The information that an employer or employee organization must include in a Unit Clarification or CAS
petition is specified in 456 CMR 14.03(2) and 14.04(2). Per 456 CMR 14.04(2), an individual employee
has no right to file a CAS petition. Any CAS petition found to raise a question of representation must
be dismissed and the question of representation addressed by filing a representation petition. In FY2024,
the DLR received 15 CAS petitions.
4. Labor Dispute Mediation
One of the most important services offered by the DLR is labor dispute mediation in both the
public and the private sectors. The DLR’s mediation services can be categorized as follows:
a. Interest Mediation
Interest mediation is contract negotiation mediation. The DLR provides mediators to assist
parties from the public and private sectors who are involved in such disputes. The DLR’s jurisdiction
extends to all public sector labor contract disputes, though contract disputes involving municipal police
and firefighters are mediated through the procedures and rules adopted by the JLMC. The DLR
Page 7 DLR FY 2024 Annual Report
prioritizes interest mediation because the prevention and prompt settlement of labor contract disputes
benefits the negotiating parties, and stable labor relations benefit the local community and the
Commonwealth. As such, the DLR’s mediation services are one of the most cost efficient and valuable
forms of local aid provided by