In a key ruling for public-sector labor law, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court determined that an involuntary transfer from a day shift to an overnight shift can be considered an adverse employment action in retaliation cases—even if the transfer comes with a bargained-for pay increase.
The case, City of Newton v. Commonwealth Employment Relations Board, involved Sgt. John Babcock of the Newton Police Department, a longtime union leader who had conflicts with the police chief. Soon after several union-related disputes, Babcock was reassigned from a daytime specialty role to a rotating night shift. Although the shift included an 8% pay increase under the collective bargaining agreement (CBA), it substantially changed his schedule and personal life.
The SJC rejected the city’s arguments that (1) the pay raise offset any negative effects, and (2) Babcock’s disciplinary history prevented him from proving retaliation. The Court clarified that even actions in line with a CBA can be materially harmful, and having a perfect work record is not needed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation. This ruling emphasizes that non-monetary job impacts—like schedule changes—can support retaliation claims under Massachusetts labor law. It also brings state standards in line with federal ones, recognizing that adverse actions are not always measured in dollars.
As attorney Beth Myers pointed out, “There are ways an employer can harm employees without affecting their pay.” The SJC’s decision highlights this fact and warns employers against assuming that CBA compliance automatically protects them from retaliation claims. More information on this case can be in the Massachusetts Lawyers Weekly.
