Court Affirms That Boston Police Department Improperly Bypassed Qualified Candidate

The Superior Court has reversed the decision of the Civil Service Commission majority, which which upheld the Boston Police Department's psychological bypass of a qualified candidate for patrol officer. Attorney Leah Barrault represents the bypassed candidate.

It is well established that a Massachusetts civil service employer can "bypass" (or decline to hire) a candidate for psychological reasons, so long as the employer can credible establish that the the candidate suffers from a specific type of psychiatric disorder (known as Category A). Or that the candidate suffers from a medical condition (Category B) that includes any (a) "history" of a "psychiatric condition, behavior disorder, or substance abuse problem" (other than Category A), when considered in light of the condition's "severity and degree" and that individual's "current status, prognosis, and ability to respond to the stressors of the job" or (b) any other psychiatric condition that disables the individual from performing as a police officer.

In this case, the Boston Police Department basically admitted that the applicant did not suffer from either a Category A or Category B condition, but still deemed the candidate unfit for psychological reasons. A Commission majority wrote a brief opinion defending the bypass, over a passionate minority dissent from former Commissioner Henderson.

Subsequent to the Commission's 2010 decision, the rigor of an appropriate psychological bypass has been clarified by the courts. In particular, the Supreme Judicial Court decision of Boston Police Dept v Kavaleski, 463 Mass. 680 (2012). The Superior Court, therefore, had little difficulty in reversing the Commission's decision.