Military Veteran and Advocacy Group Challenge Boston’s Hiring Practices
A disabled military veteran and a Boston-based veterans advocacy organization have filed suit in Suffolk County Superior Court challenging the Boston Fire Department’s recent hiring practices. The lawsuit, Finn & InnoVets v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts Human Resources Division, Civil Service Commission, City of Boston, and Fire Commissioner Paul Burke, contends that the City’s use of its new firefighter cadet program, along with a recently adopted “hybrid” hiring process, has improperly reduced opportunities for veterans seeking appointment to the department.
According to the complaint, plaintiff Jason Finn is a disabled veteran who scored high enough on the civil service examination to be tied for the top position on the current eligibility list for Boston firefighter. Finn participated in the 2025 lottery for original appointment, but his name was not selected. He remains on the list and is still seeking appointment.
InnoVets, the co-plaintiff, describes itself as an organization that advocates for the interests of military veterans. At the center of the complaint are appointments made under Chapter 242 of the Acts of 2020, which allows Boston to appoint up to one-third of entry-level firefighters from a fire cadet program created by the department and approved by the state’s Human Resources Division (HRD). The plaintiffs contend that Boston appointed cadets to firefighter positions in 2025 without ever obtaining HRD approval of its cadet program, a statutory requirement.
The plaintiffs allege that, despite the absence of approval, cadets were nevertheless appointed to one-third of the slots in the 2025 Fire Academy class—the first time the department has used the statutory cadet authority. They further assert that city officials acknowledged that several cadets lacked favorable Academy recommendations, some were related to existing members of the department, and some had not obtained required EMT certifications before appointment.
The complaint states that the 2025 Academy class experienced “above average failure rate for tests and exercises,” and alleges that the department subsequently “lowered standards required to graduate.” According to the filing, after several cadets failed an initial written exam, Academy staff were told that “no cadets can fail in the Academy class, as this is an election year.”
On May 19, 2025, Finn and InnoVets petitioned the Civil Service Commission to investigate the cadet program and related hiring practices. That request was denied on August 21, 2025, but the Commission noted that Boston and HRD “should officially memorialize HRD’s explicit approval of the fire cadet program forthwith.”
The plaintiffs then filed a motion for reconsideration, asserting that HRD still had not approved the cadet program and that recent public-records disclosures confirmed no such approval had been obtained prior to the appointment of cadets.
The complaint also challenges a July 2, 2025 Memorandum of Agreement between the City and HRD executed under G.L. c. 31, §59A, permitting Boston to hire up to 50 percent of new firefighters through a “local register” outside the traditional civil service process. The MOA required Boston to create a hiring policy that included provisions on “anti-nepotism, anti-patronage, and anti-favoritism.”
The plaintiffs allege that the Hybrid Hiring Policy issued by the City contained no such provisions, despite the requirement in the MOA.
According to the complaint, Boston has already begun a hiring cycle under the new hybrid system—one that will allow 50 percent of appointments to go to individuals who are “neither veterans nor disabled veterans.”
The plaintiffs claim that “but for” the City’s appointment of cadets under Chapter 242, Finn and similarly situated veterans would have been considered for original appointment. They assert that the combined use of the cadet program and the hybrid hiring agreement creates a “zero sum” effect in which each appointment made through these alternative pathways represents a lost opportunity for veterans at the top of the civil service list.
The suit seeks declaratory and injunctive relief on four counts:
- Judicial review of the Civil Service Commission’s decision, alleging the Commission’s denial of the investigation request was arbitrary, capricious, or based on legal error.
- A declaration regarding the validity of appointments made under Chapter 242, asserting the program was not lawfully approved by HRD.
- A second claim for declaratory relief regarding the legality of those appointments.
- A declaration that the City’s Hybrid Hiring Policy violates G.L. c. 31 and the MOA between Boston and HRD.
The plaintiffs also request that the Court order relief for veterans who were passed over for appointment due to these practices. A Boston Herald report published November 17, 2025, summarized the lawsuit’s allegations, stating that the complaint contends the City is “sidelining veterans” in order to meet the mayor’s diversity hiring goals. The article reported that the lawsuit challenges both the cadet program and the hybrid hiring process on the grounds that they reduce veterans’ statutory preference in firefighter hiring.
Noticeably absent from Finn’s legal theories are allegations related to military discrimination or veteran discrimination. Rather, the narrow focus of the complaint is on the city’s failure to comply with Massachusetts Civil Service law. Here is a copy of the complaint and supporting documentation.
