to impute knowledge of Delaney's complaint to Chief Majenski based on the discussion at their meeting. After all, Lieutenant Sullivan had already indicated to Owings in March of 2014 that Delaney's low rate of issuing money citations was an issue, and Delaney had just joined a shift with other officers who were notoriously recalcitrant about issuing tickets. The Chief also would have had strong incentives to have Delaney, as a leader in the .patrolmen’s union, fall in line with his enforcement objectives. 7 . The warning, coming after a meeting that Delaney agrees became contentious, is also hardly surprising in the context of a paramilitary organization, where discipline and respect for the chain of command is of unique importance. Cf. Jordan v. Carter, 428 F.3d 67, 74 (1st Cir.2005) (<HOLDING>). 8 . Delaney also makes passing references to
recognizing statutory nature of stay but concluding that court still has interest in ensuring compliance recognizing a heightened interest in ensuring discipline in police departments holding that no heightened showing is required recognizing the publics interest in ensuring that the ultimate awardee offers the best value to the government pursuant to the terms of the solicitation and applicable procurement regulations recognizing that congress has a legitimate interest in ensuring that a child who becomes an american citizen has a real relationship with a family unit and with the united states