Total Articles: 71
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • January 10, 2018
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court recently held that individuals acting as board members and investors cannot be held personally liable under the Massachusetts Payment of Wages Law, M.G.L. c. 149, § 148, for a company’s failure to pay wages. Only board members or investors who also served as an officer or agent “having the management” of the company can be subjected to personal liability. This is a significant decision, given that the Payment of Wages Law carries substantial penalties for noncompliance.
Ogletree Deakins • October 31, 2017
Massachusetts employers are reminded that, per legislation signed by Governor Charlie Baker in July 2016, qualifying veterans scheduled to work on Veterans Day who wish to participate in Veterans Day activities in their communities may be entitled to paid leave from their employers to do so. The legislation, officially titled An Act Relative to Housing, Operations, Military Service, and Enrichment or the HOME Act, amends a prior law that only required employers to grant veterans unpaid leave to participate in Veterans Day and Memorial Day activities provided they gave their employers “reasonable notice.”
Ogletree Deakins • October 30, 2017
As we get closer to the July 1, 2018 implementation date for the Massachusetts Equal Pay Act (MEPA), it is time to focus in earnest on practical workplace considerations for affected employers. Although the MEPA does not dictate what specific language employment policies must include, employers should align their internal policies and practices with the law’s detailed requirements. Employment policies that may require revision or amendment in order to comply with the provisions of MEPA cover not only compensation, but also hiring practices, interview procedures, commissions, merit-based bonuses, and confidentiality. Employers also should reviewing and updating their written employment applications, offer letters, onboarding materials, and job descriptions to ensure compliance with MEPA. These documents may include questions about salary history, explain company practices with regard to making compensation decisions, or otherwise touch on areas covered by MEPA.
Fisher Phillips • September 26, 2017
Coming on the heels of several high profile data breaches, lawmakers in the Bay State have turned their attention to evaluating and improving cybersecurity across the Commonwealth. The State Legislature has created a special committee on cybersecurity readiness and is working its way through several bills on data privacy and security (see below). In addition, Governor Baker has established a new department devoted to information technology, titled the “Executive Office of Technology Services and Security.”
Ogletree Deakins • September 08, 2017
The July 1, 2018, implementation date for the amendments to the Massachusetts Equal Pay Act (MEPA) is less than a year away. The amendments approved in 2016 will bring about substantial changes to the definition of “comparable work,” employer defenses, statutes of limitations, and prohibited employer practices, such as salary history inquiries.
XpertHR • August 03, 2017
Next spring, Massachusetts employers will have additional compliance requirements under the state Pregnant Workers Fairness Act, which prohibits employers from denying pregnant employees reasonable accommodations for pregnancy- and childbirth-related conditions, absent due hardship.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • August 01, 2017
An amendment to the Massachusetts Fair Employment Practices Act, G.L. c. 151B, expressly includes pregnancy as a protected characteristic and expands accommodation requirements for pregnant employees. The amended law goes into effect April 1, 2018.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • July 28, 2017
On July 27, 2017, Governor Baker signed the Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (the “Act”). Once the Act takes effect on April 1, 2018, most employers with employees in Massachusetts will be required to provide reasonable accommodations to employees for pregnancy and related conditions.
Fisher Phillips • July 28, 2017
Massachusetts just joined 21 other states and the District of Columbia by enacting a comprehensive pregnancy workplace law with unanimous support from the legislature, employee advocates, and the Massachusetts business community. Today, Governor Charlie Baker signed the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA), which will take effect (appropriately enough) in about nine months – on April 1, 2018.
The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that a newly-hired employee who was terminated because she tested positive for marijuana use can sue her former employer for handicap discrimination. Christina Barbuto suffers from Crohn's disease and her physician had provided her with a written certification allowing her to use marijuana for medicinal purposes. Medical and recreational marijuana use is legal in Massachusetts in limited amounts.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • July 19, 2017
An employee fired after she tested positive for marijuana on a test administered in the hiring process should be able to proceed with her “handicap discrimination” claim under Massachusetts’ anti-discrimination statute, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court has ruled. Barbuto v. Advantage Sales & Marketing, LLC, SJC -12226 (July 17, 2017). The Court’s ruling partially overturned the lower court’s decision to grant the employer’s motion to dismiss.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • July 19, 2017
On July 17, 2017, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court unanimously held that an employee may pursue a disability discrimination claim under state law against her former employer for failing to accommodate the employee’s use of medical marijuana. This is the first decision by any state’s highest court to recognize a duty to accommodate medical marijuana users at work.
Ogletree Deakins • July 19, 2017
On July 17, 2017, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court issued a unanimous ruling in Barbuto v. Advantage Sales and Marketing, LLC, allowing medical marijuana users to assert claims for handicap discrimination under the Massachusetts Fair Employment Practices Act. However, in the same ruling, the court also held that the Massachusetts Act for the Humanitarian Medical Use of Marijuana (the Massachusetts Medical Marijuana Act) does not provide an implied, private right of action by employees against employers. The court also declined to recognize an action for violation of public policy within the context of adverse employment actions against medical marijuana users.
Ogletree Deakins • May 21, 2017
On May 10, 2017, the Massachusetts House, by unanimous vote (150-to-0), passed the Massachusetts Pregnant Workers Fairness Act. If enacted, the Act will expand existing protections for pregnant employees in Massachusetts and require employers to provide pregnant women and new mothers with “reasonable accommodations” for their pregnancies and any conditions related to their pregnancies. The bill (House, No. 3680) is expected to pass the Massachusetts Senate and be signed into law by Governor Charlie Baker.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • April 27, 2017
Employers operating in Massachusetts are already aware of the Commonwealth’s Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) law.1 CORI refers to the database of criminal information maintained by the Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS).
Ogletree Deakins • February 15, 2017
In a decision that could spell trouble for Massachusetts employers, a judge in the Superior Court’s Business Litigation Session recently held that meal breaks count as “compensable working time,” for which employees must be paid, unless the employee is relieved of all work-related duties during the break. In reaching that decision, the court rejected the employer’s argument that the court should apply the more lenient federal standard, under which the compensability of meal breaks depends on whether the break time is spent “predominantly” for the benefit of the employer.
Brody and Associates, LLC • January 23, 2017
Recently, the Governor of Massachusetts signed a new pay equity law that will prohibit employers from inquiring into applicants’ prior salaries. The law goes into effect in July 2018 and it makes Massachusetts the first state in the country to have this type of law.
Ogletree Deakins • January 06, 2017
Massachusetts’s highest court recently issued a decision that impacts the ability of delivery companies operating in the commonwealth to use independent contractors in providing delivery services. In Chambers v. RDI Logistics, Inc., the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) ruled that the second prong of the state’s three-pronged independent contractor test is preempted by federal law when applied to motor carriers. Significantly, however, the SJC also ruled that the three prongs of the test are severable and that, even when the second prong is preempted, an employer must satisfy the other two prongs to avoid misclassification liability. The SJC ruling aligns with the First Circuit’s decision in Schwann v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., Inc.
Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP • November 28, 2016
On November 8, 2016 voters answered “yes” to Question 4, approving the Regulation and Taxation of Marijuana Act (the “Marijuana Act”). The Marijuana Act goes into effect on December 15, 2016. Massachusetts previously passed a law permitting use of marijuana for medicinal purposes. For more information on the impact of both of these laws on the workplace, including their impact on employer drug testing policies, read our full alert.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • October 10, 2016
In another win for employers with regard to medical marijuana use by employees, a Massachusetts state court rejected a former employee’s legal claims under the state’s medical marijuana law. Barbuto v. Advantage Sales and Marketing, LLC, et al., No. 15-02677 (Mass. Sup. Ct. May 31, 2016).
Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP • September 21, 2016
On July 14, 2016, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker signed into law An Act Relative to Housing, Operations, Military Service, and Enrichment (the “HOME Act”).By amending several existing laws, the HOME Act provides additional support and protections for veterans, members of the Armed Services, and their families. Employers should be aware of two major changes in employment law brought about by the HOME Act, both of which went into effect when the law was signed by Governor Baker and may require changes to your policies, practices, or employee handbook.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • August 22, 2016
Warehouses and delivery centers in Massachusetts can be opened on Sundays and holidays under a provision in the new economic development law amending the state’s “blue laws.” The Massachusetts blue laws, with a list of 55 exceptions, restrict certain commercial activities on Sundays and holidays. Governor Charlie Baker signed “An Act Relative to Job Creation and Workforce Development” (H. 4569) on August 10, 2016.
Fisher Phillips • August 09, 2016
On August 5, 2016, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker signed into law a bill governing gig economy rideshare companies such as Uber and Lyft – dubbed “transportation network companies” – which implements a novel new background check system, among other things. With this law, Massachusetts will join 34 other states that have passed comprehensive oversight for this new industry. The details of this compromise bill were hammered out between the House and the Senate at the eleventh hour, moments before Massachusetts’s legislative session came to a close on July 31.
Fisher Phillips • August 01, 2016
On August 1, 2016, Massachusetts Governor Charlie Baker signed into law a comprehensive pay equity bill entitled The Act to Establish Pay Equity (the Act). The law establishes significant new employer obligations with respect to pay equity, employer policies, and hiring practices, and also creates serious consequences for violations.
Ogletree Deakins • July 31, 2016
Continuing a trend, Massachusetts is poised to implement major changes to its equal pay laws. Following the lead of California, New York, and Maryland, which each enacted expansive equal pay laws in the last few months, Massachusetts is now nearing issuance of similarly broad legislation that will make litigating such cases significantly less challenging for plaintiffs. As such, Massachusetts employers need to be even more mindful of these new litigation risks and may want to take proactive steps to avoid claims of pay inequity.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • July 28, 2016
Massachusetts finally may enact non-compete reform legislation. The current session of the General Court, the state’s legislature, ends on July 31, and the House and Senate have passed versions of non-compete reform legislation limiting non-compete agreements that differ on important points. If non-compete reform is to become a reality in Massachusetts, significant compromise will be necessary before July 31.
Ogletree Deakins • July 05, 2016
Employers know all too well that employees sometimes help themselves to documents the employer would like to keep confidential. This is precisely why many employers require employees to sign confidentiality agreements and often impose discipline, including termination, for taking confidential documents. But what if an employee who has filed a discrimination suit against his or her employer takes confidential documents to assist in the case? That is, can an employer subject an employee who engages in “self-help discovery” to discipline for taking confidential information?
Fisher Phillips • June 06, 2016
An important new Supreme Judicial Court decision has paved the way for Massachusetts employees pursuing certain discrimination claims to engage in what the court has dubbed “self-help discovery.” This new variant of “discovery” would permit employees, in certain circumstances, to lawfully take and disclose confidential employer documents before a lawsuit has even begun. This ruling emphasizes the importance of maintaining appropriate security for sensitive documents, including firewalls and other technological barriers.
Ogletree Deakins • June 06, 2016
On May 11, 2016, the First Circuit Court of Appeals issued the latest of several decisions supporting and furthering federal preemption of the Massachusetts independent contractor statute for businesses that qualify as motor carriers under the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994 (FAAAA). The practical impact of the First Circuit’s decision in Massachusetts Delivery Association v. Healey and the cases that preceded it is that motor carriers, including many delivery businesses, may be able to classify their drivers as independent contractors with a reduced risk of violating the Massachusetts independent contractor statute.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • March 03, 2016
On February 22, 2016, the First Circuit issued its decision in Schwann v. Fedex Ground Package System, Inc. This decision clarified the extent to which the Massachusetts Independent Contractor statute, G.L. c. 149 § 148B (“§ 148B”), as applied to motor carriers, is preempted by the Federal Aviation Administration Authorization Act of 1994, 49 U.S.C. § 14501(c)(1) (“FAAAA”). Schwann v. FedEx Ground Package Sys., 2016 U.S. App. LEXIS 3050 (1st Cir. Mass. Feb. 22, 2016).
Jackson Lewis P.C. • February 12, 2016
The Massachusetts Senate has passed a bill to amend the state’s Equal Pay Act that would impose more rigorous equal pay obligations on employers by prohibiting certain conduct. The House is considering the bill.
Ogletree Deakins • December 18, 2015
Readers are probably aware that last year, Massachusetts voters approved a new sick leave law that went into effect on July 1, 2015. Many employers with preexisting leave policies, however, took advantage of the so-called “safe harbor” provision in the law and its implementing regulations that allowed those employers to delay full implementation until January 1, 2016, as long as they complied with certain general provisions of the law. This safe harbor expires on January 1, 2016—so employers that relied on the safe harbor rules must now put in place new policies to comply with the sick leave law.
Jackson Lewis P.C. • December 03, 2015
Employers operating under the Massachusetts Earned Sick Leave Law “safe harbor” should prepare to fully comply with the Law beginning January 1, 2016.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • June 26, 2015
Effective July 1, 2015, all private-sector employers in Massachusetts must provide their employees with up to 40 hours of sick leave per calendar year.1 Earlier this year, the Massachusetts Attorney General published proposed regulations concerning the implementation of the new law.2 After receiving comments to those proposed regulations, the Attorney General recently issued final regulations that differ from the proposed regulations in a number of important respects.
Ogletree Deakins • June 25, 2015
As many of you are aware, the July 1, 2015 effective date of the Massachusetts earned sick leave law is looming. In summary, the new law provides that employers of 11 or more employees must provide their Massachusetts employees with job-protected paid sick leave accrued at a rate of 1 hour for every 30 hours worked, while smaller employers must provide the same amount of unpaid sick leave.
Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP • June 24, 2015
The Massachusetts Attorney General has issued final regulations (“regulations”) regarding the new earned sick time (EST) law. Our recent HRW Alert provides a summary of key provisions of the regulations. Please click the link below to view the full HRW Alert.
Fisher Phillips • June 24, 2015
On June 19, 2015, the Massachusetts Attorney General published the final regulations concerning the new Earned Sick Time (“EST”) law that will go into effect on July 1, 2015. These final regulations differ somewhat from the draft regulations submitted in April and provide clarification and additional detail to aid with implementation.
Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP • June 15, 2015
On June 10, 2015, the Attorney General’s Office issued an amended safe harbor notice and poster regarding the new Massachusetts Earned Sick Time law, which goes into effect on July 1, 2015. Check out the link below for a copy of our newest HRW Alert on these updates.
Ogletree Deakins • June 15, 2015
On June 10, 2015, the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office (AGO) issued two important new documents for employers concerning implementation of the new earned sick time law that goes into effect on July 1, 2015. The AGO has held public hearings and listening sessions concerning the proposed regulations it issued in April, and has stated that the final regulations will be issued in mid-June of 2015. (AGO representatives targeted June 19, 2015 as the date for issuance of final regulations.) On June 10, the AGO issued two documents that will assist employers in preparing to implement the law.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • June 12, 2015
On June 10, 2015, the Massachusetts Attorney General issued a Notice of Employee Rights (the "Notice") under the Commonwealth's new earned sick leave law, as well as a document clarifying the scope of the "safe harbor" exemption to that law.
Ogletree Deakins • May 29, 2015
In April 2015, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts issued two important decisions providing guidance for employers on the scope of Massachusetts’s wage and hour laws. In one decision, the Court held that employers may institute no-tipping policies in the Commonwealth without violating the Tips Act; however, employers must provide notice to customers of their no-tipping policies in order to avoid potential liability for the failure to treat change left by customers as tips. In the other decision, the Court found that taxi drivers are not properly considered independent contractors under the Massachusetts Independent Contractor Law.
Littler Mendelson, P.C. • May 27, 2015
The Massachusetts Attorney General recently issued a supplemental regulation to the state's new sick leave law that aims to provide a "safe harbor" to Massachusetts employers that had qualifying paid time off ("PTO") policies (including sick, personal, vacation, and/or combined PTO policies) in place as of May 1, 2015. The new regulation is welcome news to employers who are struggling to adopt policies that comply with the new law.
Ogletree Deakins • May 19, 2015
On May 18, 2015, the Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office (AGO) held the first of several public hearings on proposed regulations concerning implementation of the new earned sick time law passed by Massachusetts voters in November 2014. At that hearing, Attorney General Maura Healey stated that the AGO intends to proceed with implementing the law as of its July 1, 2015 effective date and that the AGO is on track to finalize implementing regulations ahead of that date (AGO representatives targeted June 19, 2015 as the date for issuance of final regulations).
Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP • May 12, 2015
The Massachusetts Attorney General has issued proposed regulations (“regulations”) regarding the new Sick Leave Law. The regulations do not yet have the force of law. There will be a notice and comment period that lasts until June 10, 2015, and public hearings will be held throughout the Commonwealth. For a summary of key provisions of these regulations check out the full copy of our alert by clicking on this link.
In November, Massachusetts voters approved a paid sick leave ballot measure that will require an employer to provide paid sick leave if it has more than 10 employees, or unpaid sick leave if it has10 or fewer employees. The law is set to go into effect on July 1. However, numerous questions have come up regarding how the new law should be implemented.
Fisher Phillips • May 01, 2015
On November 4, 2014, Massachusetts voters passed a ballot initiative requiring that all employees be entitled to earn and use up to 40 hours of earned sick time in a calendar year. There were significant ambiguities in the law (as discussed in our previous alert), but the law also enabled the Massachusetts Attorney General to “adopt rules and regulations necessary to carry out the purpose and provisions of this section.” On April 24, 2015, the Attorney General’s office published its proposed regulations implementing this law.
Ogletree Deakins • April 29, 2015
As we detailed in November 2014, Massachusetts voters last fall approved a new law mandating that employers provide earned sick time to their employees. Under the new law, employers with 11 or more employees must provide paid sick leave for workers and smaller employers must provide unpaid sick time. The law is set to take effect on July 1, 2015, and employers have raised many questions about how the law will be implemented. The Massachusetts Attorney General’s Office (AGO) recently issued proposed regulations that provide detailed guidance concerning implementation of the new law. The AGO has scheduled six public hearings to gather public feedback on the regulations and has invited any interested parties to submit written comments on the regulations.
Hirsch Roberts Weinstein LLP • January 23, 2015
Massachusetts has revised the state’s maternity leave law, giving men and women the same rights to take 8 weeks of parental leave after the birth or adoption of a child. The amended law, An Act Relative to Parental Leave, expands the scope of the Massachusetts maternity leave law, M.G.L. c. 149, Sec. 105D, and changes language in the state’s anti-discrimination law, M.G.L. c. 151B sec. 4(11A), making both laws gender neutral. Governor Deval Patrick signed the new law the day before he left office. The law will take effect on April 7, 2015, 90 days after its enactment.
Ogletree Deakins • January 16, 2015
In one of his last acts as governor, former-Governor Deval Patrick signed into law on January 7, 2015 an amendment to the previous Massachusetts Maternity Leave Law that extends eight weeks of unpaid leave to both male and female employees to care for a newborn, newly placed, or newly adopted child.
Fisher Phillips • January 14, 2015
With very little fanfare or media attention, Massachusetts Governor Patrick signed a bill into law the day before he left office that establishes parental leave in Massachusetts for both female and male employees. Effective April 7, 2015, the new law will replace the current Massachusetts Maternity Leave Act (MLA), which provides only female employees with eight weeks of job-protected maternity leave for the birth or adoption of a child. Extending parental leave to male employees will require significant policy changes for Massachusetts employers with less than 50 employees, as they are not already covered by the Family and Medical Leave Act (FMLA) which applies to both male and female employees.
Fisher Phillips • December 12, 2014
On November 4, 2014, Massachusetts voters passed a ballot measure to provide earned paid sick leave to employees. Starting on July 1, 2015, employers with more than 10 employees will be required to allow all employees who work in Massachusetts to accrue and use up to 40 hours of paid sick leave per calendar year. Employers with 10 or fewer employees will be required to allow their employees to earn and use up to 40 hours of unpaid sick leave.
Ogletree Deakins • November 25, 2014
In addition to the restrictions on opening in certain New England states, retailers with stores in Massachusetts and Rhode Island should also be aware of their obligation to pay their employees holiday pay (i.e., one-and-one-half of their regular rate) for working on state holidays (as well as on Sundays). These premium pay requirements are some of the last vestiges of the New England “blue laws” that regulate commercial activity on “days of rest.” Although these laws have roots stemming back hundreds of years, they are still vigorously enforced today.
Ogletree Deakins • November 17, 2014
In August of 2014, Massachusetts enacted broad reforms of the Commonwealth’s domestic violence laws. As Ogletree Deakins detailed in an August 18, 2014 Massachusetts eAuthority, “Domestic Leave Now Mandated in Massachusetts,” the reforms included a new law that requires employers with 50 or more employees to provide up to 15 days of leave from work during a 12-month period to employees who are victims of domestic abuse or are related to a qualifying family member who is a victim. The Office of the Massachusetts Attorney General, which is responsible for enforcing this law, recently issued advisory materials about the domestic abuse leave requirement. These guidance documents primarily track the detailed language of the law itself and provide useful summaries of the law. The guidance also provides the Attorney General’s views on certain undefined portions of the law.
FordHarrison LLP • November 13, 2014
Executive Summary: On election day, Massachusetts voters approved a ballot initiative requiring employers to provide sick time to their employees. Absent legislative repeal, the mandatory sick time law will become effective on July 1, 2015.
Ogletree Deakins • November 11, 2014
Over the past several years, many retailers have moved up the start times of their “Black Friday” sales so that they start on Thursday—which is Thanksgiving—instead of Friday. Despite some public disapproval, this move towards an earlier start to the holiday shopping season appears to be here to stay. Retailers with operations in New England should be aware that Massachusetts, Rhode Island, and Maine have laws that prohibit most retailers from opening on Thanksgiving and Christmas day. Although these so-called “blue laws” have been relaxed in many respects to allow retailers to open for business on Sundays and certain other holidays (often requiring retailers to pay employees premium pay if they do), the long-standing prohibitions on Thanksgiving and Christmas openings remain in effect for most retailers.
Fisher Phillips • November 06, 2014
On November 4, 2014, Massachusetts voters passed a ballot measure to provide earned paid sick leave to employees. Effective July 1, 2015, employers with more than 10 employees will be required to allow all employees who work in Massachusetts to accrue and use up to 40 hours of paid sick leave per calendar year. Employers with 10 or fewer employees will be required to allow their employees to earn and use up to 40 hours of unpaid sick leave.
Ogletree Deakins • November 06, 2014
On November 4, 2014, Massachusetts voters approved by a decisive margin (approximately 60 percent in favor) a new measure requiring employers to provide sick leave to all employees (with certain limited exceptions regarding federal or municipal employers). The new law further provides for paid sick leave for workers employed by employers of 11 or more employees. The new law takes effect on July 1, 2015. While many employers provide sick leave (paid or unpaid) to their workers, approximately one-third of Massachusetts employees are not covered by such voluntary programs. As such, this new law will have a significant impact on these employers, and the new statutory scheme impacts employers that currently provide sick leave as well.
Ogletree Deakins • November 05, 2014
On October 23, 2014, the Boston office hosted Commissioner Sunila Thomas-George, Commissioner Charlotte Golar Richie, and General Counsel Constance McGrane of the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) at its semi-annual Breakfast Briefing. The MCAD commissioners and general counsel provided helpful information and advice for employers appearing at the MCAD. Here is a summary of the valuable tidbits the MCAD commissioners and general counsel shared with us.
Fisher Phillips • August 20, 2014
Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed into law An Act Relative to Domestic Violence on August 8, 2014.This far-reaching law, which institutes reforms throughout the criminal justice system, mandates that all public and private employers with more than 50 employees must permit employees impacted by domestic violence to take up to 15 days of leave in any 12 month period. This leave may be paid or unpaid at the employer’s discretion. Employers are not required to grant leave if the employee is the perpetrator of abusive behavior against a family member. Employers are specifically required to notify employees of their rights and responsibilities under the law.
Ogletree Deakins • August 19, 2014
On August 8, 2014, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed sweeping new legislation in the area of domestic violence—M.G.L. c. 260 entitled “An Act relative to domestic violence.” The new law is effective immediately and impacts not only the criminal justice system, but public and private employers in the Commonwealth as well. Under the new law, employers with 50 or more employees must provide employees up to 15 days of unpaid leave in any 12-month period if the employee or a covered family member of the employee is a victim of abusive behavior. Covered employers must notify employees of their rights and responsibilities under the law.
Fisher Phillips • February 13, 2014
A recent Massachusetts Superior Court decision held that employers risk losing trade secrets and confidential information if they do not protect that information from independent contractors. The court held that employers who do not take active steps to protect their proprietary information from disclosure cannot recover from independent contractors who take that information for their own purposes. C.R.T.R. v. Lao
Ogletree Deakins • September 03, 2013
Governor Deval Patrick recently approved the Commonwealth’s 2014 fiscal year budget, which includes provisions repealing both the Fair Share Contribution (FSC) and the Health Insurance Responsibility Disclosure (HIRD) form requirements. These requirements were part of the landmark Massachusetts health care reform law in 2006. Their repeal resulted from the upcoming implementation of the federal health care reform, the Affordable Care Act (ACA).
Ogletree Deakins • September 26, 2012
In August 2012, Massachusetts Governor Deval Patrick signed into law a bill that established a series of new legal requirements for temporary staffing agencies and the companies that use their services. The law, called the “Temporary Workers Right to Know Act,” amends existing Massachusetts laws governing the temporary staffing industry in three specific ways by: (1) requiring that staffing agencies provide certain notices and information to all temporary employees; (2) prohibiting staffing agencies and worksite employers from charging certain fees to temporary employees; and (3) regulating the manner in which staffing agencies conduct their business. The new law will take effect on January 31, 2013.
Ogletree Deakins • August 20, 2012
First Circuit Limits Ability to Avoid Class-Wide Arbitration
Massachusetts Federal Court Holds That Websites Can Be Places of Public Accommodation for Purposes of the ADA
New Law in New Hampshire Requires Employers to Disclose Non-Compete Agreements at the Time of Hire or Change of Job
New Developments in Rhode Island
Ogletree Deakins • July 03, 2012
The Massachusetts Department of Criminal Justice Information Services (DCJIS) recently issued final regulations to accompany the Massachusetts Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) law. The law, which was passed in August 2010, significantly changed the way in which employers screen the criminal histories of applicants and employees. The new regulations, which went into effect immediately, clarify how employers obtain and use criminal history information.
Ogletree Deakins • March 20, 2012
Articles in this issue include: Criminal Record Law Requirements Become Effective May 4; Change in Compensation Voids Massachusetts Non-Compete Agreement; Meal Break Violations Cost A Massachusetts Retailer Almost $500,000.
Fisher Phillips • September 02, 2010
On August 5, 2010, Governor Deval Patrick signed into law "An Act Relative to Economic Development Reorganization" (M.G.L. c. 240, §1, et. seq.), with a stated purpose of providing a business-friendly environment, stimulating job growth, and coordinating economic development activities funded by the Commonwealth. Buried within the Act is a significant amendment to the Massachusetts Personnel Records Statute (M.G.L. c. 149, § 52C). The amended statute, which became effective immediately, now requires that employers provide notice to employees every time certain negative information is placed in their personnel files. This affirmative notice obligation is in stark contrast to prior law, which only required that employers allow employees to review their personnel records at the employee's request.
Ogletree Deakins • August 16, 2010
On August 6, Governor Deval Patrick signed into law a bill making significant changes to the Massachusetts Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) law. The new law is extensive and contains changes to all aspects of CORI and the state’s mandatory sentencing laws. One of the underlying purposes of the new law is to help rehabilitate people with criminal records by making it easier for them to return to the workplace, while at the same time, encouraging employers to hire them. In order to fulfill that goal, the new law offers protection for employers that rely on criminal record information, limits the information employers can access, and gives specific rights to job applicants with criminal records.
Fisher Phillips • August 16, 2010
On August 6, 2010, Governor Deval Patrick signed into law legislation which overhauls the Commonwealth's Criminal Offender Record Information (CORI) law. Currently, the Massachusetts Fair Employment Practices Law prohibits employers from asking questions of job applicants about arrests that do not result in convictions and convictions for certain misdemeanors, but allows questions about felony convictions and about misdemeanor convictions not protected from disclosure.
Ogletree Deakins • September 28, 2009
In the wake of the highly publicized theft of massive amounts of confidential customer information, Massachusetts enacted comprehensive data security legislation intended to prevent unauthorized access to such information. The Office of Consumer Affairs and Business Regulation (OCABR) has since issued detailed regulations implementing the legislation. Compliance with these regulations is now required by March 1, 2010.
Ogletree Deakins • August 05, 2009
A state appellate court recently ruled that an employer is not liable for the injuries caused by a drunk driving accident involving one of its workers. According to the Massachusetts Appeals Court, although the worker became intoxicated while meeting with his supervisor at a restaurant, his employer did not have a duty of care under a theory of employer host liability.