USA – MASSACHUSETTS Trends and Developments Contributed by: William C. Martucci, Stephen I. Hansen, Lisa O. White and Brandon L. Arber, Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP
Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP 1800 K Street NW Washington, DC 20006 USA
Tel: +1 202 639 5640 Fax: +1 202 783 4211 Email: wmartucci@shb.com Web: www.shb.com
Developments in Massachusetts Employment Law Massachusetts remains one of the most dynamic jurisdictions in the United States. The legal develop - ments and the expansiveness of the protections, as interpreted by the courts, present great challenges for employers. The dynamism of Massachusetts looms large in the overall context of American law as it expands and becomes ever nuanced in the protec- tions. This review of trends and developments pro- vides a glimpse of some of the key trends with practi- cal and sound guidance. Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) In its most recent annual report, MCAD offered insight into current investigation trends and results. In 2024, the trend of increasing new complaints filed contin - ued, after a slight decline during the COVID period in 2021. In 2022, 2,822 new complaints were filed; in 2023, there were 3,086 filed; and in 2024, a total of 3,553 complaints were filed. MCAD also maintains a considerable backlog of open cases (defined as investigations over 18 months old), but managed to slow the rate of backlog increases to just 2.8% from 2023–2024, after a massive increase of 27% from 2022–2023. The current backlog sits at 1,851 cases. Notably, MCAD reported that of its total 1,276 investi- gative findings in 2024, 84% found a lack of probable cause to support the complainant’s allegations and 16% resulted in a probable cause finding. Noteworthy recent decisions by MCAD include large awards of attorneys’ fees and costs for complain- ants recovering for discrimination claims before the
Hearing Commissioner. These include an award of USD157,327 to the complainant in a successful find - ing of failure to make reasonable accommodations, retaliation, and constructive discharge against the Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, MCAD and Joseph v Massachusetts Department of Children and Families, 46 MDLR 18 (2024) an award of USD231,996.38 in attorneys’ fees for the successful claim of racial discrimination and retaliation by an Afri- can-American woman against her employer, MCAD and Thomas v Stash’s Pizza (2024) and USD53,498.90 awarded in attorneys’ fees to the complainant for suc- cessful claims of hostile work environment, sexual harassment and retaliation, MCAD and Vincenti v the Plymouth Exchange et al (2024) . The 2024 MCAD Annual Report is available here. Wage and hour litigation First Circuit finds judicial delay not a basis for equitable tolling in FLSA collective action The First Circuit Court of Appeals decided in Kwoka v Enterprise Rent-A-Car, 141 F.4th 10 (1st Cir. 2025 ), that the district court’s delay issuing a decision could not form the basis for a claim of equitable tolling of the statute of limitations for an action brought pursuant to the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). Assuming with- out deciding that a delay could be a basis to equitably toll the statute of limitations, the First Circuit panel concluded that no such tolling was warranted in this case. Accordingly, the decision affirmed the dismissal of untimely FLSA claims asserted by opt-ins that had joined the action after the complaint had been filed.
737 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook