USA – MASSACHUSETTS Trends and Developments Contributed by: William C. Martucci, Stephen I. Hansen, Lisa O. White and Brandon L. Arber, Shook, Hardy & Bacon LLP
to second guess the legislature’s decision to vary payment deadlines, and further emphasised that for certain Massachusetts workers living paycheck to paycheck, a single day’s payment delay could be important. Recent verdicts and reported wage and hour settlements Su v Gate Solution Sys. Inc. et al, 2024 WL 5359544 (Massachusetts District Court, 21 November 2024) – USD2,424,576 (settlement) The US Department of Labor alleged that defendants Healthcare Services Group Inc., Gate Solution Sys - tems Inc. (GSS), and GSS’ owners/managers failed to pay employees premium overtime compensation and failed to keep accurate employment-related records in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act. Macedo v Hatch, 2024 WL 4784541 (Massachusetts Superior Court, 28 August 2024) – bench verdict for defendant Plaintiff Douglas Macedo alleged that he was employed by a landscaping company owned by the defendant, and that he was terminated following his request to be paid overtime wages to which he was entitled. He asserted claims for retaliation under the Massachusetts Wage Act. The defendants denied the allegations and alleged the plaintiff was discharged for poor job performance. The defendants claimed that they had made a good-faith payment to, and later entered into a severance agreement with, the plain- tiff. The defendants claimed they fully performed its obligations under the severance agreement, but the plaintiff breached the agreement by engaging in activi - ties that he promised to refrain from. Sutton v Jordan’s Furniture, Inc., 493 Massachusetts 728 (2024) – USD11.6 million (jury verdict) The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed judgment in favour of plaintiffs, a class of commission-based sales associates, against furniture retailer Jordan’s Furniture, concerning failure to pay time-and-a-half wages for working overtime and on Sundays. Following the appeal, the trial court entered final judgment for USD11.6 million, plus USD500,000 in attorneys’ fees and costs. The judgment was equal to the amounts owed to all Jordan’s sales associates
between 19 June 2016, and 1 August 2019, plus treble damages and pre- and post-judgment interest. Walsh v Liam’s Home Furniture Inc. et al, 2023 WL 11967952 (Massachusetts District Court, 1 December 2023) – USD15,000 (settlement) The US Department of Labor brought action on behalf of delivery driver Scott Reddin against defendant- employers Liam’s Home Furniture Inc., Collins Movers Inc., and Francise Frederick, the manager of Liam’s and Collins. When Reddin stated that he intended to report the defendants to the Department of Labor for non-payment of wages, Frederick allegedly assaulted him in response. The plaintiff alleged the defendants failed to pay Reddin minimum wage for all hours worked, failed to keep complete and accu- rate records, and unlawfully retaliated against Reddin in violation of the FLSA. The defendants denied the allegations and claimed Reddin was not an employee and had unclean hands. The defendants also denied that Frederick assaulted Reddin, contending Frederick acted in self-defence. Walsh v Fakhouri Inc. et al, 2023 WL 11976549 (Massachusetts District Court, 14 September 2023) – USD338,628 (settlement) US Department of Labor action against defendant Fakhouri Inc. d/b/a Sound Bites Cafe, a restaurant, and defendant Yasser Mirza, who managed the res- taurant’s operations and employees, where the plaintiff alleged FLSA violations including retention of employ- ee tips, failure to pay the federal minimum wage for all hours worked for two employees, failure to pay at least 14 employees overtime at the proper rate, and failure to maintain employment-related records. Massachusetts statutes and regulations Massachusetts Pay Transparency Law takes effect on 29 October 2025 and requires covered employers to provide pay range information Effective 29 October 2025, the pay transparency pro - visions of the Equal Pay Act of 2018, G.L. c. 149, Sec- tion 105F, will take effect. Employers with 25 or more employees in Massachusetts (“Covered Employers”) will be required to disclose the pay range for all job postings. Under the law, the pay range is the annual salary or hourly range that the employer “reasonably and in good faith” expects to pay for the position.
740 CHAMBERS.COM
Powered by FlippingBook