Preventing Identity Theft — The New Employer Duty

November 9, 2009 By

A tough new data protection law is on the books and will soon require virtually all Massachusetts businesses to implement comprehensive policies to protect against identity theft. The statute applies so broadly that employers of every size and shape will be subject to it. All must create, implement, monitor and regularly update internal data protection procedures and encrypt information that is either transmitted via the internet or stored on portable devices.

Though the data security law became effective in October 2007, enforcement has been delayed until March 1, 2010 to permit Massachusetts companies time to become compliant. Doing so is a daunting task, since the statute’s broad reach captures virtually every every piece of what’s called “personal information.” That phrase refers to a combination of an individual’s name and either a social security number, driver’s license number, or financial account/credit card number or password. Employers must be certain to protect against both external data thefts and internal breaches. Not surprisingly, the latter sort is far more common. [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, Data Security, Employer - Employment Law, Massachusetts Employment Law

Court Clarifies Punitive Damages Guidelines

October 19, 2009 By

In a ruling that may be useful to Massachusetts employers, the Supreme Judicial Court in October made clear that puntive damages can only be awarded to discrimination plaintiffs when their employer’s conduct is “outrageous or egregious.” Punitive damages are, after all, available only to punish bad actors, not to permit windfall awards to discrimination victims who are generally entitled only to recover what they lost in wages and what they suffered from proven emotional injuries.

Apparently recognizing the subjective natures of the terms “outrageous” and “egregious” — who, after all can define either with more than a modicum of confidence — the court did what it often does. It created a list of factors that should be considered by judges and juries when evaluating whether to issue punitive damage awards. As always, the list is intended as a guideline only. Other factors that are relevant in particular cases can always be considered. The five punitive damages factors created by the SJC are: [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, Discrimination, Employee - Employment Law, Employer - Employment Law, Massachusetts Employment Law, Wrongful Termination

Misclassifying Workers Can Mean Big, Big Damages

September 23, 2009 By

Employers who misclassify their workers as independent contractors now have even more to worry about. In August, the state’s highest court made clear they could pay huge damages for this transgression of the law, even if they merely made an honest mistake.

In a majority opinion, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court concluded that employers can’t defend an independent contractor classification lawsuit by claiming a worker would have made less money if he/she had been properly classified as an employee. Damages are not measured by the difference between what a worker received and what he would have received as an employee.  Instead,  under the independent contractor provisions of the state’s Wage Act, damages equal the value of “wages and benefits [a worker] should have received as an employee, but did not,” the court wrote. [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, Independent Contractors, Massachusetts Wage Act, Wages and Commissions

SJC Makes Arbitration of Discrimination Lawsuits Tougher

August 14, 2009 By

In a surprising decision, Massachusetts’ highest court ruled in July that not all arbitration agreements are created equally and, consequently, only some of them are enforceable by employers. When it comes to suits under the state’s anti-discrimination law (Chapter 151B), the language in a workplace arbitration clause must be clear and unequivocal. Unless it demonstrates that an employee specifically bargained away the right to sue at the Commission Against Discrimination or in state court, the worker’s lawsuit for sexual harassment, age or race bias, failure to reasonably accommodate, or other discrimination issues may escape arbitration. That means employers will face the far more difficult and expensive task of defending themselves in front of a jury or at the MCAD or its federal counterpart, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).

The message for employers is clear: review any and all arbitration agreements you entered with your employees and, if you still believe arbitration of discrimination claims is in the company’s best interest, make sure Chapter 151B is specifically referenced. For many employers, [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, Discrimination, Employee - Employment Law, Employer - Employment Law, Massachusetts Employment Law, Wrongful Termination

Wrongful Termination Law in Massachusetts

July 10, 2009 By

Wrongful termination is a phrase frequently used by employers and employees alike to cover the whole rubric of potential causes of action that an individual could have against the company when he or she is fired.

Wrongful termination means, simply, that there is some kind of legal action that the an employee may take after being let go by an employer.

There are several discrete categories of wrongful termination in Massachusetts. Under the local law, all employees, unless they have a specific contract that they have negotiated with their employer, either in writing or orally, are At-Will employees.  This means they can leave whenever they choose to, or be let go whenever the employer chooses to let them go.  There are a couple of very narrow exceptions to the At-Will rule in Massachusetts that would constitute Wrongful Termination under the States Law. The exceptions are:

  1. A violation of Good Faith and Fair Dealing, meaning an employer, in a typical case, lets an employee go to avoid paying an employee a commission or large sum of compensation that would normally be due.
  2. Another way to violate the At-Will law is if an employer lets someone go in violation of something called the Public Policy Exception. There are very few Public Policy Exceptions. However, if an employee is serving on a jury, testifying in court, or performing some other act that the government wants to protect, the employer can not fire the employee for those actions.
  3. An employer also cannot fire or discharge someone in Massachusetts if they have a contract that provides otherwise. Sometimes employees have an employment contract that says,  for example,  they can only be fired for specific reasons, such as stealing from the employer, insubordination, or committing a crime. Where a company violates those terms, a breach of contract claim can arise in Massachusetts and that would be Wrongful Termination.
  4. The final category for Wrongful Termination involves discrimination cases. In Massachusetts, and under Federal Law, you can not let an employee go or treat them less favorably because of their race, gender, national origin, age, sexual orientation, handicap status, or genetic disposition.

If any of these factors are in play in your situation when you are let go from work, call me for a consultation.

If you have questions about Massachusetts employment law, consult an qualified Massachusetts employment lawyer before you take action.

Boston employment lawyer, Attorney Jack Merrill provides legal services to employees and employers throughout the Boston metro and Worcester County region including Ashland, Dedham, Framingham, Franklin, Hopkinton, Maynard, Marlborough, Milford, Natick, Needham, Newton, Shrewsbury, Sudbury, Waltham, and Worcester, Massachusetts.

Filed Under: Articles, Employee - Employment Law, Massachusetts Employment Law, Uncategorized, Wrongful Termination

Massachusetts Employment Law: How To Let Your Workers Go

June 9, 2009 By

One thing Massachusetts employers must understand is that you are free to do as you see fit with your employees. You can let them go for any reason, at any time, with or without cause. An employer does not need to be concerned about lawsuits as long as they have covered these three basic areas:

  1. Be sure your employees do not have contracts.
  2. Make sure you don’t discriminate against your employees. You need to look at how a worker was treated and whether or not he or she has made prior claims of discrimination. If they have made claimes, be careful,  retaliation is a viable cause for action.
  3. Pay them all wages they have earned and all money owed to them immediately.

For more discussion about “How To Let Your Workers Go“, watch my video:

If you have questions about an employee or any issue regarding Massachusetts employment law, consult an qualified Massachusetts employment lawyer before you take action.

Boston employment lawyer, Attorney Jack Merrill provides legal services to employees and employers throughout the Boston metro and Worcester County region including Ashland, Dedham, Framingham, Franklin, Hopkinton, Maynard, Marlborough, Milford, Natick, Needham, Newton, Shrewsbury, Sudbury, Waltham, and Worcester, Massachusetts.

Filed Under: Employer - Employment Law, Employment Law Videos, Massachusetts Employment Law, Video on Employment Law, Wages and Commissions, Wrongful Termination

COBRA Law Benefits Expanded

March 26, 2009 By

It’s commonly known as the “Stimulus Bill,” and is officially called the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009. This is the huge federal bill passed in February at the urging of President Barack Obama. While the overall idea was to stimulate the American economy, included in the bill’s details are unexpected benefits like the one that laid off employees will enjoy under COBRA. As most know, this federal law guarantees continued health care coverage for workers who lose their jobs, regardless of the reason. Under the Stimulus Bill, employers now must cover 65% of the COBRA premium for employees fired – or laid off, if that term is preferred, the distinction being meaningless in this context – between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009. This percentage must be paid for up to nine months, but applies only to periods of time between [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, COBRA, Employee - Employment Law, Employer - Employment Law, Massachusetts Employment Law

Massachusetts Attacks Independent Contractors

March 15, 2009 By

In 2004, Massachusetts changed its independent contractor law in a rather radical way. The amendment essentially banned the use of independent contractors in the Commonwealth, regardless whether workers and employers agreed that the arrangement made good business sense. The new law so narrowly defined who could and couldn’t be an independent contractor that most observers figured it represented a case of legislative over-drafting. How, after all, could the state have intended such a radical result when important segments of the business community had for so many years operated openly and productively under the independent contractor model?

Five years later, the anti-contractor law not only is unchanged but is being vigorously enforced under the leadership of Governor Deval Patrick. In 2008, he formed a joint task force to target violators of the independent contractor statute, calling them purveyors of an “underground economy” that underpays employees, reduces state tax revenues, and undermines safety laws. The task force’s mission statement takes an aggressive stand against what’s termed improper employee classification, which the Governor believes affects one in every seven Massachusetts workers. In its one year of existence, the task force has already launched hundreds of coordinated investigations and leveled numerous fines against Massachusetts employers. An anonymous tip line makes starting an [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, Independent Contractors, Massachusetts Employment Law

Massachusetts Employment Law: Take Care With Interview Questions

February 12, 2009 By

Job interview questions are an often overlooked area of discrimination law but one that can pack a real punch to the jaws of Massachusetts employers who get careless. Many don’t realize that screening out job candidates via seemingly innocent questions that may touch upon age, gender or religion is just as illegal as firing an employee because he’s handicapped. Both federal and state anti-discrimination agencies have produced detailed descriptions of what a job interviewer can say to a candidate and what he can’t. The wrong question can result in a lawsuit almost as easily as other acts of discrimination can.

In some cases, the damages can be quite high. In one, a car dealer was ordered to pay $100,000 to an applicant after it solicited his age on an application just by asking about his military service. The prospective employee never got an interview but sued because, he said, his 1959 [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, Employee - Employment Law, Employer - Employment Law, Massachusetts Employment Law

Recovery Act Requires Massachusetts Employers To Pay Cobra Costs

January 14, 2009 By

Most people probably wouldn’t associate a $700 billion-plus economic recovery bill with the plight of former employees who need to make hefty health insurance payments. Then again, most people don’t think like members of the U.S. Congress. Among the many lesser publicized aspects of the latest mega-bill, passed in February 2009, is a requirement that employers who fire employees between September 1, 2008 and December 31, 2009 pay 65% of their former workers’ health care costs under COBRA for a period of up to nine months.

The benefits payments don’t kick in until February 17, 2009, but workers let go before that date can still enjoy coverage. Under the new law, employers must make the payments first and recoup them through tax credits at year end. COBRA is the federal law that provides for continued health care coverage to employees who lose their jobs, regardless of the reason for separation. Under the 2009 bill, the 65% benefit also applies [Read more...]

Filed Under: Articles, Employee - Employment Law, Employer - Employment Law, Massachusetts Employment Law