A Firefighters union proposes a new benefit, night differential, at 2% the first year, then 3% the second year, and 4% the third year of a 3-year contract (the “differential” is to be paid for all hours, daytime too). When the case heads to arbitration, the Union submits a proposal for a 9% night differential [...]
The Supreme Judicial Court has ruled that a municipality cannot require an employee to work for it a minimum number of years prior to retirement as a condition of that municipality contributing toward the cost of the employee’s retiree health insurance. As long as the employee is eligible for retirement benefits under c. 32, the [...]
It has been four years since the Commonwealth Employment Relations Board ("CERB") took the view that municipal employers have a duty to bargain health insurance contribution rates of certain retirees, i.e. current employees who will retire in the future. Under CERB’s logic, an employer could unilaterally alter the health insurance contribution rate of persons already [...]
On January 7, 2015, in one of his last acts as governor, Deval Patrick signed into law “An Act Relative to Parental Leave”, which expands the Massachusetts Maternity Leave Act (“MMLA”) (M.G.L. c. 149, §105D) and makes it gender neutral. The MMLA requires employers with six or more employees to provide full-time female employees of [...]
On November 4, 2014, Massachusetts voters passed Ballot Question 4, providing earned paid sick leave for employees. Effective July 1, 2015, employers with 11 or more employees will be required to allow all employees to accrue and use up to 40 hours of paid sick leave per calendar year. As it now stands, for purposes [...]
On August 8, 2014, Governor Patrick signed the “Act Relative to Domestic Violence” which requires an employer of fifty or more employees to provide fifteen days of leave to an employee who is a victim of domestic violence, or one who is needed to care for a family member (spouse, child, parent, grandparent, grandchild, or [...]
A majority of the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that DOMA’s attempt to supersede a state’s decision to recognize same-sex marriage was a deprivation of due process and the principles of equal protection under the law.