Massachusetts Becomes 11th State to Adopt a Pay Transparency Law

August 7, 2024

On July 31, 2024, Massachusetts became the 11th state to adopt a pay transparency act when Governor Maura Healy signed “An Act Relative to Salary Range Transparency" into law. This law will take effect on July 31, 2025 with a portion of it beginning February 1, 2025.


Under this law, Massachusetts employers with 25 or more employees will be required to include salary range information on all job postings and provide this information to both applicants and current employees regarding their positions. Additionally, employers with more than 100 employees will need to disclose demographic and pay data to the Commonwealth by filing an annual wage report, known as an aggregate wage data report, with the state Executive Office of Labor and Workforce Development. Although these reports will not be public record, the Commonwealth will compile the data into an aggregate report, broken down by industry, which will be posted on the Department of Labor and Workforce Development’s website no later than July 1 each year, starting in 2025.


The purpose of this law is to promote pay transparency and protect workers’ rights by ensuring they have access to salary range information, whether they are applying for a new position, seeking a promotion, or facing a transfer within their current organization.


Key Dates to Remember

Employers must implement two key practices:

1.     By February 1, 2025, employers with 100 or more employees must submit their pay data to the Commonwealth.

2.     By July 31, 2025, all employers with 25 employees or more must ensure that salary or wage information is included in all job postings. Failure to comply may result in fines or citations.


Prepare Early

Although the effective dates may seem distant, it is crucial to prepare in advance. Employers should establish pay ranges for each position and integrate these ranges into job postings as a standard practice. To proactively address potential issues, employers should also consider conducting a pay equity audit to identify and address any existing pay disparities that could impact the business.   


Employers should consult with their employment counsel to develop a plan to avoid fines or citations. The Attorney General will have the authority to enforce this law through fines and/or civil citations. Initial violations will be subject to warnings, with subsequent offenses incurring fines ranging from $500 to $25,000 for a fourth or any subsequent offenses.


If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

April 18, 2025
Employee's Wage Act Claim Case Overview : In Turgut v. Hitachi Rail STS USA, Inc., Plaintiff filed a putative class action against a company, Defendant, alleging violation of the Wage Act by not paying wages within six days of the pay period's end. Defendant argued that its employees fell under the exception that allowed seven days for payment; however that exception only applies to hourly workers that work all seven days of a work week. The plaintiff is looking to represent a class of employees that received W-2 wages in what he alleges was in an untimely manner. The case was originally filed in state court on February 20, 2025 but was moved to federal court. Reason for Treble Damages: Under Rueter v. City of Methuen, the seminal case regarding the Massachusetts Wage Act (“Wage Act”), the proper measure of damages under the Wage Act is treble damages. Previously employees were only entitled to interest on the unpaid wages if the company paid before proceedings started. It kept noncompliance from being as costly as it is now. Currently any violation can be subjected to treble damages for the total amount of the alleged late payment. It’s expected that we will see more cases pick up by attorneys because the treble damages make it worthwhile for their clients as well as themselves, given this recent ruling. Judge's Ruling : The Judge ruled that the six-day deadline applies. The Judge stated that while the complaint didn’t make it clear if plaintiff is hourly or salary, plaintiff only worked five days a week, meaning that the seven-day exception did not apply as the Wage Act was written. Legal Implications Legislative History : The Wage Act provides different deadlines for an employee’s final pay based on the number of days worked in a week. This case also emphasizes that having salaried workers on staff does not fulfill the requirement of having employees work seven days a week. Significance of One Day : The judge emphasized that even a single day's delay in payment can significantly impact employees living paycheck to paycheck. What Employers need to know Make sure you’re aware of your employees’ pay cycle and make compliance a company priority. It’s more cost effective to pay a day or two earlier than it is to head to court over claims of violations. This ruling expands on the Reuter ruling by clarifying the Wage Act rules in relation to hourly employees. If an hourly employee resigns, ensure that automatic payment systems (as well as the employer’s own internal pay systems) are aligned with the requirements of this ruling. If your business has any questions on this topic or any other matters, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.
April 10, 2025
Though the Difference Makers event has come to a close, let's continue to shine a light on the transformative power of giving back to our community! Every year, The Royal Law Firm is humbled to be a part of this incredible event that spotlights the brightest stars in our community. We can't wait to celebrate the 2026 Difference Makers and the boundless impact they'll have!