Royal

Unemployment Solvency Fix passed by the MA House of Representatives

May 19, 2021

On May 18, 2021, the Massachusetts House of Representatives passed legislation to address the overwhelming Unemployment Insurance bills employers received in April. The plan would reduce the solvency assessment rate from 9.23% to 1.12% by shifting COVID related claims into a new account to be paid down over a period of 20 years. Payment of the first-quarter UI bill would be pushed back to July 31st when the second-quarter bills will also be due. Employers who already paid their first-quarter bill would be given a tax credit for the difference.


The House’s plan does not use any of the federal relief money to offset the long-term deficits in State’s unemployment trust. So, while this plan is an important first step in relieving the short-term burden on employers, industry groups continue to urge the State to use federal relief funds to refill the unemployment trust, which was depleted by the COVID crisis.


The plan would also require employers to provide sick leave to employees who are sick with COVID or are getting vaccinated. The sick leave would be capped at 40 hours with a maximum benefit of $850. Employers would then be reimbursed through state funds.


After August 1st, the system will go back to charging new COVID related unemployment claims directly to employers.


The Senate will likely take up the bill later this week. 


If you have any questions about this topic or any other labor and employment law matters, please feel free to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

January 15, 2025
An employer brought counterclaims of malicious prosecution and abuse-of-process in response to a Wage Act suit brought by an employee. The Appeals Court cited that the employer’s counterclaims should have been dismissed under the anti-SLAPP (Strategic Lawsuits Against Public Participation) law. Anti-SLAPP laws are meant to provide parties with a way to quickly dismiss meritless lawsuits filed against them, usually in response to a lawsuit. The plaintiff in this case, an hourly laborer, claimed that his employer violated the Wage Act by failing to pay him for four of the six weeks he worked for them. The employer refuted these allegations, stating that the employee had only worked for two weeks, that he had been paid in full and then brought counterclaims of malicious prosecution and abuse of process. The District Court judge denied the plaintiff’s motion to dismiss the counterclaims under the anti-SLAPP law. When brought to the Appeals Court, the decision was reversed; the Appeals Court stated that the defendants did not meet the burden of showing that plaintiff’s claims lacked an objectively reasonable factual basis. This ruling suggests that it might behoove an employer to pause and wait to see if a plaintiff’s Wage Act claim fails before filing a counterclaim of abuse of process or malicious prosecution in response.  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.
January 8, 2025
Attorney Trevor Brice hosted a seminar on Wednesday, January 8, 2025, discussing the possible issues with current compensation plans and contingent compensation pitfalls made possible by recent court rulings. Some of the topics discussed included: Issues with current compensation plans under the FLSA Restrictive Covenants and Compensation Plans Problems with Commission-Based Compensation Plans and Possible Solutions When a Bonus is not actually a bonus and issues under the Massachusetts Wage Act This seminar was perfect for H.R. professionals and anyone in a management position. Please feel free to contact any of the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm if you have any questions on this topic!
Share by: