When Does a Competitive Business Practice Become Actionable under Chapter 93A, § 11?

2019-04-08T17:09:46+00:00 April 8th, 2019|Categories: Business Litigation, Johanna Matloff, Julie L. Martin, Laws & Regulations, Litigation|Tags: , , |

Chapter 93A, § 11 provides a right of action to persons engaged in business who suffer a loss of money or property as a result of unfair methods of competition, or unfair or deceptive acts or practices, used by another business in Massachusetts. An aggrieved business may recover its actual

First Circuit Joins Sister Circuits Approving Burden-Shifting Approach to Proving Causation in ERISA Fiduciary-Breach Claims

2018-11-06T20:26:12+00:00 November 6th, 2018|Categories: Johanna Matloff, Laws & Regulations|Tags: |

Ordinarily, the burden of proof rests with the plaintiff. However, in Brotherston v. Putnam Investments, LLC, the First Circuit joined three of its sister circuit courts and held that the burden of proof in an ERISA fiduciary-breach case shifts to the defendant fiduciary to prove that its breach did not

EEOC Issues Two New Publications Discussing Workplace Rights of Persons with HIV

2017-01-13T17:39:37+00:00 April 5th, 2016|Categories: Adam M. Santeusanio, Johanna Matloff, MCAD & EEOC|

According to a December 2015 press release, in Fiscal Year 2014 alone, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (“EEOC”) resolved approximately 200 charges of discrimination based on HIV status, resulting in over $825,000 for job applicants and employees with HIV who were unlawfully denied employment or reasonable accommodations. See December 1, 2015 EEOC Press Release.

Who’s in Charge? Burgers, Donuts, & the Bona Fide Executive Exemption to the FLSA’s Overtime Pay Requirements

2017-01-13T17:12:22+00:00 February 3rd, 2016|Categories: Adam M. Santeusanio, FLSA, Johanna Matloff, Laws & Regulations, Wage & Hour|

The First Circuit recently held that a material factual dispute existed as to whether store managers employed by Dunkin’ Donuts qualified as “bona fide executives” under the Fair Labor Standards Act (“FLSA”), and as such, were exempt from the FLSA’s overtime requirements. Marzuq v. Cadete Enters., 807 F.3d 431 (1st Cir. 2015) (hereinafter Dunkin’

Third Circuit Adopts “Predominant Benefit Test” for Meal Break Compensation under Fair Labor Standards Act

2017-01-13T17:14:10+00:00 December 22nd, 2015|Categories: Adam M. Santeusanio, FLSA, Human Resources Compliance, Johanna Matloff, Wage & Hour|

David works in a secretarial position for a very busy office. At least once a week, while David is trying to enjoy his lunch, his boss bursts through the door and leaves David with a pile of work to finish during his lunch break. While this scenario may seem routine in a busy workplace, employers

Classifying Individuals as Independent Contractors or Employees

2017-01-13T17:15:45+00:00 November 4th, 2015|Categories: Adam M. Santeusanio, Human Resources Compliance, Independent Contractor, Johanna Matloff, Labor Law & NLRB, Laws & Regulations, Wage & Hour|

Introduction Most employers will, at some point, have occasion to consider whether an individual who performs services for the employer is an “independent contractor” or an “employee.” How an employer classifies an individual is crucial to the employer’s compliance with wage and hour laws, discrimination statutes, workers’ compensation requirements, mandatory affirmative action programs, and a

Noncompete Reform – A Non-Issue?

2017-01-13T17:21:43+00:00 June 19th, 2015|Categories: Human Resources Compliance, Johanna Matloff, Noncompete Agreements, Wage & Hour|

An arcane provision in Chapter 149 of the Massachusetts General Laws states that “No person shall, by intimidation or force, prevent or seek to prevent a person from entering into or continuing in the employment of any person.” G. L. c. 149, § 19. Representative Lori A. Erlich (D-Marblehead) and others filed bills in the