© 2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP Massachusetts Wage & Hour Peculiarities, 2025 ed. | 139 The wage and hour laws set forth in M.G.L. ch. 149 The minimum wage law set forth in M.G.L. ch. 151 and 455 C.M.R. § 2.01 The overtime law set forth in M.G.L. ch. 151 The law requiring employers to provide health insurance to migrant farm workers, as set forth in M.G.L. ch. 151, § 2B The law requiring employers to keep true and accurate employee payroll records, and to furnish the records to the Attorney General upon request, as set forth in M.G.L. ch. 151, § 15 The provisions requiring employers to withhold taxes on employee wages, as set forth in M.G.L. ch. 62B The workers’ compensation provisions punishing knowing misclassification of an employee, as set forth in M.G.L. ch. 152, § 14819 Even if an employer misclassifies an employee as an independent contractor, the employer is not liable for damages under the Independent Contractor Statute, so long as in doing so it does not violate any of the above wage and hour laws.820 In practice, it is unlikely that an employer misclassifying an individual would comply with all of the wage and hour provisions set forth above. The SJC has defined “damages incurred” under the statute as an amount equal to the full value of wages and benefits that the wrongly classified individual would have received as an employee.821 If an individual prevails in a suit for a violation of the Independent Contractor Statute and demonstrates a violation of the wage and hour laws as a result of the misclassification, he or she generally is entitled to recover treble damages, as well as litigation costs and reasonable attorneys’ fees. In a misclassification case that does not involve a failure to pay wages, an employer is liable only for fees it was required by law to bear, such as liability insurance and workers’ compensation insurance or potentially certain expenses incurred by the contractor in the course of his or her work for the employer.822 This is true even if the misclassified employee agreed to pay those fees and 819 Massachusetts Attorney General Advisory 2008/1, at 4. 820 But see Awuah I, 707 F. Supp. 2d at 85 (granting employee’s motion for partial summary judgment on independent contractor misclassification claim and reserving damages issue for later proceedings). 821 Somers v. Converged Access, Inc., 454 Mass. 582, 584 (2009) (Somers II). In Somers II, the SJC held that the plaintiff may sue for nonpayment of wages based on misclassification as an independent contractor—even though he earned more as an independent contractor than he would have earned as an employee—because he was not paid the “full value” of wages and benefits that he would have received as an employee. Id. 822 Awuah v. Coverall N. Am., Inc., 460 Mass. 484, 494-97 (2011) (Awuah III) (holding that employers violate the Wage Act by deducting the costs of workers’ compensation and other mandatory insurance coverage from misclassified employees’ pay). Chargebacks deducted when customers paid their bills late were also recoverable as damages because this practice violated the timely payment of wages law, M.G.L. ch. 149, § 148. Id. at 491-93 (holding that employee “earns” his wages at the time he performs work and must be paid within seven days of that date). While the employer repaid these chargebacks prior to litigation,
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4