© 2025 Seyfarth Shaw LLP Massachusetts Wage & Hour Peculiarities, 2025 ed. | 185 grievance process, she could not pursue her claim for overtime on a contractual basis in court. Id. at 776-778. However, a few weeks later, in Parris v. Sheriff of Suffolk County, a majority of the Appeals Court explained that the timely payment of wages was an independent statutory right of the plaintiffs that could be enforced personally in court, even though the collective bargaining agreement addressed the subject and their claims were premised on the language in the agreement.1157 Two judges dissented from the decision, opining that plaintiffs’ claims were premised on language in the CBA and that the dispute “must be resolved, in the first instance through the mechanism provided for in the CBA.”1158 Notably, the contractual language at issue in Parris conflicted with the timing of payment under the Wage Act. The union agreed in the CBA that overtime was to be paid within 25 days of the month in which the time was worked (as opposed to six or seven days after the pay period in which the time was worked, the default under the statute).1159 The Appeals Court held that the union had the power to negotiate a different payment schedule because the Wage Act specifically permits state employees to request payment in a different manner.1160 Thus, the plaintiffs’ claim under the Wage Act claim was limited to whether the defendant had violated the 25-day payment provision set forth in the CBA. C. What Forms of Compensation In A CBA Can Be a Wage Under the Wage Act? CBAs often provide for payments to employees that go beyond what the law requires. Some CBAs provide for “contractual” overtime, meaning, for example, premium pay for work beyond eight hours in a single day. Some CBAs also provide for differentials for working certain shifts or additional payments for doing certain tasks. These types of payments are above and beyond regular weekly wages and statutory overtime. The employer’s obligation to make these payments is solely a creature of the collective bargaining agreement. There is an argument that these types of payments are not “wages” within the meaning of the Wage Act. The Massachusetts courts have made clear that the Wage Act does not encompass forms of compensation not expressly enumerated in the statute.1161 Thus, to the extent that a plaintiff alleges that an employer violated the Wage Act by failing to make some payment 1157 93 Mass. App. Ct. 864, 869, 873 (2018); see also Newton v. Comm. of the Dep’t of Youth Services, 62 Mass. App. Ct. 343 (2004) (plaintiffs’ claims for overtime and unpaid wages were independent statutory claims that could be enforced judicially even though premised on languages in a CBA). 1158 93 Mass. App. at 877. 1159 See M.G.L. ch. 149, § 148. 1160 Parris, 93 Mass. App. at 869. 1161 See, e.g., Mui v. MassPort, 478 Mass. 710, 712 (2018) (sick pay not wages); Weems v. Citigroup, Inc., 453 Mass. 147, 155156 (2009) (discretionary bonuses and unvested restricted stock not wages); Boston Police Patrolmen’s Ass’n, Inc. v. City of Boston, 435 Mass. 718, 720-721 (2002) (deferred compensation not “wages”); Prozinski v. Northeast Real Estate Servs., LLC, 59 Mass. App. Ct. 599, 603-605 (2003) (severance pay not “wages”).
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy OTkwMTQ4