Mass-Peculiarities: An Employers Guide to Wage & Hour Law in the Bay State 2022 Edition

158 | Massachusetts Wage & Hour Peculiarities, 2022 ed. © 2022 Seyfarth Shaw LLP The Office of the Massachusetts Attorney General enforces the law and may seek a fine of not less than $500 and not more than $2,500 per violation. 939 In addition, the SJC has held that terminating an employee for filing a written response to a personnel record violates the public policy exception to at-will employment and that an employee could sue for wrongful termination in that circumstance. 940 An individual employee also has the right to seek a judicial determination of whether a document qualifies as a “personnel record.” 941 B. Temporary Workers Right to Know Law On January 31, 2013, “An Act Establishing a Temporary Workers Right to Know” went into effect in Massachusetts. 942 The law requires “staffing agencies” to provide temporary employees with comprehensive, individualized, pre-employment information regarding each new work assignment (“notice requirements”), limits the fees and costs for which staffing agencies and work site employers may charge temporary employees, and requires staffing agencies to reimburse temporary employees sent to work sites where no work is available for the full cost of transportation. 943 In December 2014, the DLS issued “Employment Agency and Temporary Workers Right To Know Regulations” to carry out the provisions of the law. 944 The regulations define “staffing agencies” subject to the law and distinguish “staffing agencies” from “employment agencies,” which are subject to their own regulations, in the following manner: • A “staffing agency” is defined as an individual or company “that procures or provides temporary or part-time employment to an individual who then works under the supervision or direction of a worksite employer.” 945 • An “employment agency” is defined as a “person, business or entity engaged in the business, or organized for the purpose, of procuring or attempting to procure permanent or temporary help, employment or engagements.” The regulations expressly exclude individuals or companies “employing individuals directly for the 939 M.G.L. ch. 149, § 52C. 940 See Meehan v. Medical Information Technologies, Inc. , SJC-13117, 2021 WL 5990887 (Dec. 17, 2021). Under the public policy except ion, it is unlawful for an employer to terminate an employee in cont ravention of a well-defined public policy. In Meehan , the SJC explained that the right of employees to submit a writ ten statement in response to a personnel record is a legally guaranteed right of employment and a mat ter of public significance. 941 See Kessler v. Cambridge Health Alliance , 62 Mass. App. Ct . 589, 597 (2004). 942 M.G.L. ch. 149, § 159C. 943 Id. 944 454 C.M.R. § 24.00. 945 454 C.M.R. § 24.02.