Where plaintiff employees commenced a putative class action claiming to be owed Sunday pay under G.L.c. 136, §6(50), a grant of summary judgment in the defendant employer’s favor must be vacated because the statutory exemptions for beauty and massage therapy services did not apply to ancillary retail sales engaged in by the plaintiffs.
“… Prior to January 1, 2023, G.L.c. 136, §6(50), as amended through St. 2018, c. 121, §§5-8, required certain employers that sold goods at retail to pay employees premium pay for hours worked on Sunday (Sunday pay). This case presents the question whether an employer who principally provided beauty and massage therapy services, which are exempted or permitted activities that did not require Sunday pay, see G.L.c. 136, §6(54), (54 1/2), may still have been required to pay Sunday pay to employees engaged in ancillary retail sales before that requirement was phased out. Because the statutory exemptions for beauty and massage therapy services do not allow the retail sale of goods on Sunday, and because the employer was a ‘store or shop’ as used in §6(50), which authorized the retail sale of goods subject to the Sunday pay requirement, we vacate the order allowing summary judgment in favor of the employer. …
“In arguing that no Sunday pay was required, the employer relies on exemptions that allow businesses to offer beauty and massage therapy services on Sunday. … These exemptions allow certain types of business activities to be performed....
Nonprofit fraud is in the news a lot these days. Federal investigators in Minnesota prosecuted one of the largest alleged COVID-19 pandemic fraud schemes, in which several nonprofits and individua...