Massachusetts — Wage & Hour

Massachusetts wage and hour law is principally codified in M.G.L. c. 151 ("Minimum Fair Wages"), which establishes the state minimum wage and overtime requirements, and M.G.L. c. 149, § 148, which governs timing and manner of wage payment. The Attorney General's Fair Labor Division enforces these statutes and related workplace protections.

Source: M.G.L. c. 151; M.G.L. c. 149, § 148; Attorney General's Fair Labor Division

Massachusetts law establishes a minimum wage of $15.00 per hour for employees in any occupation. Any wage below this amount is conclusively presumed to be oppressive and unreasonable. This rate took effect January 1, 2023, as the final step in a multi-year increase enacted in 2018, and remains unchanged as of 2026. Massachusetts law also provides that the state minimum wage "shall [not] be less than $.50 higher than the effective federal minimum rate."

Source: M.G.L. c. 151, § 1

Massachusetts requires employers to pay overtime compensation at one and one-half times the employee's regular hourly rate for all hours worked in excess of 40 in a workweek. M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A establishes this requirement, and the implementing regulation, 454 CMR 27.03(3), specifies that the regular hourly rate "not to be less than the basic minimum wage." Unlike some states (notably California), Massachusetts does not mandate daily overtime; the 40-hour threshold is measured on a weekly basis only.

Calculation of the regular rate. For non-hourly employees, the regular hourly rate is determined by dividing the employee's total weekly compensation by the total hours worked in that week. For tipped employees paid at the service rate ($6.75 per hour), the overtime rate is calculated at 1.5 times the basic minimum wage ($15.00), not 1.5 times the service rate, yielding an overtime rate of $22.50 per hour.

Commissions, bonuses, and overtime calculation. Massachusetts law contains two distinct rules governing how commissions, bonuses, and similar payments interact with overtime:

First, M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A provides that "[s]ums paid as commissions, drawing accounts, bonuses, or other incentive pay based on sales or production, shall be excluded in computing the regular rate and the overtime rate of compensation under the provisions of this section." This statutory provision excludes sales-based and production-based commissions and bonuses from the denominator when calculating an employee's regular rate of pay, meaning those payments do not dilute the per-hour rate used to compute the overtime multiplier.

Second, 454 CMR 27.03(3) addresses whether base compensation—regardless of how structured—may be credited toward the overtime premium owed. The regulation provides: "Whether a nonexempt employee is paid on an hourly, piece work, salary, or any other basis, such payments shall not serve to compensate the employee for any portion of the overtime rate for hours worked over 40 in a work week," except that this limitation applies only to the "one-half" portion of the overtime rate (one and "one-half" times an employee's regular hourly rate) when overtime is determined on a bona fide fluctuating workweek basis. In other words, an employer who pays a salary or other non-hourly compensation cannot treat that pay as satisfying the overtime premium for hours over 40; the employer must pay the overtime rate separately.

These rules were reinforced by the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court in Sutton v. Jordan's Furniture, Inc., 493 Mass. 728 (2024), which held that an employer violated the Wage Act by paying overtime and Sunday premium pay out of earned commissions rather than separately. The Sutton case involved conduct from 2016–2019, when retail Sunday premium pay was still required under Massachusetts blue laws. Although Sunday and holiday premium pay for retail workers was eliminated effective January 1, 2023, under the "Grand Bargain" legislation (St. 2018, c. 121, as amended by St. 2020, c. 358), the Sutton holding remains relevant because it establishes the broader principle that overtime pay (and premium pay, when owed) cannot be satisfied by paying from earned commissions. Massachusetts retail employers are no longer required to pay premium pay for Sunday or holiday work, though the voluntariness provisions of M.G.L. c. 136 remain in effect—employers with more than seven employees may not require employees to work on Sundays or certain holidays, and refusal to work those shifts cannot be grounds for discrimination, dismissal, discharge, reduction in hours, or any other penalty.

Exemptions. M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A contains a lengthy list of occupational and industry-specific exemptions, including employees in hospitals, sanatoriums, convalescent or nursing homes (subsection 16); employees in seasonal businesses operating 120 days or fewer per year (subsection 9); janitors or caretakers of residential property who are furnished living quarters and paid at least $30 per week (subsection 1); bona fide executive, administrative, and professional employees (subsection 3); and others. For the executive, administrative, and professional exemptions, 454 CMR 27.03(3) incorporates by reference the federal definitions under 29 C.F.R. Part 541, meaning Massachusetts follows the federal duties tests and (generally) the federal salary thresholds, though the state statute sets a floor of $80 per week for professional persons and qualified trainees for executive, administrative, and professional positions. Because many of the state-law exemptions do not align with federal FLSA exemptions, employers must evaluate both statutes; the more protective standard applies.

Workweek definition. The workweek is a fixed, regularly recurring period of 168 consecutive hours (seven consecutive 24-hour periods). The employer may designate any day and time as the start of the workweek, and it need not align with a calendar week.

Enforcement and penalties. M.G.L. c. 151, § 1B provides for treble damages as liquidated damages for unpaid overtime, along with costs and reasonable attorney's fees for a prevailing employee. The three-year statute of limitations under the Massachusetts Wage Act is longer than the FLSA's standard two-year period. An agreement between employee and employer to work for less than the statutory overtime rate is not a defense to a wage claim.

Source: M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A; M.G.L. c. 151, § 1B; 454 CMR 27.03; Sutton v. Jordan's Furniture, Inc., 493 Mass. 728 (2024); St. 2018, c. 121 (Grand Bargain legislation); M.G.L. c. 136, § 6

Massachusetts establishes a separate, lower minimum wage for employees in agriculture and farming under M.G.L. c. 151, § 2A. A wage of less than $8.00 per hour in agriculture and farming is conclusively presumed to be oppressive and unreasonable. This rate is $7.00 per hour below the standard minimum wage of $15.00 per hour established by M.G.L. c. 151, § 1, and has remained unchanged at $8.00 per hour while the general minimum wage has increased over time.

Scope — what constitutes "agriculture and farming." Section 2A applies to "any person in agriculture and farming" in Massachusetts. The statute itself does not define those terms, but M.G.L. c. 151, § 2 defines "agricultural and farm work" as "labor on a farm and the growing and harvesting of agricultural, floricultural and horticultural commodities." The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court, in Arias-Villano v. Chang & Sons Enterprises, Inc., 481 Mass. 625 (2019), interpreted this definition narrowly and held that the agricultural exemption applies only to planting, growing, and harvesting—not to post-harvesting activities such as cleaning, inspecting, sorting, weighing, packaging, cleaning a facility, or discarding waste. The Court emphasized that Massachusetts's agricultural definition is narrower than the federal FLSA definition, which encompasses post-harvest preparation for market.

The Massachusetts Department of Labor Standards issued an opinion letter (MW-2020-04-27-20) following Chang & Sons to clarify the line between harvesting and post-harvesting. The letter confirms that once crops are harvested, activities such as sorting, weighing, packaging, and preparing for distribution are not "agricultural and farm work" under Massachusetts law, even if performed on a farm by the same workforce that harvested the crops. Workers engaged in these post-harvest activities are employed in an "occupation" (as defined in M.G.L. c. 151, § 2) and are entitled to both the standard $15.00 minimum wage and overtime protection under § 1A.

Whether a particular employee is engaged in agriculture and farming is a fact-specific question that turns on the tasks the employee performs. Employees who exclusively plant, grow, and harvest crops fall within the agricultural definition under § 2A and § 2. Employees who perform post-harvest processing, even on a farm, do not. Employees whose workweek includes both types of work must be paid the applicable wage for each type of work; the Chang & Sons opinion letter indicates that hours spent in post-harvest activities are "occupation" hours subject to the standard minimum wage and overtime rules.

Family and youth exemptions. The $8.00 agricultural minimum wage does not apply when the wage is paid to (1) a child seventeen years of age or under, or (2) a parent, spouse, child, or other member of the employer's immediate family. For these categories of workers, no statutory minimum wage applies under § 2A, though federal law may impose the FLSA minimum ($7.25 per hour for covered agricultural workers) where applicable.

Interaction with federal law. Agricultural employers covered by the federal Fair Labor Standards Act must comply with the federal minimum wage of $7.25 per hour for agricultural employees. Because the Massachusetts agricultural rate of $8.00 per hour is higher, covered agricultural workers in Massachusetts engaged in planting, growing, and harvesting are entitled to the state rate under the general rule that an employee subject to both state and federal minimum wage laws receives the higher of the two. Workers engaged in post-harvest activities, however, are entitled to the full $15.00 Massachusetts minimum wage, not the $8.00 agricultural rate.

Overtime — planting, growing, and harvesting are exempt; post-harvest work is not. M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A requires employers to pay overtime at 1.5 times the regular rate for hours worked over 40 in a workweek but contains a lengthy list of exempted occupations and industries. Section 1A does not explicitly list agriculture or farming among the enumerated exemptions, but the statute applies only to employees in an "occupation, as defined in section two," and § 2 excludes "agricultural and farm work" from the definition of "occupation." Historically, this structure was understood to exempt all agricultural workers from Massachusetts overtime, and the Department of Labor Standards' wage-and-hour poster stated that agricultural workers are not entitled to overtime under state law.

However, Chang & Sons fundamentally changed this analysis by holding that the agricultural exclusion is limited to planting, growing, and harvesting. Workers engaged in post-harvest activities are employed in an "occupation" under § 2 and therefore are entitled to overtime under § 1A. The DLS opinion letter (MW-2020-04-27-20) confirmed this interpretation: agricultural workers who clean, inspect, sort, weigh, package, or otherwise process harvested crops must be paid overtime at 1.5 times their regular rate for hours over 40 in a workweek, even if the work is performed on a farm. The federal FLSA exempts most agricultural workers from overtime under 29 U.S.C. § 213(b)(12), but Massachusetts law is more protective for post-harvest workers and applies regardless of the federal exemption.

For employees whose workweek includes both exempt agricultural work (planting, growing, harvesting) and non-exempt post-harvest work, the DLS opinion letter indicates that only the hours spent in planting, growing, and harvesting are exempt from overtime; hours spent in post-harvest activities count toward the 40-hour threshold and trigger overtime obligations.

No scheduled increases. Unlike the standard minimum wage, which increased in steps from 2019 through 2023 pursuant to the Grand Bargain legislation (St. 2018, c. 121), the agricultural minimum wage has remained at $8.00 per hour and is not subject to automatic indexing or scheduled increases. Any increase to the agricultural minimum wage would require separate legislative action.

Enforcement. Section 2A declares that it is against public policy to employ any person in agriculture and farming at an oppressive and unreasonable wage, and any contract, agreement, or understanding for such employment is null and void. Violations of the agricultural minimum wage are enforceable under M.G.L. c. 151, § 20, which provides for recovery of unpaid wages plus an equal amount as liquidated damages, along with costs and reasonable attorney's fees for a prevailing employee. The statute of limitations is three years. The Attorney General's Fair Labor Division enforces the agricultural minimum wage under the same framework as the standard minimum wage.

Source: M.G.L. c. 151, § 2A; M.G.L. c. 151, § 2; M.G.L. c. 151, § 1; M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A; M.G.L. c. 151, § 20; Agricultural overtime opinion letter MW-2020-04-27-20, Mass.gov; Massachusetts law about minimum wage, Mass.gov

Massachusetts law exempts certain restaurant and hotel employees from the state's overtime requirements, creating a significant divergence from federal law. Under M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A, the statute that establishes the general 40-hour weekly overtime threshold, two industry-specific exemptions exclude employees who are "employed in a restaurant" and those "employed in a hotel, motel, motor court or like establishment" from the state overtime mandate. These exemptions are enumerated among approximately 20 categories of workers excluded from Massachusetts overtime protection, including outside salespeople, agricultural workers, hospital employees, and seasonal workers.

Scope and application. The exemptions apply based on where and how the employee works, not merely whether the work touches a restaurant or hotel facility. Massachusetts courts apply a "plain and unmistakable" standard when construing these exemptions. Federal district courts interpreting Massachusetts law have emphasized that the exemption does not automatically cover all workers whose duties relate to a restaurant or hotel. For example, a maintenance technician who traveled between multiple restaurant locations performing repair work and reported to a regional manager—rather than working at a single restaurant in a traditional hospitality role—was found not to fall plainly and unmistakably within the restaurant-employee exemption. The exemption is most clearly applicable to workers in traditional hospitality roles—hosts, servers, cooks, dishwashers, front-desk staff, housekeeping—who work at a single establishment.

Employees whose work is ancillary to the restaurant or hotel operation, who work across multiple locations, or whose job duties are not tied to the core hospitality function face a substantial risk that a reviewing court will find the exemption inapplicable. The employer bears the burden of proving that the exemption plainly and unmistakably applies.

Federal FLSA overtime still applies. The Massachusetts exemptions do not relieve employers of their federal overtime obligations. The Fair Labor Standards Act does not contain industry-wide exemptions for restaurant or hotel workers; instead, it applies the standard 40-hour threshold and the same white-collar exemptions (executive, administrative, professional, outside sales) to hospitality employers as to other industries. Consequently, a line cook working 50 hours per week at a Massachusetts restaurant has no entitlement to overtime under state law but remains entitled to overtime at 1.5 times the regular rate under the FLSA, provided the employer meets the FLSA's enterprise-coverage threshold (generally $500,000 in annual gross volume) or the employee individually engages in interstate commerce.

When an employee is exempt under Massachusetts law but covered by federal law, the federal standard applies, and the employer must pay overtime. When both state and federal law require overtime, the employee receives whichever protection is more favorable—typically the same 1.5× rate, but Massachusetts provides stronger remedies (treble damages under M.G.L. c. 151, § 1B versus double liquidated damages under the FLSA, and a three-year statute of limitations versus the FLSA's standard two-year period).

Enforcement implications. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held in Devaney v. Zucchini Gold LLC, 488 Mass. 616 (2021), that restaurant workers exempt from state overtime under § 1A who sue solely under the FLSA cannot recover the enhanced remedies of the Massachusetts Wage Act (treble damages, mandatory attorney's fees, and the three-year statute of limitations). They are limited to the remedies Congress prescribed in the FLSA. The Devaney holding means that employers of restaurant and hotel workers in Massachusetts face lower damages exposure for overtime violations than employers in industries without a state-law exemption, because the state's automatic treble-damages penalty does not apply to purely federal overtime claims.

Other § 1A exemptions. Section 1A also exempts from state overtime requirements employees in hospitals, sanatoriums, convalescent and nursing homes; employees of gasoline stations; employees in seasonal businesses operating 120 days or fewer per year; certain agricultural workers; and other enumerated categories. Each exemption is construed narrowly under the plain-and-unmistakable standard.

Cross-reference. For the general Massachusetts overtime rule and calculation mechanics, see the "Overtime — 40-hour weekly threshold and 1.5× rate" section of this guide. For the federal FLSA overtime floor, see the United States — Wage & Hour guide.

Source: M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A; M.G.L. c. 151, § 1B; Massachusetts law about overtime, Mass.gov

Massachusetts law establishes strict timing requirements for wage payments under M.G.L. c. 149, § 148. The statute distinguishes between regular payroll cycles and final paychecks upon separation, and recent Massachusetts case law confirms that even a single day's delay triggers automatic treble damages under the Massachusetts Wage Act.

Regular payroll — weekly or bi-weekly only. Employers must pay employees weekly or bi-weekly. Monthly and semi-monthly pay periods are not permitted for most employees. Within those weekly or bi-weekly cycles, the payment deadline depends on the employee's workweek:

• Five- or six-day workweek: Wages must be paid within six days of the termination of the pay period.
• Seven-day workweek: Wages must be paid within seven days of the termination of the pay period.
• Casual employees (fewer than five days worked): Wages must be paid within seven days after the termination of the work period.

These deadlines are measured from the end of the pay period, not the end of the workweek. For example, if an employer operates a bi-weekly pay period ending on a Saturday and the employee works five days per week, the employer must pay wages by the following Friday (six days after Saturday).

Executive, administrative, and professional employees — alternative pay frequencies. Employees in bona fide executive, administrative, or professional capacities (as determined by the Massachusetts Attorney General and defined by reference to federal FLSA standards under 29 C.F.R. Part 541) may be paid weekly, bi-weekly, or semi-monthly. These employees may also elect at their own option to be paid monthly. However, even for these employees, wages may not remain unpaid for more than six days after the end of the pay period unless the employee has affirmatively elected monthly payment.

Final paycheck — termination. An employee discharged from employment must be paid in full on the day of discharge. The statute contains a narrow exception for employers in Boston, where the final paycheck is due "as soon as the laws requiring pay rolls, bills and accounts to be approved by city auditors will permit." This Boston exception is extremely limited and tied to municipal approval processes; most Boston employers must still pay on the day of discharge.

Final paycheck — resignation. An employee who voluntarily leaves employment must be paid in full on the next regular payday. If there is no regular payday, the employer must pay by the following Saturday.

What "in full" means. Final paychecks must include all earned but unpaid wages through the last day of work, including regular pay, overtime, earned commissions that have been definitely determined and are due and payable, and accrued but unused vacation time. Massachusetts courts treat earned vacation pay as wages; employers cannot forfeit accrued vacation through a "use it or lose it" policy, and the full value must be paid in the final check.

Commissions. Section 148 expressly applies to commissions "when the amount of such commissions, less allowable or authorized deductions, has been definitely determined and has become due and payable to such employee." Once a commission is definitely determined and due, it is subject to the same timing rules as wages. The Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court held in Sutton v. Jordan's Furniture, Inc., 493 Mass. 728 (2024), that earned commissions are wages under the Wage Act and that an employer violates § 148 by paying overtime or premium pay out of earned commissions rather than paying those amounts separately and on time.

Strict liability — one day late triggers treble damages. Massachusetts courts enforce the wage-payment deadlines strictly. In Reuter v. City of Methuen, 489 Mass. 465 (2022), the Supreme Judicial Court held that wages paid just three weeks after the statutory deadline—but before the employee sued—still counted as "lost wages" subject to mandatory treble damages under M.G.L. c. 149, § 150. In Turgut v. Hitachi Rail STS USA, Inc., No. 24-CV-10660-AK (D. Mass. 2024), the federal district court denied an employer's motion to dismiss a claim alleging that the employer regularly paid all Massachusetts employees one day later than § 148 required, holding that "a day matters for the many people in this Commonwealth who live paycheck to paycheck." Even a single day's delay is a violation; there is no grace period, no good-faith defense, and no cure by late payment before suit.

Exceptions to the timing rules. Section 148 contains narrow statutory exemptions:

• Hospital employees: The section does not apply to employees of (1) hospitals supported in part by contributions from the Commonwealth or a city or town, or (2) incorporated hospitals that provide treatment to patients free of charge or are conducted as public charities—unless the employee requests the hospital to pay weekly. If the employee makes such a request, the standard weekly-payment rules apply.
• Cooperative association shareholders: Employees who are shareholders in a cooperative association are exempt unless they request weekly payment.
• Casual public employees: Casual employees (as defined above—those who work fewer than five days) employed by the Commonwealth, a county, a city, or a town are exempt from the timing rules.

No private agreement can waive the statute. Section 148 explicitly provides that "no person shall by a special contract with an employee or by any other means exempt himself from this section." An employment agreement, employee handbook provision, or offer letter that attempts to authorize monthly payment (for a non-exempt employee) or delay of final paychecks is void and unenforceable.

Transition from weekly to bi-weekly pay. If an employer paying employees on a weekly basis as of July 1, 1992, wishes to switch to bi-weekly payment, the employer must provide each employee with written notice of the change at least ninety days in advance of the first bi-weekly paycheck. This notice requirement does not apply to new hires after that date or to employers who adopted bi-weekly pay after July 1, 1992.

Check-cashing facilities. Employers paying wages by check or draft must provide employees with facilities for cashing the check at a bank or elsewhere, without charge (either by deduction from the face amount or otherwise), as the Attorney General deems reasonable. This requirement ensures that employees can access earned wages immediately without incurring fees.

Enforcement and remedies. Violations of § 148 are subject to the treble-damages and fee-shifting regime under M.G.L. c. 149, § 150. A prevailing employee recovers three times the unpaid wages, plus costs and reasonable attorney's fees. The statute of limitations is three years. Payment of the overdue wages after a complaint is filed is not a defense and does not eliminate treble-damages liability. Because § 150 makes attorney's fees mandatory for prevailing employees, wage-timing cases are economically viable even for small amounts.

Source: M.G.L. c. 149, § 148; M.G.L. c. 149, § 150; Reuter v. City of Methuen, 489 Mass. 465 (2022); Pay and recordkeeping, Mass.gov

Massachusetts allows employers to pay a reduced cash wage of $6.75 per hour—known as the "service rate"—to tipped employees, provided the employee's tips bring total hourly compensation up to the full $15.00 minimum wage. M.G.L. c. 151, § 7 establishes this tip-credit system: the employer pays a cash wage of not less than $6.75, and may credit up to $8.25 per hour in tips toward the minimum wage obligation, provided the employee actually receives tips equal to or exceeding that amount. This calculation is performed at the completion of each shift.

Make-up obligation. If an employee's tips during a shift, when added to the $6.75 service rate, do not equal or exceed the $15.00 minimum wage, the employer must pay the employee the difference. M.G.L. c. 151, § 7 provides that "the additional amount on account of tips may not exceed the value of the tips actually received by an employee." The make-up payment must be consistent with the wage payment timing rules under M.G.L. c. 149, § 148—meaning it must be included in the employee's regular paycheck on the same schedule as other wages (weekly or bi-weekly). An employer cannot average tips across multiple weeks or pay periods to satisfy the minimum wage; the minimum must be met for each shift worked.

Eligibility — who may be paid the service rate. Not all employees who receive tips qualify for the service rate. The Massachusetts Department of Labor Standards applies the service rate to three categories of workers defined in M.G.L. c. 149, § 152A:

• Wait staff employees — persons who work in a restaurant, banquet facility, or other place where prepared food or beverages are served; who provide service to customers; and who have no managerial responsibility. Effective 2021, this definition was expanded to include employees in quick-service restaurants who prepare or serve food or beverages as part of a team of counter staff.

• Service employees — persons who work in occupations in which employees customarily receive tips; who provide service directly to customers; who work in an occupation other than food or beverage service; and who have no managerial responsibility. Examples include bellhops, baggage handlers, and hairdressers.

• Service bartenders — persons who prepare alcoholic or nonalcoholic beverages for patrons to be served by another employee (such as a wait staff employee).

Any employee with managerial responsibility—even minimal supervisory authority—cannot be paid at the service rate and cannot participate in a tip pool. Managers, assistant managers, shift supervisors, and maître d's are excluded. Kitchen staff, administrative staff, and employees who do not directly serve customers are likewise excluded from both the service-rate eligibility and tip-pooling participation.

Notice requirement. An employer may pay the service rate only if the employer has informed the employee of the provisions of M.G.L. c. 151, § 7 (the third paragraph of that statute, which sets forth the tip-credit rules). This notice must be given before the employer begins taking a tip credit. The statute does not prescribe a particular form, but the employer must affirmatively communicate to the employee how the tip credit works, the amount of the service rate, and the employer's obligation to make up the difference if tips are insufficient.

Tip pooling — strict limits on participants. Massachusetts law permits tip pooling, but only among the three categories of employees listed above: wait staff employees, service employees, and service bartenders. M.G.L. c. 149, § 152A(c) provides that "no employer or person shall cause, require or permit any wait staff employee, service employee, or service bartender to participate in a tip pool through which such employee remits any wage, tip or service charge, or any portion thereof, for distribution to any person who is not a wait staff employee, service employee, or service bartender."

Employers, owners, and any person with managerial responsibility are categorically prohibited from sharing in tips or receiving any portion of a tip pool. Section 152A(b) provides that "no employer or other person shall demand, request or accept from any wait staff employee, service employee, or service bartender any payment or deduction from a tip or service charge given to such wait staff employee, service employee, or service bartender by a patron." Tips and pooled tips must be distributed in proportion to the services the eligible employees provided.

An employer may administer a valid tip pool and keep records of amounts received for bookkeeping or tax purposes, but the employer cannot retain any portion of the tips.

Service charges. If an employer or person submits a bill that imposes a service charge or tip, the total proceeds must be remitted only to wait staff employees, service employees, or service bartenders, in proportion to the service they provided. M.G.L. c. 149, § 152A(d). An employer may impose a house fee or administrative fee instead of or in addition to a service charge, but only if the employer provides a written designation or description informing the patron that the house or administrative fee does not represent a tip or service charge for the service employees. Employers who fail to provide this notice and then retain service-charge proceeds violate the statute.

Overtime calculation for tipped employees. For tipped employees paid at the $6.75 service rate, the overtime rate under M.G.L. c. 151, § 1A is calculated at 1.5 times the full minimum wage ($15.00), not 1.5 times the service rate. This yields an overtime rate of $22.50 per hour for all hours over 40 in a workweek. (See the "Overtime — 40-hour weekly threshold and 1.5× rate" section of this guide for detail on the overtime calculation.)

Enforcement and remedies. Violations of the tip-credit and tip-pooling rules are subject to the treble-damages regime under M.G.L. c. 149, § 150. An employee claiming to be aggrieved by a violation of § 152A may proceed under the second paragraph of § 150, which provides for recovery of three times the unpaid wages, plus costs and reasonable attorney's fees. Section 152A also provides for restitution of any tips accepted, distributed, or retained in violation of the statute, together with interest at 12 percent per annum. The statute of limitations is three years. Criminal penalties may also apply under M.G.L. c. 149, § 27C.

No employer may exempt itself from the tip-credit or tip-pooling requirements by special contract or agreement with an employee. M.G.L. c. 149, § 152A(g) provides that "no employer or person shall by a special contract with an employee or by any other means exempt itself from this section." Any such agreement is void.

Cross-reference. For the general Massachusetts minimum wage ($15.00), see the "Minimum wage — $15.00 per hour" section of this guide. For federal FLSA tip-credit rules (which set a lower floor and permit a larger tip credit), see the United States — Wage & Hour guide.

Source: M.G.L. c. 151, § 7; M.G.L. c. 149, § 152A; M.G.L. c. 149, § 150; Massachusetts law about minimum wage, Mass.gov