The Online Resource for Massachusetts Poverty Law Advocates

41. UI Eligibility During a Labor Dispute

An individual may be disqualified from receiving benefits if unemployment is due to a "stoppage of work" because of a labor dispute. G.L. c. 151A, § 25(b). In order for there to be a stoppage of work, operations must be "substantially curtailed." How much disruption is required to constitute a substantial curtailment is a fact-specific inquiry; there is no percentage threshold or numerical formula. Boguszewski v. Commissioner of the Div. of Employment & Training, 410 Mass. 337, 338, 572 N.E.2d 554, 555 (1991) ("stoppage of work occurred where two-thirds of employees of a public electric utility ceased to work during a four-week strike): Hertz Corp. v. Acting Director of the Div. of Employment and Training, 437 Mass. 295, 297, 771 N.E.2d 153, 155-56 (2002) (no decrease in rentals or revenue); Reed Nat. Corp. v. Director of the Div. of Employment Sec., 393 Mass. 721, 473 N.E.2d 190 (1985) (25% drop at one plant only did not constitute substantial curtailment); Westinghouse Broadcasting Col, Inc. v. Director of the Div. of Employment Sec., 378 Mass. 51, 389 N.E.2d 410 (1979); Adomaitis v. Director of the Div. of Employment Sec., 334 Mass. 520, 136 N.E.2d 259 (1956).

The burden is on the claimant to prove that she or he falls within the exceptions to the provisions of the statute denying UI eligibility when unemployment results from a stoppage of work due to a labor dispute. General Electric Co. v. Director of the Div. of Employment Sec., 349 Mass. 358, 208 N.E.2d 234 (1965).

The bar to benefits does not apply before the strike begins if the individual is involuntarily unemployed during contract negotiations or after the strike has ended if the individual is not recalled within one week of the end of the strike. G.L. c. 151A, § 25(b).

This bar also does not apply if the individual did not as an individual or as a member of a group participate in, finance, or have a direct interest in the labor dispute (notwithstanding the payment of union dues). G.L. c. 151A, § 25(b)(1), (2). However, even if an individual is not a member of a union participating in the strike, the requirement of "direct interest" is met if the individual's wages, hours, or conditions of work will be either favorably or adversely affected by the outcome. Wheeler v. Director of the Div. of Employment Sec., 347 Mass. 730, 200 N.E.2d 272 (1964).

If there has been a "lockout," i.e., either a physical shut-down of a plant or a communication by the employer to its employees that there will be no more work until the end of the labor dispute, individuals are eligible for unemployment benefits whether or not there has been a stoppage of work as long as the workers are willing to work under the terms of the existing or expired contract pending the negotiation of a new contract. The payment of benefits under these circumstances can be prevented by the employer only if it demonstrates by a preponderance of the evidence that the lockout is in response to damage or threats of damage by bargaining unit members with express or implied approval of the union's officers, that the employer has taken reasonable measures to prevent such damage, and that such efforts have been unsuccessful. G.L. c. 151A, § 25 (b)(4).