Additional decisions about more specific issues on this topic can be accessed by clicking the related links.
0075 5579 22
0075 5579 22 (July 28, 2023) – The claimant refused to cross a picket line set up by striking coworkers who belonged to a different union. Because the claimant risked jeopardizing his own union membership in good standing if he crossed the picket line, and he would lose his job if he did not maintain membership in good standing, held the claimant was in unemployment and entitled to benefits pursuant to G.L. c. 151A, §§ 29 and 1(r). While the other union maintained its picket line, the claimant’s job had become unsuitable.
0074 1862 27
0074 1862 27 (July 26, 2023) – The claimant declined suitable work in order to prevent the part-time wages from affecting the amount of his unemployment benefits. Held he was not in total unemployment within the meaning of G.L. c. 151A, § 1(r)(2), during those weeks, and he was not entitled to any benefits. A constructive deduction was not appropriate, because he had not separated from the part-time employer. During another week when he worked some hours, he was in partial unemployment pursuant to G.L. c. 151A, § 1(r)(1), but subject to a lost time charge, because he declined additional hours of suitable work.
0058 3800 18
0058 3800 18 (Feb. 24, 2022) – Spin instructor was in total unemployment pursuant to G.L. c. 151A, §§ 29 and 1(r), when her employer shut down due to the COVID-19 public health emergency. During this time, she was available for remote work, but the employer never assigned any to her. As the employer’s PPP payments to her were not for the performance of any work, they did not constitute disqualifying remuneration under G.L. c. 151A, § 1(r)(3). Upon her return, she remained in partial unemployment because she continued to be available for all suitable work, but her hours had been drastically reduced.
0057 9775 06
0057 9775 06 (Mar. 31, 2021) – While the president of a corporation performed only a couple of hours of unpaid work for his business after it was closed due to COVID-19, he was eligible for benefits under G.L. c. 151A, §§ 29 and 1(r). However, once he began working full-time hours, even though unpaid, he was deemed to be unavailable for other, paid full-time work and, thus, he did not meet the availability requirements to be in total or partial unemployment under the statute.
N6-FM22-N44K
N6-FM22-N44K (Dec. 30, 2020) – The claimant author-artist worked between 60-70 hours during the week beginning September 20, 2020 in the hope that her work would be used and she would be compensated. As she was attempting to re-establish her self-employment, she met the PUA eligibility requirements under the CARES Act and 20 CFR § 625.4(g).