The State Organization Index provides an alphabetical listing of government organizations, including commissions, departments, and bureaus.
Top-requested sites to log in to services provided by the state
0017 5436 74 (Oct. 20, 2016) – The claimant was offered the opportunity to apply for a job. Such an offer does not constitute a definite offer of work, and, therefore, her failure to apply for the job does not constitute a rejection of suitable or unsuitable work under G.L. c. 151A, § 25(c).
0016 2073 23 (Dec. 24, 2015) – A temporary employee, who had worked full-time at one assignment for approximately a year, did not refuse an offer of suitable work. The employer offered only sixteen hours of work about a month after the end of the full-time assignment. [Note: The District Court affirmed the Board of Review.]
0014 0062 59 (Mar. 9, 2015) – A claimant, who turned down a number of hours per week from the employer at a location which she reasonably believed caused her health problems, was entitled to partial unemployment benefits. In light of other statutory provisions and applicable case law, we interpret G.L. c. 151A, § 1(r)(1) to permit a claimant to refuse unsuitable work.
0012 3564 87 (Oct. 10, 2014) – A laid-off commercial driver and carpenter was not disqualified pursuant to G.L. c. 151A, §§ 29 and 1(r), when he declined to accept additional hours of work from his part-time subsidiary employer. The offered work was not suitable full-time employment, because it was several dollars less per hour than his customary work and outside of his usual occupational field.
0001 1361 33 (Sept. 15, 2014) – A claimant, who refused an offer of work from one employer because she was working in other suitable employment, was not disqualified under G.L. c. 151A, §§ 29(a),(b), and 1(r).
0008 9771 96 (May 15, 2014) – A claimant, who could only work weekdays in the morning and until 3:00 p.m. due to childcare responsibilities, had good cause to restrict her work search where her work history showed that work was available within these restrictions. Given that the claimant made $13.00 per hour, a one-hour shift at a location far away from her home was not an offer of suitable employment.