Additional decisions concerning more specific issues on this topic can be accessed by clicking the related links.
0047 7652 42
0047 7652 42 (Nov. 23, 2021) – The employer provided the claimant bus driver with an offer letter that may have been sufficient to constitute reasonable assurance for the 2020-21 academic year. However, the start of the academic year was delayed and the claimant’s hours were reduced from the previous year as a result of the pandemic. Since she did not return to the same position under the same economic terms, she is entitled to retroactive benefits pursuant to G.L. c. 151A, § 28A(b).
0049 7404 34
0049 7404 34 (Jul. 22, 2021) – An assumption that the claimant would return to work in the fall unless notified is insufficient to meet the employer’s burden to show that it provided reasonable assurance of re-employment within the meaning of G.L. c. 151A, § 28A.
0047 7968 91
0047 7968 91 (Feb. 22, 2021) – School paraprofessional received reasonable assurance of re-employment to her regular full-time job in the 2020-21 academic year. Because her other work for the school department, including tutoring, after-school care, and 2019 summer employment, were not required as part of her full-time position, she is entitled to a reduced weekly benefit amount based upon those base period earnings for the weeks between academic years.
0047 5467 37
0047 5467 37 (Jan. 26, 2021) – Employer’s written offer to re-employ the claimant in her paraprofessional position in the 2020-21 school year stated that it was contingent upon the pandemic and funding. Because the employer was uncertain at the time and throughout the summer whether students would come back for in-person learning, whether the claimant’s hours would be reduced, or that her services would even be needed, Board held the claimant was not provided with reasonable assurance of re-employment under G.L. c. 151A, § 28A, until the end of August, when they mailed her a contract.
0026 5187 26
0026 5187 26 (Feb. 27, 2019) – School district’s offer of re-employment for a 10-month position, where it was offered to a 12-month employee, was not reasonable assurance under G.L. c. 151A, § 28A(b), because it was an offer under economic terms that were considerably less than his present position.
0022 1445 55
0022 1445 55 (Apr. 27, 2018) – Where a full-time, 12-month ABA technician was required to work part-time for six weeks over the summer, G.L. c. 151A, § 28A(b) does not preclude her from receiving partial unemployment benefits during that time. However, she cannot collect benefits in the weeks immediately before and after the six-week summer program due to G.L. c. 151A, § 28A(c). Such weeks were a customary vacation period, the claimant worked immediately before, and she had reasonable assurance that she would work immediately after such period.
0016 2670 84
0016 2670 84 (Jan. 29, 2016) – The employer bears the burden of proving that a claimant had reasonable assurance of re-employment under G.L. c. 151A, § 28A. Here, the employer did not present historical evidence demonstrating a long-term pattern of hiring the adjunct professor to teach 2 courses every fall and 4 courses every spring term. Therefore, its offer of 2 courses for the fall semester did not constitute reasonable assurance.