Question

I’ve been reviewing the Massachusetts Wage Act, and I’m confused. When exactly do I have to pay my employees? It says six or seven days after the pay period, but which is it?

Answer

You’re not alone—this law can be very confusing. The general rule is:

• If an employee works five or six days a week, the employee must be paid within six days after the pay period ends.
• If an employee works fewer than five days or all seven days of the week, the employee must be paid within seven days after the pay period ends.

That sounds simple enough—but the law has a lot of legal language and exceptions that make it hard to follow. Two recent federal court cases in Massachusetts help explain how to apply it in real life, especially about when employees must be paid and how they should be classified.

Case 1: Is One Day Late a Violation?

In the first case, the U.S. District Court addressed whether a one-day delay in wage payments constitutes a violation of the Wage Act. The employee, a senior engineer manager, alleged that the transit company employer consistently paid employees later than six days after the end of the pay period, contrary to the Wage Act’s requirements.  The employer regularly made payment to employees on the seventh day following the end of the pay period.

The engineer said this broke the law that requires payment within six days for employees who work five or six days.

The employer said, “But he’s a salaried employee, and salaried workers work seven days a week, right?”

The court disagreed. It looked at the law, past court decisions, and guidance from the Massachusetts Attorney General. The judge ruled that salaried workers are still subject to the six-day rule—unless they truly work all seven days. So, paying on day seven could be a violation.

This decision is a strong reminder that employers must pay employees on time to follow Massachusetts state law.

Case 2: Was This Worker an Independent Contractor?

In the second case, another U.S. District Court judge examined issues of employee misclassification and wage violations. The plaintiff in that case worked for a dental practice and was classified as an independent contractor. The worker contended that she was misclassified and that the defendants failed to pay her timely wages and overtime, violating both the Massachusetts Wage Act and the Fair Labor Standards Act. She also claimed that her termination was in retaliation for her complaint about wage violations.

The employer said the plaintiff was an independent contractor, not an employee. That meant they didn’t think they had to follow the same wage laws, like paying her timely wages and overtime.

The worker said she was really doing employee work—managing the office, working as a hygienist, and more. She also said she didn’t get paid on time and didn’t get overtime, even though she worked more than 40 hours a week.

The judge looked at the Massachusetts Independent Contractor Law, which says a worker is a contractor only if all three of the following things are true:

1. The worker controls how he or she does the work – the individual is free from control and direction in connection with the performance of the service, both under the contract for the performance of service and in fact; and
2. The worker does work outside the usual business of the employer – the service is performed outside the usual course of the business of the employer; and
3. The worked has his or her own business doing the same kind of work– the individual is customarily engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, profession or business of the same nature as that involved in the service performed.

In this case, the court said the plaintiff clearly did work within the usual business of the dental office. Her work was fully within the “usual course of business” of the dental practice.  She managed the office, including scheduling patients, billing, and overseeing the hygienists and administrative staff.  She performed patient care and dental hygiene services.

That meant she didn’t meet all three parts of the test—so she should have been classified as an employee, not a contractor.  But the court did not rule on the retaliation claim because there is a real disagreement about why th plaintiff was fired.  That factual issue will be decided by a jury.

If someone is doing work that’s part of your core business, they probably aren’t an independent contractor.

Key Takeaways for HR Professionals

• Pay employees on time. If they work five or six days, you must pay them within six days of the end of the pay period.  Don’t assume salaried employees have more time to get paid. They usually fall under the six-day rule too.
• Classify workers correctly. If they do the same work as your regular employees or help run the business, they are likely employees, not contractors.
• Late payments—even by one day—can break the law and lead to triple damages in Massachusetts.
• Misclassifying workers can lead to lawsuits and fines.

Final Thoughts

The Massachusetts Wage Act is strict. If you make a mistake—even a small one—you could owe triple damages plus legal fees. That’s why it’s smart to:

• Review how you pay people.
• Check how workers are classified.
• Ask for legal help if you’re not sure.

If AIM members have questions about the Wage Act, the Independent Contractor Law, or any other HR matters, they may reach the AIM HR Helpline at 800-470-6277, or helpline@aimnet.org