The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts has denied an employer’s motion for summary judgment, ruling that certain deductions from wages, even when part of the employer’s formula to determine wages owed,  is impermissible.

United States District Court of Massachusetts

SUMMARY: (court decision – opens in PDF)

“Plaintiffs Justin Muniz, Mohammed Belaabd, Jose Dilone, and Victor Amora bring this action on behalf of a certified class against defendant RXO Last Mile, Inc. (‘RXO’). The Plaintiffs are employees of RXO, a federally authorized freight forwarder, who deliver appliances and other large consumers goods for RXO’s retail clients. The Plaintiffs allege that RXO unlawfully deducted wages from their pay in violation of the Massachusetts Wage Act. M.G.L.c. 149, §§148 and 150. …

“RXO arranges and facilitates deliveries of large goods on behalf of retailers to the purchasing customer. RXO contracts with DSPs to complete these deliveries. The contractual relationship between RXO and the DSPs is reflected in a standardized Delivery Service Agreement (‘DSA’), at least insofar as the DSA refers to the payments and deductions at issue here. …

“… RXO argues that, rather than being unlawful deductions from wages, its deductions were part of the formula for determining wages. This is foreclosed by Massachusetts precedent and that precedent was not abrogated in Patel v. 7-Eleven, 489 Mass. 356 (2022). In Massachusetts, a company may not avoid the obligations of wage laws by including violations of those laws in its employment contracts.”