Wrongful Termination in Massachusetts (2026): Laws, Deadlines, How to File

Massachusetts is an employment-at-will state, so a firing is wrongful only when it breaks a specific law, a contract, or a clearly established public policy. The main state law is Chapter 151B of the General Laws, which makes it unlawful under G.L. c. 151B, section 4 to discharge an employee because of a protected characteristic, for employers with six or more employees.

A discrimination complaint goes to the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination (MCAD) within 300 days, and a lawsuit can follow within 3 years. Massachusetts courts also recognize a narrow public-policy claim and an implied covenant of good faith in some contracts. To compare other states, see our guide to wrongful termination laws by state.

Information last verified on October 10, 2026. This article has not been reviewed by a licensed lawyer.

Jurisdiction scope: This article covers Massachusetts law on firing employees: G.L. c. 151B (sections 1, 4, 5 and 9), the public-policy, contract and good-faith decisions of the Supreme Judicial Court, and Massachusetts statutes on workers' compensation, wage and sick-time complaints, paid family and medical leave, jury service, military service and personnel records, with short notes on the federal laws that also apply. The federal rules in full are on our wrongful termination laws by state guide. It does not cover severance agreements; see Massachusetts severance pay laws.

Is Massachusetts an at-will state?

Yes, unless a contract sets a definite term or limits firing. In Jackson v. Action for Boston Community Development, Inc., 403 Mass. 8 (1988), the Supreme Judicial Court noted that where a contract has no definite period, "it establishes employment at will." For how the doctrine works day to day, see Massachusetts at-will employment laws.

Grounds for a wrongful termination claim in Massachusetts

Discrimination under Chapter 151B

Under G.L. c. 151B, section 4(1), it is unlawful for an employer to discharge an individual because of "race, color, religious creed, national origin, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation..., genetic information, pregnancy or a condition related to said pregnancy including, but not limited to, lactation or the need to express breast milk for a nursing child, ancestry or status as a veteran." Other paragraphs of section 4 cover age (4(1B)), religious observance including the Sabbath (4(1A)), membership in or service obligations to the uniformed services including the National Guard (4(1D)), pregnancy accommodation (4(1E)), requesting or keeping a record of certain arrest and criminal-record information, such as arrests that did not lead to a conviction, or penalizing a person for not providing it, in connection with employment decisions including discharge (4(9)), refusing to restore an employee after the 8 weeks of parental leave under G.L. c. 149, section 105D (4(11A)), handicap for a qualified handicapped person, including reasonable accommodation (4(16)), and sexual harassment (4(16A)). Section 4(5) also makes it unlawful for any person, "whether an employer or an employee or not," to aid, abet, incite, compel or coerce a violation.

Who is covered. Section 1(5) says "employer" does not include "any employer with fewer than six persons in his employ," so the law reaches employers with six or more employees, any employer of domestic workers, and the Commonwealth and its political subdivisions. It also excludes a social club or fraternal association or corporation that is not organized for private profit. Federal law reaches fewer employers: Title VII applies to employers with 15 or more employees and the federal age law to employers with 20 or more (42 U.S.C. 2000e(b); 29 U.S.C. 630(b)). Under Bostock v. Clayton County, 590 U.S. 644 (2020), Title VII also bars firing someone for being gay or transgender.

Retaliation. Section 4(4) makes it unlawful "to discharge, expel or otherwise discriminate against any person because he has opposed any practices forbidden under this chapter or because he has filed a complaint, testified or assisted in any proceeding under section five." Section 4(4A) separately bars coercing or interfering with a person exercising rights under the chapter.

Firing in violation of public policy

In Smith-Pfeffer v. Superintendent of the Walter E. Fernald State School, 404 Mass. 145 (1989), the Supreme Judicial Court explained that "Redress is available for employees who are terminated for asserting a legally guaranteed right (e.g., filing workers' compensation claim), for doing what the law requires (e.g., serving on a jury), or for refusing to do that which the law forbids (e.g., committing perjury)." The court refused to extend the claim to an employee fired for criticizing a reorganization, writing: "The public policy exception to the at-will employment rule is not that broad."

In Upton v. JWP Businessland, 425 Mass. 756 (1997), the court said liability may be imposed "if an at-will employee is terminated for a reason that violates a clearly established public policy," but held that firing an employee for refusing to work long hours was not within the exception. Our research did not establish whether a regulation or constitutional provision alone can supply the public policy.

Not a route around Chapter 151B. In Charland v. Muzi Motors, Inc., 417 Mass. 580 (1994), the Supreme Judicial Court held that "where G. L. c. 151B is applicable, employees alleging discriminatory conduct by their employer must comply with the administrative requirements of c. 151B," including the 300-day MCAD filing, and it adopted the Appeals Court's conclusion in Melley v. Gillette Corp. (1986) that "a new common law remedy for employment discrimination should not be created where G. L. c. 151B applies." So a firing covered by Chapter 151B cannot be brought as a public-policy tort to take advantage of the longer tort deadline.

Deadline. Massachusetts's general tort statute, G.L. c. 260, section 2A, provides that "actions of tort... shall be commenced only within three years next after the cause of action accrues." Our research found no decision applying it to the public-policy claim specifically, so get advice promptly. It does not extend the 300-day MCAD deadline for a discrimination claim Chapter 151B covers (Charland).

Contracts, handbooks and good faith

Handbooks. In Jackson, the employee argued that a personnel manual created a contract limiting discharge. The court concluded that "the conduct of the parties, and their relation, fell short of that which would allow a jury to decide reasonably that the parties had entered an implied contract based on the manual's terms." A handbook can matter, but Jackson shows the claim is hard to prove; our research did not review later handbook decisions.

Good faith and fair dealing. In Fortune v. National Cash Register Co., 373 Mass. 96 (1977), a salesman was fired to deprive him of commissions on a sale he had already made. The court held: "We hold that NCR's written contract contains an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing, and a termination not made in good faith constitutes a breach of the contract." Our research did not review later decisions on how far the covenant reaches today.

Workers' compensation retaliation (G.L. c. 152, section 75B)

Under section 75B(2), "No employer or duly authorized agent of an employer shall discharge, refuse to hire or in any other manner discriminate against an employee because the employee has exercised a right afforded by this chapter, or who has testified or in any manner cooperated with an inquiry or proceeding pursuant to this chapter, unless the employee knowingly participated in a fraudulent proceeding."

The employee sues in superior court, and the employer "shall be exclusively liable to pay to the employee lost wages, shall grant the employee suitable employment, and shall reimburse such reasonable attorney fees"; the court may also grant equitable relief. Under section 75B(1), an injured employee capable of performing the essential functions of a job is deemed a qualified handicapped person under Chapter 151B. Section 75B states no filing deadline in the text we reviewed, so act promptly. For the benefits side, see Massachusetts workers' compensation laws.

Wage complaints and earned sick time (G.L. c. 149, sections 148A, 148C, 150)

"No employee shall be penalized by an employer in any way as a result of any action on the part of an employee to seek his or her rights under the wages and hours provisions of this chapter" (c. 149, section 148A). An employer who discharges or discriminates against an employee because the employee "has made a complaint to the attorney general or any other person" or started a proceeding violates the section.

The earned sick time law makes it unlawful to use "the taking of earned sick time... as a negative factor in any employment action such as evaluation, promotion, disciplinary action or termination," or to take any adverse action against an employee who opposes practices the employee believes violate the law (c. 149, section 148C(h), (i)).

How to bring the claim. Under section 150, an employee may sue 90 days after filing a complaint with the Attorney General (or sooner with the Attorney General's assent) and "within 3 years after the violation." A prevailing employee "shall be awarded treble damages, as liquidated damages, for any lost wages and other benefits and shall also be awarded the costs of the litigation and reasonable attorneys' fees." The 3-year period is tolled from the Attorney General complaint until the Attorney General authorizes a private suit or its own action becomes final.

Paid family and medical leave (G.L. c. 175M, section 9)

It is unlawful to retaliate by "discharging, firing, suspending, expelling, disciplining... or in any other manner discriminating against an employee for exercising any right" under the paid family and medical leave law (c. 175M, section 9(a)). Any negative change in status or terms of employment during leave, or during "the 6 month period following an employee's leave or restoration," is "presumed to be retaliation," and the employer can rebut that only by clear and convincing evidence (section 9(c)).

The employee "may, not more than 3 years after the violation occurs, institute a civil action in the superior court," with a jury trial (section 9(d)). The court may order reinstatement, restore benefits and seniority, "compensate the employee for 3 times the lost wages, benefits and other remuneration and the interest thereon," and award costs and attorneys' fees, and all remedies available in common-law tort actions are also available.

Domestic violence leave (G.L. c. 149, section 52E)

An employer with 50 or more employees must allow up to 15 days of leave in any 12 months for an employee who, or whose family member, is a victim of abusive behavior, to seek medical attention, counseling, victim services or legal help, secure housing, obtain a protective order or appear in court, among other listed purposes (section 52E(b), (c)). "No employer shall discharge or in any other manner discriminate against an employee for exercising the employee's rights under this section" (section 52E(i)). The claim follows the section 150 route described above: a complaint to the Attorney General, then suit within 3 years.

Jury service (G.L. c. 234A, section 61)

"An employer shall not deprive a juror-employee of his employment or any incidents or benefits thereof, nor shall an employer harass, threaten, or coerce an employee because the employee has received a juror summons, responds thereto, performs any obligation or election of juror service" (c. 234A, section 61). A violation is a crime punishable by a fine of up to $5,000, and the employer is liable in tort. The juror may sue in superior court for damages and injunctive relief, and on a finding of willful conduct the court may award treble damages and reasonable attorney's fees. Section 61 states no deadline of its own; it makes the employer liable in tort, and the general deadline for tort actions is 3 years (G.L. c. 260, section 2A).

Military service, voting and other statutes

• Military service. G.L. c. 33, section 13 gives members of the Commonwealth's armed forces and state defense force the rights of the federal Uniformed Services Employment and Reemployment Rights Act, with the Massachusetts Attorney General performing the federal Attorney General's role. "In the case of an action against a private employer under this section, the action may proceed in the district or superior courts of the commonwealth."
• Voting. In manufacturing, mechanical and mercantile establishments, an employer may not employ or permit a voter to work "during the period of two hours after the opening of the polls" if the voter applies for leave during that period (c. 149, section 178). The section contains no discharge clause or remedy.
• Equal pay. An employer may not fire or otherwise retaliate against an employee for opposing pay discrimination, taking part in a proceeding, or disclosing, asking about or discussing wages (G.L. c. 149, section 105A(c)(3)); suit must be filed within 3 years after the violation.
• Minimum wage and small necessities leave. Retaliation for a minimum wage complaint (G.L. c. 151, section 19) and violations of the 24-hour small necessities leave law (G.L. c. 149, section 52D) follow the section 150 route: a complaint to the Attorney General, then suit within 3 years.
• Workplace toxic substances. An employee fired or disciplined for exercising rights under the Right to Know law must file a verified complaint with the commissioner of DOL, as the statute names the state labor office, within 180 days of the violation or of learning of it (G.L. c. 111F, section 13).

Whistleblowing

Our research did not locate a general Massachusetts whistleblower statute for private-sector employees. G.L. c. 149, section 185 protects employees of the Commonwealth, its political subdivisions and public utility employers, with a civil action in superior court "within two years" and "All remedies available in common law tort actions." Two specific statutes do reach private employers. G.L. c. 149, section 187 bars a health care facility, such as a hospital, clinic, nursing home or pharmacy, from retaliating against a licensed health care provider who discloses, testifies about or refuses to take part in what the provider reasonably believes is a violation of law or of professional standards of practice that poses a risk to public health. A report to a public body is generally protected only if the provider first gave a manager written notice and a reasonable chance to correct the problem (section 187(c)), and suit must be filed in superior court within two years (section 187(d)). The Massachusetts False Claims Act bars retaliation for lawful efforts to stop a violation of that Act, with reinstatement, twice the back pay and attorneys' fees, if suit is filed within 3 years (G.L. c. 12, section 5J). Otherwise, private-sector employees generally rely on the public-policy claim and the subject-specific statutes above. For more, see Massachusetts whistleblower laws.

Wrongful termination deadlines in Massachusetts

The EEOC deadline in Massachusetts. The EEOC's Boston Area Office, which serves Massachusetts, says an individual has 300 days from the date of alleged harm to file a charge against a Massachusetts employer with 15 or more employees, and 300 days for age discrimination against an employer with 20 or more. It says charges against smaller employers must be filed with the state or local agency within the time state or local law sets. In Massachusetts that is the MCAD, within 300 days under c. 151B, section 5, for employers with six or more employees.

Where to file in Massachusetts

• Discrimination and retaliation under Chapter 151B: the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination. Our research did not confirm how the MCAD and the EEOC cross-file charges, so ask when you file.
• Federal claims: the EEOC, through the EEOC Public Portal or by phone at 1-800-669-4000 when a deadline is near.
• Wage-complaint, earned sick time, domestic violence leave and minimum wage retaliation: a complaint to the Attorney General first, then court (c. 149, section 150).
• Workers' compensation retaliation, paid leave retaliation, jury-service, public-policy and contract claims: court.

Moving a Chapter 151B case to court

Under section 9, as to acts made unlawful by section 4, the MCAD procedure "shall, while pending, be exclusive," and a final MCAD determination on the merits excludes any other civil action on the same grievance. But a complainant "may, at the expiration of ninety days after the filing of a complaint with the commission, or sooner if a commissioner assents in writing, but not later than three years after the alleged unlawful practice occurred, bring a civil action for damages or injunctive relief or both in the superior or probate court."

When the complainant sues, the complainant must notify the commission, the MCAD complaint is "dismissed without prejudice," and "the petitioner shall be barred from subsequently bringing a complaint on the same matter before the commission." The case "shall be advanced for a speedy trial at the request of the petitioner," and temporary injunctive relief is available.

What a court can award in Massachusetts

Section 9 provides: "If the court finds for the petitioner, it may award the petitioner actual and punitive damages. If the court finds for the petitioner it shall, in addition to any other relief and irrespective of the amount in controversy, award the petitioner reasonable attorney's fees and costs unless special circumstances would render such an award unjust." The section, as we read it, states no cap on damages. Our research did not cover the standard Massachusetts courts apply for punitive damages.

In age-discrimination cases, the plaintiff is entitled to a jury trial on damages issues, and recovery is actual damages or, for a knowing violation, "up to three, but not less than two, times such amount."

The federal Title VII and ADA caps of $50,000 to $300,000 (42 U.S.C. 1981a(b)(3)) apply only to federal claims; the wrongful termination guide lists the tiers.

Constructive discharge

In GTE Products Corp. v. Stewart, 421 Mass. 22 (1995), the Supreme Judicial Court said: "Constructive discharge occurs when the employer's conduct effectively forces an employee to resign." The court found the conditions in that case "were not so intolerable that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign," and said a single isolated act, such as an unfavorable review or a demotion, usually does not suffice. That case involved a common-law wrongful discharge claim; our research did not review how the test applies under Chapter 151B.

Personnel records

Under G.L. c. 149, section 52C, an employer that receives a written request from a current or former employee "shall provide the employee with an opportunity to review such employee's personnel record within 5 business days," and must provide a copy within 5 business days of a written request. Review may be limited to 2 occasions per calendar year. A violation is punishable by a fine of $500 to $2,500, and "This section shall be enforced by the attorney general."

Our research did not locate a Massachusetts statute requiring an employer to give a written reason for a termination. That is not a confirmed negative.

A bill for a longer MCAD deadline

H.1622 (194th General Court, 2025-2026), relative to workplace discrimination complaints: would amend c. 151B, section 5 to replace "300 days" with "3 years." The official bill page shows it was referred to the Judiciary committee, with a hearing scheduled June 3, 2025, and then on March 26, 2026 reported to accompany a study order (H5281). It is not law; the 300-day deadline still applies.

Practical steps after a firing in Massachusetts

Write down the date you were fired, who told you, the reason given, and any complaint, injury claim, leave, wage issue or jury summons involved. Send a written request for your personnel record under c. 149, section 52C, and keep a copy. The deadline to watch for a discrimination claim is 300 days for the MCAD complaint. For your last wages, see Massachusetts final paycheck laws.

If the employer offers money for a release, read it before signing: a release can give up the claims described here. Our Massachusetts severance pay laws page covers those agreements, and the wrongful termination guide has more on preparing for a claim.

Related

• Wrongful termination laws by state
• Massachusetts at-will employment laws
• Massachusetts whistleblower laws
• Massachusetts workers' compensation laws
• Massachusetts final paycheck laws
• Massachusetts severance pay laws

Disclaimer: This article provides general legal information about Massachusetts wrongful termination law (G.L. c. 151B, the Smith-Pfeffer, Jackson and Fortune decisions, and G.L. c. 152, section 75B, c. 149, sections 52C, 148A, 148C, 150 and 185, c. 175M, section 9 and c. 234A, section 61) and the federal laws that apply in Massachusetts. It is not legal advice. The information was verified on October 10, 2026. For advice about your situation, contact the Massachusetts Commission Against Discrimination, the Attorney General's office, the EEOC, a legal aid office or a lawyer licensed in Massachusetts.

Last updated: October 10, 2026.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I sue for wrongful termination in Massachusetts?

Only when the firing broke a specific law, a contract, or a clearly established public policy. The main routes are G.L. c. 151B, retaliation statutes such as c. 152, section 75B and c. 175M, section 9, a contract claim, and the public-policy tort the Supreme Judicial Court described in Smith-Pfeffer (1989).

How long do I have to file with the MCAD?

300 days after the alleged act of discrimination (G.L. c. 151B, section 5). A 2025 bill, H.1622, would have changed that to 3 years, but it was sent to a study order in March 2026 and has not passed.

How long do I have to sue for discrimination in Massachusetts?

No later than 3 years after the unlawful practice, and not until 90 days after you filed with the MCAD unless a commissioner assents in writing (G.L. c. 151B, section 9). Filing in court ends the MCAD case and bars a later MCAD complaint on the same matter.

Does Massachusetts discrimination law cover small employers?

Chapter 151B covers employers with six or more employees; its definition of employer excludes any employer with fewer than six persons in its employ, and excludes certain nonprofit social clubs and fraternal associations (c. 151B, section 1(5)).

Is there a cap on discrimination damages in Massachusetts?

Section 9 of c. 151B lets a court award actual and punitive damages and states no cap. It also requires an award of reasonable attorney's fees and costs to a winning petitioner unless special circumstances would make that unjust.

What is the EEOC deadline in Massachusetts?

The EEOC's Boston Area Office says 300 days from the date of alleged harm for employers with 15 or more employees (20 or more for age).

Can I be fired for filing a workers' compensation claim in Massachusetts?

No. G.L. c. 152, section 75B(2) bars discharging an employee for exercising a right under the workers' compensation law, unless the employee knowingly took part in a fraudulent proceeding. The employee may sue in superior court for lost wages, suitable employment and attorney fees.

Can I see my personnel file after being fired in Massachusetts?

Yes. Under G.L. c. 149, section 52C, an employer must let a current or former employee review the personnel record within 5 business days of a written request and provide a copy within 5 business days of a written request.

What counts as constructive discharge in Massachusetts?

In GTE Products Corp. v. Stewart (1995), the Supreme Judicial Court said constructive discharge occurs when the employer's conduct effectively forces an employee to resign, and asked whether conditions were so intolerable that a reasonable person would have felt compelled to resign.