The BIMA Summer Sizzler is the must-attend networking event for marketing and media professionals.
08/11/2022
5:30pm - 8:30pm
Museum of Science
The Fierce Urgency of Now Festival brings Boston’s diverse young professionals together with business leaders, organizations and their peers to build connection, advance careers and ignite positive change.
This is an opportunity to meet the Chamber staff as you learn how to leverage your Chamber benefits effectively to meet your goals through our offerings.
09/29/2022
2:00pm - 3:30pm
Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce
Our Boston’s Future Leaders (BFL) program provides emerging leaders with a socially conscious and civically engaged leadership toolkit, as well as the opportunity to apply their knowledge through experiential assignments.
We are now recruiting for our 2022 fall DEI cohort! We hope you’ll join us in our mission to increase DEI fluency and change in the Boston business community – starting with you.
Our Women’s Leadership Program enables you to take your leadership to the next level by arming you with the most in-demand leadership toolkit.
Our Economic Inclusion Committee provides strategic support around research, policies, and programs that are focused on building equal opportunity.
We are developing an ecosystem of corporations and partners with the influence and buying power to transform economic inclusion for minority business enterprises (MBEs).
City Awake empowers young professionals in a variety of ways that encourages these rising leaders to stay invested in the region’s future success.
BIMA (the Boston Interactive Media Association) serves a vibrant community of like-minded professionals from agencies, brands, publishers, and ad-tech companies with business interests in the New England market.
For more than 25 years, the Chamber’s Women’s Network has connected female professionals of all background and career levels. Today, our Women’s Network is the largest in New England, strengthening the professional networks of women each year.
Through MITX (the Massachusetts Innovation and Technology Exchange), we’re building valuable connections between the people and ideas behind technology and its impact on the future of customer experiences, all to create a community that’s finding tomorrow’s solutions together.
We support small business through public policy initiatives, events designed to connect small businesses in Greater Boston to their peers and established business leaders, professional development offerings, and free small business advising.
Explore our mission and values to better understand how we are leading the business community forward.
Our member directory is your resource to discover, connect, and engage with Boston’s businesses from every industry and sector.
April 8, 2022
The Greater Boston Chamber of Commerce submitted further testimony on Docket #0188, Ordinance Preventing Wage Theft in the City of Boston. The Chamber continues to oppose wage theft in any form and supports strong enforcement of current state laws prohibiting wage theft by employers. However, I would like to reiterate the Chamber’s general concerns with the scope, ambiguity, and timing of this ordinance outlined in our original testimony submitted on March 31, 2022. As the Committee proceeds into a working session on Docket #0188, the Chamber would like to take the opportunity to highlight a few specific language problems within the proposed ordinance that underscore these concerns.
Section 2 Definitions Several of the definitions under consideration are overly broad. One example is the definition of “employer” which includes “any natural person or business, whether or not incorporated or unincorporated, who suffers or permits another to work… (3) who otherwise maintains a commercial presence in the City of Boston.” This definition likely includes any employer that has any commercial connection to Boston, even if they do not actually employ anyone in Boston. The term “employer” is then used throughout the ordinance in different contexts, creating confusion over the obligations under the ordinance. In conjunction with the broad scope for “employer” are the definitions of “minimum wage” and “wage theft.” The definition of “minimum wage” includes violations of “any other state or federal statute or regulation establishing a minimum fair wage for particular occupations or classes of workers.” That term is then incorporated into the definition of “wage theft.”
The definitions outlined above have particular ramifications in section 6 of the proposed ordinance, though they also apply to other provisions. These broad definitions lead to a scenario where an employer with a multi-state presence may be prohibited from obtaining a license, or be required to report out-of-state violations of wage laws, due to the actions of individuals or agents not within their control or their ultimate responsibility. Examples may include franchisees, which generally operate independently from larger brands, but may be denied a license under the broad terms of this ordinance for violations in another state. Licensed employers are also required to post notices of wage violations occurring anywhere in the country locally in the City of Boston, and subject to draconian fines of $300 per day, regardless if the local entity is aware of or contributed in any manner to the wage violation.
The Chamber unequivocally opposes wage theft and believes that violators should be held responsible under existing laws. But it is important to ensure that only those that have direct control over those violations receive punishment, especially when the very existence of a business depends on a license from the City. The far-reaching definitions in this ordinance may lead to unintended consequences that significantly hurt our business climate. Definitions should be narrowed to specify illegal conduct in Massachusetts by employers located in Boston with direct control over wage decisions.
Fact Finding and Appeals Processes The proposed ordinance gives the City wide latitude to revoke contracts, licenses, and permits of employers that violate wage laws. However, the ordinance does not outline any fact finding or appeals process for such actions. It is unclear, for instance, under what circumstances these penalties can occur due to the unlawful conduct of a subcontractor when that conduct is outside of the control, and without the knowledge of, a general contractor. If a subcontractor receives a final determination of a wage violation, can a permit for an entire project be revoked? What happens if a general contractor is purposefully misled by a subcontractor? The ordinance also allows for stop work orders for a violation of a variety of requirements, without a process for appeal or otherwise determining responsibility on the part of a permit or license holder. Other than outlining a brief 30-day “conciliation process” in section 6 for license holders, there is little due process outlined in the ordinance, while creating enormous consequences for employers. The Committee should carefully consider adding an adequate process to the ordinance when the very existence of a business might be at stake.
Overall Scope, Complexity, and Context The proposed ordinance creates elaborate and complex requirements for employers in order to conduct most business with the City. While large businesses with legal and compliance offices may have resources and expertise to help navigate these hurdles, small businesses or those trying to start a new business will find it difficult, if not impossible, to understand and comply with the ordinance’s requirements. Crafting the ordinance to encompass such a wide array of business interaction with the City will also impose these requirements on small, routine tasks that may not warrant such regulation. The Committee should consider methods to exempt both small employers and routine business transactions from the scope of the proposed ordinance. This approach is reflected in section 9 related to municipal building permits. Those thresholds should be increased, and the concept should apply throughout the proposal for requirements for contracting, construction, and licensing. This could be achieved by incorporating minimum contract values ($500,000 for example), exempting certain types of transactions, and/or applying requirements only to employers with 50 or more employees.
Popular Resources