WeVote
Log In

Bill

Bill

S 1375

Requiring the office of parks, recreation and historic preservation establish design standards and manage applications for greenway trails

2025 Regular Session Introduced by Jose Serrano

Shortens retaliation window from 6 to 3 months and removes the presumption and its clear-and-convincing rebuttal, making retaliation claims harder for employees.

REFERRED TO CULTURAL AFFAIRS, TOURISM, PARKS AND RECREATION
0
WeVote Research Nonpartisan
Bill Summary · S 1375

Summary — S.1375 (introduced 2025)

Note: The source materials provided for S.1375 appear to be internally inconsistent and to combine information from multiple jurisdictions and bills. The bill text itself is a Massachusetts bill presented by Senator Bruce E. Tarr amending chapter 175M of the Massachusetts General Laws. Other metadata (title about greenway trails, a federal “SNOOP Act,” and a list of U.S. Senate cosponsors) appear to be unrelated. The summary below focuses on the actual bill text that was submitted to the Massachusetts Senate.

Purpose / Intent

The bill is titled in the filing as “An Act to preserve employer autonomy.” Its stated effect is to alter statutory language in section 9, subsection (c), of chapter 175M of the Massachusetts General Laws. The changes narrow or eliminate a statutory presumption that an employer’s adverse action was retaliatory after an employee’s use of leave or participation in related proceedings.

Key provisions

The bill makes three textual amendments to section 9(c), chapter 175M:

  1. Replace the phrase “6 month” with “3 months.”

    • This shortens the temporal window in the subsection from six months to three months.

  2. Remove the word “presumed” from subsection (c).

    • Removing this word eliminates an express statutory presumption language in that subsection.

  3. Remove the following (long) rebuttal clause from subsection (c):

    • The sentence stating that the presumption “shall be rebutted only by clear and convincing evidence…” and describing the employer’s ability to show independent justification and that it would have taken the same action regardless of the employee’s use of leave is deleted.

(Those three changes are the full content of the bill as filed.)

Who is affected

  • Employers and employees subject to chapter 175M of the Massachusetts General Laws (the statute being amended). Chapter 175M relates to worker protections contained in Massachusetts law; stakeholders likely include private employers, human-resources departments, labor attorneys, and employees asserting retaliation claims related to leave or participation in proceedings covered under that chapter.
  • State agencies and courts that interpret and apply section 9(c) in adjudicating retaliation or related claims.

Likely effects / practical impact

  • Shorter timing: By changing “6 month” to “3 months,” the period during which temporal proximity is evaluated (or any time-based rule in that subsection) is shortened.
  • Reduced statutory presumption: Removing the word “presumed” and deleting the explicit “clear and convincing” rebuttal standard would significantly weaken—or potentially eliminate—the automatic presumption that an employer’s adverse action was retaliatory within the relevant time window. That makes it harder for employees to rely on a statutory, rebuttable presumption and may shift the evidentiary burden more toward employees to prove retaliation.
  • Employer autonomy: The bill’s stated aim is to preserve employer autonomy by narrowing worker-side procedural or evidentiary advantages in retaliation disputes.

Legislative status & timeline (as provided)

  • Filed in Massachusetts Senate: 01/13/2025 (Senate Docket No. 508 / Senate No. 1375; presented by Bruce E. Tarr).
  • Referred to committee (records vary): referred to the committee on Labor and Workforce Development (02/27/2025). Additional entries show read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance (04/09/2025) and hearings scheduled/rescheduled for 10/08/2025.
  • Data notes: other listed referral entries (e.g., “REFERRED TO CULTURAL AFFAIRS, TOURISM, PARKS AND RECREATION”), sponsor lists, and alternate titles appear inconsistent with the Massachusetts filing and likely reflect merged or erroneous metadata.

Notes on discrepancies

  • The provided dataset mixes multiple bill titles, jurisdictions, and sponsor lists (including federal legislators). The operative bill text and the sponsorship/petitioner in the bill file identify this as a Massachusetts state bill introduced by Senator Bruce E. Tarr. Users relying on this summary should consult the official Massachusetts legislative docket (Senate No. 1375 / Senate Docket No. 508, 2025–2026 session) or the legislature’s bill text for authoritative details.

Compiled from official sources — confirm details with the bill’s official record.

Sign in to ask a question.