Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, § 27A (2026)

Appeals from classifications and wage determinations

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 27A. Within five days from the date of the first advertisement or call for bids, two or more employers of labor, or two or more members of a labor organization, or the awarding officer or official, or five or more residents of the town or towns where the public works are to be constructed, may appeal to the commissioner or his designee from a wage determination, or a classification of employment as made by the commissioner, by serving on the commissioner a written notice to that effect. Thereupon the commissioner or his designee shall immediately hold a public hearing on the action appealed from. The commissioner or his designee shall render his decision not later than three days after the closing of the hearing. The decision of the commissioner or his designee shall be final and notice thereof shall be given forthwith to the awarding official or public body.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 8 cases, 1989–2019 · leading case: Cordeiro v. Kirwan (In re Kirwan), 558 B.R. 9 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2016).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Cordeiro v. Kirwan (In re Kirwan), 558 B.R. 9 (Bankr. D. Mass. 2016). · cites it 2× “Most notably, pursuant to Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, § 27A, Galway Bay Décor was required to pay its employees no less than the prevailing wage set by the Massachusetts Commissioner of the Division of Occupational Safety.”

Teamsters Jt. Council No. 10 v. Dir. of the Dep't of Labor & Workforce Dev., 447 Mass. 100 (Mass. 2006). · cites it 2× “The defendant businesses and organizations then filed an appeal pursuant to G. L. c. 149, § 27A, contesting the application of the prevailing wage law to the drivers’ road time.”

Donis v. Am. Waste Servs., LLC, 125 N.E.3d 759 (Mass. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 2× “This argument faces the initial hurdle that the proper *326 procedure for challenging a wage determination (or job classification) is through the administrative review mechanism set out in G.”

Felix A. Marino Co. v. Comm'r of Labor & Indus., 689 N.E.2d 495 (Mass. 1998). · cites it 2× “An appeal by a consortium of towns, pursuant to G. L. c. 149, § 27A, led to a decision by the commissioner on September 27, 1995, following a hearing attended by Marino, that the consortium, in seeking bids for road repairs and maintenance work, was concerned with public works…”

Constr. Indus. of Mass. v. COMMR. OF LABOR & INDUS., 546 N.E.2d 367 (Mass. 1989). · cites it 3× “The judge declined, however, to determine *166 whether the commissioner had authority to set the wages for truckers hauling bituminous concrete because plaintiffs had not availed themselves of the administrative review procedure created by G.L.c. 149, § 27A. Finally, the judge…”

Constr. Indus. v. Comm'r of Labor & Indus., 406 Mass. 162 (Mass. 1989). · cites it 3× “The judge declined, however, to de *166 termine whether the commissioner had authority to set the wages for truckers hauling bituminous concrete because plaintiffs had not availed themselves of the administrative review procedure created by G. L. c. 149, § 27A. Finally, the…”

Lighthouse Masonry, Inc. v. Div. of Admin. Law Appeals, 466 Mass. 692 (Mass. 2013). “Should a party wish to appeal either a job classification determination or a prevailing wage rate determination, that party may do so pursuant to G. L. c. 149, § 27A, “[wjithin five days from the date of the first advertisement or call for bids.”

Niles v. Huntington Controls, Inc. (Mass. App. Ct. 2017). “" G. L. c. 149, § 27A, as appearing in St. 1987, c.”

Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.