Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 152, § 46 (2026)

Waiver of rights to compensation; arbitration

✓ current as of July 2026

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

Section 46. No agreement by any employee to waive his right to compensation shall be valid. Nothing in this section shall be deemed to prohibit the parties from entering into an agreement to submit to binding arbitration pursuant to the provisions of section ten as an exclusive alternative to proceedings within the division of dispute resolution.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 6 cases, 1931–1999 · leading case: Delaney v. Chief of Police of Wareham, 539 N.E.2d 65 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Delaney v. Chief of Police of Wareham, 539 N.E.2d 65 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989). “The analogy the plaintiff attempts to draw between § 111F, and G. L. c. 152, § 46, of the Workers’ Compensation Act is inapposite.”

McLaughlin's Case, 174 N.E. 338 (Mass. 1931). “480, 485, 486 , the provision of the statute, that no agreement of an employee to waive rights of compensation is valid, G. L. c. 152, § 46, as amended by St. 1927, c.”

S. F. Bowser & Co. v. Indep. Dye House, Inc., 177 N.E. 268 (Mass. 1931). “See, for example, G. L. c. 152, §§ 46,47, and cases reviewed in Holcombe v.”

Niemi v. GenRad, Inc., 479 N.E.2d 742 (Mass. App. Ct. 1985). “See also G. L. c. 152, § 46. Gould’s Case , which shields the rights of injured employees under the statute, cannot be used as a sword to cut off contractual benefits in excess of those guaranteed by the statute.”

Lundborg v. Keystone Shipping Co., 138 Wash. 2d 658 (Wash. 1999). “Jones Act claims require proof of negligence, while maintenance claims do not.”

Epstein v. Steinadler, 1 Mass. L. Rptr. 558 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1994). “The plaintiff relies on the provision in the Workers’ Compensation Statute, G.L.c. 152, §46, which stated at the time of the accident: “No agreement by any employee to waive his right to compensation shall be valid.”

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.