Mass. Gen. Laws » Part I Title IV Chapter 31
Massachusetts General Laws

Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 31, § 38 (2026)

Unauthorized leaves of absence; reports; separation from employment; review

✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section MAmalegislature.gov (official) JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Section 38. Upon reporting an unauthorized absence to the administrator pursuant to section sixty-eight, an appointing authority shall send by registered mail a statement to the person named in the report, informing him that (1) he is considered to have permanently and voluntarily separated himself from the employ of such appointing authority and (2) he may within ten days after the mailing of such statement request a hearing before the appointing authority. A copy of such statement shall be attached to such report to the administrator.

The appointing authority may restore such person to the position formerly occupied by him or may grant a leave of absence pursuant to section thirty-seven if such person, within fourteen days after the mailing of such statement, files with the appointing authority a written request for such leave, including in such request an explanation of the absence which is satisfactory to the appointing authority. The appointing authority shall immediately notify the administrator in writing of any such restoration or the granting of any such leave.

If an appointing authority fails to grant such person a leave of absence pursuant to the provisions of the preceding paragraph or, after a request for a hearing pursuant to the provisions of this section, fails to restore such person to the position formerly occupied by him, such person may request a review by the administrator. The administrator shall conduct such review, provided that it shall be limited to a determination of whether such person failed to give proper notice of the absence to the appointing authority and whether the failure to give such notice was reasonable under the circumstances.

No person who has been reported as being on unauthorized absence under this section shall have recourse under sections forty-one through forty-five with respect to his separation from employment on account of such absence.

For the purposes of this section, unauthorized absence shall mean an absence from work for a period of more than fourteen days for which no notice has been given to the appointing authority by the employee or by a person authorized to do so, and which may not be charged to vacation or sick leave, or for which no leave was granted pursuant to the provisions of section thirty-seven.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1925–2025 · leading case: McDonald v. Town of Brookline, 863 F.3d 57 (1st Cir. 2017).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
McDonald v. Town of Brookline, 863 F.3d 57 (1st Cir. 2017). “The letter specifically cited Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 31, § 38 . 2 . See 42 U.”
DeSimone v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 541 N.E.2d 358 (Mass. App. Ct. 1989). · cites it 3× “There followed a request by DeSimone, made February 16, 1979, for a review under G. L. c. 31, § 38, third par., by the personnel administrator of the Department of Personnel Administration of the Commonwealth (see G.”
Sisca v. City of Fall River, 838 N.E.2d 609 (Mass. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 4× “See G. L. c. 31, § 38, inserted by St. 1978, c.”
Police Comm'r v. Pers. Adm'r of the Dep't of Pers. Admin., 656 N.E.2d 910 (Mass. App. Ct. 1995). “A person aggrieved by their termination pursuant to this section may seek review by the personnel administrator.”
Police Comm'r v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 561 N.E.2d 869 (Mass. App. Ct. 1990). · cites it 2× “She reasoned that, because there had been no continuous fourteen-day period during which Figueroa had failed to provide some form of notice to the police department, the absences did not fall within the narrow definition of “unauthorized absence” in G. L. c. 31, § 38. The…”
Police Comm'r v. Pers. Adm'r, 671 N.E.2d 1231 (Mass. 1996). “” G. L. c. 31, § 38. Figueroa had furnished notice of her impending work absences before each of her scheduled four-day work shifts.”
DiFronzo's Case, 945 N.E.2d 350 (Mass. 2011). “1017, 1017 (1996) (endorsing objective, rather than subjective, inquiry to determine whether failure to give proper notice was “reasonable under the circumstances,” as required by civil service statute, G. L. c. 31, § 38); Choa v. Hotel Oasis, Inc.”
Patterson v. Tortolano, 359 F. Supp. 2d 13 (D. Mass. 2005). · cites it 3× “17 Defendants argue that M.G.L. c. 31, § 38 authorizes the City to consider an employee to have “permanently and voluntarily separated himself’ from his job when the employee has “failed to return for duty without authorization.”
Hartigan v. Civil Serv. Commissioners, 252 Mass. 323 (Mass. 1925). “It was amended, however, on January 16, 1925, by alleging that the respondents have found the appointment illegal and have notified the appropriate persons (so that by force of the statute, G. L. c. 31, § 38, payment of any salary is withheld).”
Burns v. City of Worcester (D. Mass. 2025). · cites it 2× “In terminating Burns, Batista relied on Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 31, § 38 , which applies to termination for unauthorized absence and bars recourse by the dismissed employee to civil service protections provided under c.”
Police Comm'r v. Comm'r of Civil Serv., 180 N.E. 300 (Mass. 1932). “31 and the civil service rules and should cease at once; and that, pursuant to G. L. c. 31, § 38, the respondent would notify the auditor and the treasurer of such violation and that payment of compensation to such officer was illegal and must cease within one week after the…”
City of Somerville v. Somerville Mun. Employees Ass'n, 5 Mass. L. Rptr. 659 (Mass. Super. Ct. 1996). · cites it 4× “On July 20, 1994, City Director of Personnel Katherine Auspitz conducted a hearing “with regard to the termination of Salvato’s employment pursuant to G.L.c. 31, §38.” She reported to the Mayor in writing on September 1, 1994; he *661 adopted the report on September 6, 1994, and…”
Show all 13 citing cases →
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.