Court Rules Worcester Club Violated Massachusetts Tip Act

October 10, 2022

On September 30, 2022 the United States District Court, D. Massachusetts held in favor of exotic dancers in the matter of Saad v. JOLO, Inc. by applying minimum wage law and the Massachusetts Tips Act. 


An employer may pay direct wages at the Service Rate (a rate substantially lower than minimum wage) provided that: (i) the employer provides the employees with required statutory notice; (ii) the employee actually receives tips in an amount which, when added to the Service Rate, equals or exceeds the full Massachusetts Minimum Wage; and (iii) all tips received by the employee are retained by the employee receiving the tips.


JOLO, Inc. specifically violated the Massachusetts Tip Act due to unlawful tip sharing as: (i) a portion of the tips received by exotic dancers were given to DJs and security guards (which included a manager) and (ii) a portion of the tips exotic dancers received was paid directly to their employer. 

The Court cited: Matamoros v. Starbucks Corp. which held that shift supervisors are not “wait staff” and therefore are ineligible to share in tips pools with baristas; and Cormier v. Landry's Seafood House-N. Carolina, Inc. which held that seater hosts are neither wait staff employees nor service employees under the Tips Act, and are also ineligible to participate in the tip pool with wait staff.



Additionally, since JOLO, Inc. retained a portion or “split” of the tips the exotic dancers received from customers for private/non-private dances it failed to comply with the Service Rate requirements which necessarily constituted a violation of the minimum wage law because they were ineligible for the tip credit.


If you have questions about this topic, or any other general employment issues, please do not hesitate to contact the attorneys at The Royal Law Firm at 413-586-2288.

December 5, 2025
Our attorneys successfully obtained summary judgment in favor of the Defendant from the Massachusetts Appeals Court in a Wage Act and contract dispute. The Complainant alleged entitlement to a substantial variable compensation award following resignation. We demonstrated that the compensation plan made such awards discretionary and contingent on continued employment at the time of payout. The Appeals Court agreed, finding that the award did not constitute wages under the Wage Act and that the Defendant acted lawfully in denying payment. All claims were dismissed in their entirety.
By The Royal Law Firm November 5, 2025
Attorney Amy Royal has once again been selected as a Super Lawyer ! As published by Super Lawyers Amy B. Royal is a top-rated attorney, with her firm headquartered in Springfield, Massachusetts. Providing legal representation in the New England states and New York, for a variety of different issues, Amy Royal was selected to Super Lawyers for 2014 - 2016, 2019 - 2025. Attorneys like Amy B. Royal are recognized by their peers for their outstanding work and commitment to the spirit of the legal profession. Their knowledge of the law, professional work ethic, and advocacy on behalf of their clients allow them to stand out among other attorneys in the field.