July 27, 2020
In This Issue
ASM Upcoming Events
Recent Events
Thank you to our 2020 Premium Sponsors
ASM Associate Members are your Trusted Partners
Legislative Update
Legislative Update
Legal Update
Recent Guidance for Paragraph E Vendors
COVID-19 and Contract Performance: May I Be Excused?
Regulatory Update
What an Employee Should Know About Workers' Compensation Insurance in the Pandemic
Update from DCAMM
Safety Update
Join the National Safety Stand-Down To Prevent Falls in Construction
Member News
Joseph Bodio Honored with 2020 NECA Coggeshall Award
Do You Have A Legal Question? Accessing The ASM Hotline
Are You Following ASM On Social Media?
Newsletter Tools
Search Past Issues
Print-Friendly Issue
Forward to a Friend
Subscribe via RSS

ASM Upcoming Events

We are sad that events still cannot happen in person and so hopefully, if trends continue in the right direction, we can host live programs again soon. This certainly would include our GC Showcase which is currently scheduled for October 5th. On July 2, Governor Baker issued an updated order pertaining to limits on gathering sizes in the Commonwealth. The updated order provides for new indoor and outdoor gathering limits as of July 6th. Indoor gatherings are limited to 8 persons per 1,000 square feet of accessible, indoor floor space and never more than 25 persons in a single enclosed, indoor space. Any programs that we eventually do hold, will be in-compliance with CDC recommendations and state health and safety requirements.

That being said, stay turned for more webinars and online events and programs.

Return to Top
Recent Events

Click the links below to view our recent webinars


ASM Safety Roundtable- Workplace COVID-19 Testing andLegal Considerations

Password: 3K!.92%3


Recovering Added Construction Costs in the Pandemic

Password: #QaZ#w%2

Return to Top
Thank you to our 2020 Premium Sponsors



Return to Top
ASM Associate Members are your Trusted Partners

Are you looking for services from a trusted partner? Consider contacting an ASM Associate Member. Our Associate Members include suppliers, law firms, insurance companies, financial advisors and more. Click here for a list of our Associate Member firms.

Return to Top
Legislative Update
Legislative Update

Today is July 27th. Under normal circumstances, since this is an even numbered year, the Legislature would conclude formal sessions this Friday July 31st. Legislators would return to work in their districts for the balance of the summer and then turn their focus to elections this fall. Like everything else, this year we are not under normal circumstances. There will be the usual end of July rush to get some bills over the finish line, but there are already discussions happening about the Legislature coming back into session to address outstanding issues. These would likely include passing a budget for the balance of fiscal 2021. In addition, there could be more action on major bills outstanding in the areas of transportation, economic development, energy, and health care, to name a few.

Along with some of the “big ticket” issues mentioned above, the Legislature continues to focus on COVID-19 bills. As of today, 228 bills have been filed in the Massachusetts legislature specific to the pandemic on a variety of topics. Many bills would impact employers. As you would expect, many bills deal with unemployment programs, workers compensation, workplace safety, employer liability, and relief bills for families, employers, and municipalities. Certainly not all these bills will be signed into law and we must acknowledge that not all issues can be fixed by legislation.  

MWBE Legislation Heard at Virtual Public Hearing

The Joint Committee on State Administration & Regulatory Oversight collected written testimony this month on legislation that would make significant changes to the Massachusetts filed sub-bid law. H.4511, a bill filed by the Baker-Polito Administration would give additional authority to DCAMM and all awarding authorities. Specifically, it would allow the awarding authority to set MBE and WBE participation goals by requiring filed sub-bidders to subcontract up to 10% of the work on filed sub-bids or trade bids on projects where the overall value exceeds $5 million. The bill would also amend the filed sub-bid law to raise the threshold for which the law applies from $150,000 to $1,000,000 total job value and increase the individual bid value from $25,000 to $50,000.

ASM has a long and proud history of supporting ways for more MWBE firms to enter the construction business but at the same time, we raised some points of concern with some of the specifics in this bill. Click here to view ASM’s testimony on this bill.

Transportation and Infrastructure Funding

If you recall back to February and early March, transportation and infrastructure funding was a main issue on the minds of the public and the legislature. Traffic in the Greater Boston area had never been so bad. The House passed a bill back in March that would raise $500 million a year in additional revenue for transportation projects with a 5- cent gas tax increase, a 9-cent diesel tax increase, and additional fees on app ride services like Uber.

Last week, the Senate approved a bill that would allow cities and towns to impose new tax surcharges for local transportation projects. This would allow municipalities the ability to form regional tax districts to place a surcharge on property tax, sales tax, auto excise, and lodging tax. New taxes would require local approval. As some have pointed out, this would create a patchwork of tax policy across the commonwealth. This is one issue that remains unresolved.

AG Overturns Brookline Gas and Oil Moratorium

Last week, Attorney General Maura Healey issued a decision blocking Brookline’s bylaw that would ban new connections for gas and oil as part of new development. The AG noted that the bylaw conflicted with state building and gas codes and the Department of Public Utilities jurisdiction in regulating the sale and distribution of gas. This case was important not only for the Town of Brookline but also for the precedent it would have set for other municipalities.

Contractor and Subcontractor Liability Related to COVID-19

Still pending before in the legislature is a bill dealing with contractor liability issues related to COVID-19. The bill would grant immunity to contractors and subcontractors from liability for damages related to delays caused by workforce shortages, schedule changes, and other impacts resulting from COVID19. Those are costs that are more likely to be incurred by subcontractors. While this bill would protect subcontractors from such claims, at the same time it would remove the ability of a subcontractors to recover against a contractor. In another section, the bill would prohibit suits for damages against any employee organization or union for advising their members to refuse to work because of dangerous conditions relayed to COVID-19.

ASM welcomes your input on all of these bills. Send us an email at mmcdonagh@associatedsubs.com.

Are you interested in legislation and politics? If so, we would love to have you join our Legislative Committee. The Committee meets periodically to review and discuss pressing legislative and regulatory matters and how they would impact ASM and the members. Contact ASM if you would like to volunteer!


Return to Top
Legal Update
Recent Guidance for Paragraph E Vendors

by Emanuel Bardanis, Corwin & Corwin

A recent advisory opinion from the Massachusetts Attorney General provides important guidance for listing so-called “Paragraph E” vendors – i.e., specialized sub-subcontractors – on trade bid forms for jobs bid under M.G.L. c. 149A.  In a nutshell, the opinion states that trade bidders may make such listings even where the awarding authority has not specifically requested them.  Indeed, failing to do so could result in a possible challenge to a successful low trade bid. 

“Paragraph E” listings were created as part of the traditional c. 149 approach to public bidding.  Because certain work is almost always sub-subcontracted out – e.g., temperature controls work within the HVAC trade – the bid laws had to allow such delegation, albeit with certain limits.  First, the awarding authority must make clear in the bid documents what work may be sub-subcontracted; and even then, it can only do so if that work is: (1) customarily sub-subcontracted within the trade; and (2) worth more than $25,000.  If these criteria are met, the sub-bidder must list who will perform this work, and at what price, on Paragraph E of the statutory bid form contained in M.G.L. c. 149, § 44F.  A sub-bidder may also list itself if it customarily performs such work, in which case it need not state a price.

Many trade bidders assumed c. 149A worked the same way, as the bid process is similar.  There are key differences, however.  First, as the advisory opinion notes, there is no statutory bid form in M.G.L c. 149A, § 8, which governs trade bidding.  Hence, unlike under c. 149, § 44F, trade bid forms need not include language restricting bidders to listing only those sub-subcontractors “for which the provisions of the section of the specifications for this sub-trade require a listing.”  Rather, c. 149A, § 8 requires “certification that the trade contractor will perform the complete trade work with employees on his own payroll, except for work customarily performed by sub-trade subcontractors within the trade; and the names of all sub-trade subcontractors to be used if awarded the trade contract and each sub-trade contract sum [emphasis added].”   

Hence, the Attorney General concluded that listing a sub-subcontractor on a c. 149A trade bid form – although the specifications do not call for such a listing – does not necessarily require rejection on grounds it is an “addition not called for.”  Of course, if the awarding authority’s trade bid form contains the traditional c. 149 “Paragraph E” language quoted above, the result could be different.  (And even then, the awarding authority may be able to waive the error.)  But short of that – or unless the Legislature rewrites c. 149A, § 8 – trade bidders on c. 149A job must list all sub-subcontractors they intend to use, as long as the work is “customarily performed by sub-trade subcontractors within the trade.”  If you are unsure as to whether to make such a listing on a c. 149A job, the safest course would be to make a pre-bid inquiry asking the awarding authority to confirm the listing is appropriate. 

Return to Top
COVID-19 and Contract Performance: May I Be Excused?

By Sakib A. Khan, Esq. and Benjamin Roberts

In addition to its health risks, COVID-19 has disturbed our businesses and the entire economic system of our country.  We are learning how courts will factor these disruptions in when judging contract performance and evaluating breach.

In one of the first cases addressing how Massachusetts courts will consider COVID-19’s effects on the ability of parties to perform contracts, Martorella v. Rapp, Judge Michael D. Vhay of the Massachusetts Land Court ruled that a home buyer’s wife’s hospitalization with COVID-19 did not excuse the failure to make the closing date, even when the home buyer’s wife’s availability was integral in securing financing for the purchase.

In February 2020, the buyer made a deposit and signed a purchase and sale agreement to close the following month. The P&S would become void and the deposit retained as liquidated damages if the buyer did not meet the deadline. The P&S did not include any financing contingency clause. Unknown to the seller, the buyer required his wife to secure a mortgage for the closing. 

In March, the buyer and seller agreed twice to extend the deadline due to the coronavirus pandemic. In mid-March, the wife was notified by her bank that the couple had qualified for a mortgage. Unfortunately, the wife subsequently became ill with COVID-19 and was hospitalized. The husband then self-quarantined and requested a third extension, but the seller refused. The buyer missed the closing date and was unable to recover his deposit. 

The buyer argued that his breach of the P&S should be excused by the doctrine of impossibility, which excuses performance of a contract, where from the beginning, both parties have understood that the continued existence of a specific thing is a foundation of what was to be done and that thing becomes impossible to do without fault of either party. The buyer’s argument was essentially that a pandemic free environment was a mutual assumption and the end of the pandemic free environment rendered the buyer’s performance of the contract, that is closing on the closing date, impossible.

The court rejected the buyer’s argument on two grounds. First, the seller was not aware of the buyer’s reliance on financing to be able to pay for the closing was fundamental to his agreement. The contract explicitly stated that there were “no contingencies affecting [his] obligation to perform.” The seller thought that the buyer would have enough cash to close and did not understand that financing was foundational to the agreement. Second, the person who suffered incapacity due to COVID-19 was the wife, not the husband. The seller was not aware that the buyer relied on his wife’s ability to secure a mortgage to deliver payment. The husband’s performance would have only been excused if the seller understood that the wife’s involvement was foundational to the transaction.

While this seems like a harsh decision because the devastating effects of COVID-19 on the family could not have been foreseen, the seller was unaware of the buyer’s reliance on financing secured by another party and the buyer himself was not suffering from COVID-19.   Additionally, the buyer in that case did not argue (but could have argued) that the seller’s refusal to grant a further extension of the closing date when the buyer was self-quarantined and the Commonwealth was under a “stay at home” advisory from the Governor (thus likely impeding the seller’s ability to re-market the property in any event) as a breach of the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing.

Despite the strict nature of this decision, Contractors with projects affected by COVID-19 may have a more convincing argument for impossibility. First, prime construction contracts (including the commonly used AIA documents) tend to expressly define the roles and expectations of Subcontractors, Designers and other non-parties upon whom the parties to the contract depend on to perform their obligations. Further, there is an industry understanding of the fundamental relationships between the parties in a project. Owners should be aware that Contractors often rely on other parties in a project. It would not be a surprise that the Contractor’s work was made impossible by a Subcontractor failing to work due to COVID-19, supply chain disruptions, acute labor shortages, quarantine orders and the like.

Parties may also proactively protect themselves by including force majeure clauses which excuse performance when circumstances outside of their control make performance impractical or impossible.  For example, the unmodified AIA A201-2017 provides for extensions of time for circumstances outside of the contractor’s control, as long as the Architect agrees.  See A201 § 8.3.3(5).

Contractors should consult with counsel if their work has been made impossible by COVID-19 to see if they may be excused from performance.

Return to Top
Regulatory Update
What an Employee Should Know About Workers' Compensation Insurance in the Pandemic

What an Employee Should Know About Workers' Compensation Insurance in the Pandemic

Whether a worker is entitled to coverage is determined by the Governor’s Department of Industrial Accidents (DIA) on a case-by-case basis. Workers' compensation only covers injuries that are work related. Coverage for communicable disease, such as COVID-19, is further limited to situations where “the hazard of contracting such diseases by an employee is inherent in the employment.” The Attorney General's Office believes employees in certain fields where the employment inherently leaves them with a heightened risk of COVID-19 exposure are likely to meet this test. Nurses working with COVID-19 patients, for example, will likely qualify. However, no matter what your job, lost wage benefits are generally only available if you miss more than five days of work due to the illness.



The Department of Family and Medical Leave (DFML) Regulations Updated

The Department of Family and Medical Leave (DFML) has recently concluded its public hearing and comment period with respect to 458 CMR 2.00.  The final version of the regulations has been submitted to the Secretary of State and is anticipated to be published on July 24, 2020. 

The DFML is providing this unofficial version of the final regulation for your convenience. Below is a brief synopsis of some of the changes from the May proposed draft regulations and the final version.  

Changed titles of 2.08, 2.09, 2.12 and 2.16 in Index Section and Actual Section Headings

Accrued Paid Leave - Expanded definition.

Active Duty - Changed definition to require foreign deployment as a condition precedent.

Average Weekly Wage - Clarified definition to address multiple employers.

Average Working Week – New definition.

Base Period – Clarified definition.

Continuing Treatment by a Health Care Provider - Added allowance for telehealth in section (a)(3).

Continuing Treatment by a Health Care Provider - Deleted reference to Substance Abuse in section (g).

Extended Illness Leave Bank – New definition.  

Financial Eligibility Test - Expanded definition to address calculations where there are multiple employers.

Former Member of Armed Services – Deleted reference to exclusion for dishonorable discharge.

Intermittent Leave – Changed to allow usage in 15-minute increments consistent with employer policies provided, however, that payment by the Department will not be made in requests of less than 8 hours.

Job Protected Leave – Clarified that use of a disability policy of an employer, a paid leave policy of an employer and Extended Illness Leave Bank program of an employer will begin job protected leave and such time will run concurrently with the DFML benefits.

Section 2.06(8) - Clarified reference to Horace Mann Charter Schools.

Section 2.07(1)(c) – Clarified eligibility for covered individuals to require coverage under a private plan.

 Section 2.07(1)(c)(2) – Extended timeline that Department can notify an employer of a change in the term of an approved exemption from 30 to 60 days.

Section 2.07(2)(e) -Clarified criteria for financial eligibility and leave benefits under a private plan.

Section 2.07(8)(b) – Clarified coverage where an employer terminates a private plan or leaves the state plan for a private plan or transfers among private plans.

Section 2.07(c) – Clarifies that covered individuals can begin to file applications for benefits with the Department on the first day of the first quarter following an employer’s termination of a private plan.

Section 2.07(8)(e) – Addresses coverage of former employees and how applications for benefits are filed depending on whether covered individual is employed or unemployed at the time of filing.

Section 2.08(10) – New section to address substance abuse.

Section 2.10(1) – Clarifies that each request for intermittent leave shall require recertification consistent with new definition of intermittent leave.

Section 2.10(2) – Obligates covered individual to notify the Department within 7 days of a change in circumstances affecting benefits.

Section 2.12(2) – Clarifies that benefit determinations will be based on wages earned with a specific employer. 

Section 2.12(4) – Deleted references to allowing the Department to limit benefits based on benefits or wages received from other employers.

Section 2.12(4) - Clarifies that leave in the case of multiple employers does not need to be taken at the same time.

2.12(6) – Deleted reference to leave allotment for avoidance of confusion.

2.12(6)(b) and (c) – Deleted references to allowing the Department to reduce benefits where the covered individual has other benefits under another employer’s private plan or for wages earned from other employment.

2.12(6)(d)(3) – Added a new subsection to allow the Department to consider other wages earned by a covered employee as a possible reduction.

2.12(7) – Clarified that 7-day waiting period commences job protected leave period.

2.12(8)(a) and (c) – Clarified the affect on use of time provided by employer towards DFML benefits.

2.12(9) – Clarified situations in which employer is entitled to reimbursement.

The website provides three versions of the proposed regulations in order to facilitate your review of the final changes.  First, the original version of the draft regulations posted in May can be found here.  The redline version showing changes between the May version and the current version can be accessed here.  Lastly, the clean version of the draft final regulations can be located using this link

Return to Top
Update from DCAMM

Revised Overall Annual Program Participation Goals For MBE & WBE Participation On Certain State Funded Building Projects Affirmative Marketing Program Announcement: 

Pursuant to M.G.L. c 7c, §6 and M.G.L. c. 7, §61(l), the Supplier Diversity Office (“SDO”) and the Division of Capital Asset Management and Maintenance (“DCAMM”) have set new Overall Annual Program Goals for Minority Business Enterprise (“MBE”) and Women Business Enterprise (“WBE”) Participation.  These new Overall Annual MBE and WBE Participation Goals apply to the total dollar amount of contracts awarded annually for construction work and design services on affected capital facility projects and state assisted building projects as those projects are defined in the above referenced laws and related Executive Orders. 

Effective July 1, 2020, and until such time as the Overall Annual MBE and WBE Participation Goals may be revised, the MBE and WBE participation goals applicable to annual spending by those affected public awarding authorities on their building construction and design project awards are as follows:

Overall Annual Program Goals Applied to Awarded Projects

Construction Awards  Design Awards 

MBE Participation   4.2%     6.6% WBE Participation   8.8%     15.0%

Important Note: These are annual goals and are only applicable to the overall annual dollar value of contracts awarded by an awarding authority.  These overall annual participation goals should not be applied in setting MBE and WBE participation goals on individual construction or design projects.  Individual project goals shall be set using project specific information including project costs, MBE/WBE availability and other applicable factors.  

For those individual building construction or design contracts advertised for procurement on or after July 1, 2020 for which MBE and WBE Participation Goals are set, the MBE and WBE participation goals shall be established on a project by project basis and be listed as separate MBE and WBE participation goals in procurement documents and contracts. 

MBE and WBE goals for individual building construction and design contracts shall be established on a project by project basis, using project specific information including estimated project costs, MBE/WBE availability, project specific and other applicable factors. Municipal public awarding authorities should contact SDO, and state public awarding authorities should contact DCAMM for additional information on setting project participation goals on individual projects, as well as their project compliance and participation reporting responsibilities. 

Return to Top
Safety Update
Join the National Safety Stand-Down To Prevent Falls in Construction

Join the

National Safety

To Prevent Falls in Construction

Fatalities caused by falls from elevation continue to be a leading cause of death for construction employees, accounting for 320 of the 1,008 construction fatalities recorded in 2018 (BLS data). Those deaths were preventable. The National Safety Stand-Down raises fall hazard awareness across the country in an effort to stop fall fatalities and injuries.

What is a Safety Stand-Down?

A Safety Stand-Down is a voluntary event for employers to talk directly to employees about safety. Any workplace can hold a stand-down by taking a break to focus on "Fall Hazards" and reinforcing the importance of "Fall Prevention". Employers of companies not exposed to fall hazards, can also use this opportunity to have a conversation with employees about the other job hazards they face, protective methods, and the company's safety policies and goals. It can also be an opportunity for employees to talk to management about fall and other job hazards they see.

Who Can Participate?

Anyone who wants to prevent hazards in the workplace can participate in the Stand-Down. In past years, participants included commercial construction companies of all sizes, residential construction contractors, sub- and independent contractors, highway construction companies, general industry employers, the U.S. Military, other government participants, unions, employer's trade associations, institutes, employee interest organizations, and safety equipment manufacturers.


OSHA is partnering with key groups to assist with this effort, including the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), the National Occupational Research Agenda (NORA), OSHA approved State Plans, State consultation programs, the Center for Construction Research and Training (CPWR), the American Society of Safety Engineers (ASSE), the National Safety Council, the National Construction Safety Executives (NCSE), the U.S. Air Force, and the OSHA Training Institute (OTI) Education Centers.

How to Conduct a Safety Stand-Down and FAQ's

Companies can conduct a Safety Stand-Down by taking a break to have a toolbox talk or another safety activity such as conducting safety equipment inspections, developing rescue plans, or discussing job specific hazards. Managers are encouraged to plan a stand-down that works best for their workplace anytime. See Suggestions to Prepare for a Successful "Stand-Down"and Highlights from the Past Stand-Downs. OSHA also hosts an Events page with events that are free and open to the public to help employers and employees find events in your area.

If you plan to host a free event that is open to the public, see OSHA's Events page to submit the event details and to contact your Regional Stand-Down Coordinator.

Certificate of Participation

Employers will be able to provide feedback about their Stand-Down and download a Certificate of Participation following the Stand-Down. The certificate pages will be active on September 14, 2020, for employers to enter their information and print their certificate.

Share Your Story With Us

If you want to share information with OSHA on your Safety Stand-Down, Fall Prevention Programs or suggestions on how we can improve future initiatives like this, please send your email to oshastanddown@dol.gov. Also share your Stand-Down story on social media, with the hashtag: #StandDown4Safety.

Return to Top
Member News
Joseph Bodio Honored with 2020 NECA Coggeshall Award

Peter Gormley, Sue Mailman, Joseph Bodio

By: Kristen Gowin, NECA Boston Chapter, Electrical Contractors Association 

On June 24, the National Electrical Contractors Association (NECA) announced that Joseph Bodio, CEO and Founder of LAN-TEL Communications, Inc. was selected as the honoree of the Association’s 2020 Coggeshall Award.  The award, established in 1956, is presented annually to a NECA electrical contractor who has made outstanding contributions to the industry in the Technical and Service field.  

A past President, Governor and now Director of NECA Greater Boston Chapter, Bodio has dedicated much of his career to education and training.  He was a founding member of the Boston Chapter’s Telecom Division, served on the Joint Conference Committee as a Trustee from 2010 to 2012, and was also as an active member of the Telecom Training subcommittee for six years.  

“On the Training Committee, Joe was instrumental in the growth and enhancement of the Boston’s five-year JATC Telecommunications Apprenticeship Training Program,” said NECA Boston Senior Advisor and former Executive Manager, Glenn Kingsbury.

Bodio’s relationship with the Boston JATC telecom program began in the early 90's when he, along with his lifelong friend and Local 103 member Paul Woods, assisted the administration with improving the newly founded telecom program. In the late 1990’s, Bodio was the instructor of the “Blueprints for Telecom,” course at the JATC, which has evolved to become the current "Systems Drawings & Specifications” course. In 2007, he participated in the JATC Telecom Curriculum Review Committee, which brought updated and emerging technologies into the telecom curriculum. Concurrently, the Review Committee was instrumental in bringing state-of-the-art improvements to the JATC’s telecom shop areas. 

In 2009, Joe's helped establish the JATC’s Paul Woods Scholarship, which awards $500 annually to the outstanding telecom graduate. 

Most recently, Bodio has provided his leadership and expertise to the Systems Integration Task Force, created during the 2019 collective bargaining process, which was founded to determine the role of a systems’ integrator, its place in the telecom industry, and job classification within the union.

Nationally, Joe currently serves on the NECA Management Development Committee as the Chapter’s representative for ELECTRI-International, an organization that funds, conducts, coordinates and monitors the electrical industry’s most vital research and delivers exemplary management education and supervisory training programs.

Learning of the award, JATC Greater Boston Training Director Chris Sherlock said, "Joe Bodio has been a consistent leader in the training of our apprentices for the last 30 years.  His knowledge, and vision for future industry trends in technology, have greatly assisted the JATC in keeping the telecom training program ahead of the curve.” 

Sherlock added, “Joe has always put the JATC program, our apprentices and the telecom industry first. He is true industry professional and it’s fitting that NECA has honored him with the Coggeshall Award for his outstanding contributions to the technical and training field. Joe always had his eye on the future of our industry and the JATC looks forward to our continued collaboration with him, in our mutual focus on the success of our training program."

NECA Boston Chapter Manager Kristen Gowin said, “In addition to his dedication to training and education, Joe has been a tireless advocate for updating and strengthening Massachusetts’ electrical and telecom system licensing laws to adapt to integration and include communications systems.” 

The Coggeshall Award will officially be presented during the NECA 2020 Convention and Trade Show, October 5 - 7 which will take place online, due to the Coronavirus pandemic. 

Joe served as President of ASM from 2015-2017.

Return to Top
Do You Have A Legal Question? Accessing The ASM Hotline

As an employer, you face a myriad of issues including employee leave, discrimination, wage and hour rules, hiring and termination.  As a construction business, you face a host of issues through the life of a project, including bidding, contract terms, payment and more. When issues arise, it’s often hard to know what to do. There is an easy way to get quick answers to your questions – ASM’s Hotline –FREE to ASM Members.

How do I access the Hotline? Send an email to mail@associatedsubs.com. We will forward your question to the appropriate attorney who will respond by phone or email.

Who are the attorneys?

Construction questions are referred to JohnM. Curran, Esq. at the law firm of Corwin & Corwin LLP, which has served as legal counsel to ASM for more than 65 years.

Employment questions are referred to David B. Wilson, Esq. and Catherine E. Reuben,Esq., at the law firm of Hirsch Roberts Weinstein, LLP.

Insurance questions are referred to David M. O’Connor, Esq. at the law firm of O’Connor & Associates, LLC.

What if I already have my own lawyer?
You can still call the Hotline. It is a privilege of membership in ASM.

What kind of help can I expect?
The attorney will typically spend 5-15 minutes addressing questions that can be answered easily based on years of experience in their areas of practice. You will receive information to help you determine whether to handle the issue yourself or to seek professional help to pursue legal action. The Hotline is limited in scope and does not include research or document preparation.

To pursue legal action, do I have to use the Hotline attorney? No. You are free to use your own attorney or you may retain a hotline attorney. The choice is up to you and it is a private matter between you and the attorney.

Return to Top
Are You Following ASM On Social Media?

ASM is now on Instagram. Check us out, follow us, and comment on our photos!

Please also like the ASM Facebook page and follow us on Twitter and LinkedIn.



Return to Top

Published by:

Associated Subcontractors of Massachusetts, Inc.
15 Court Square, Ste. 840
Boston, MA 02108