Off on the bold days.
And the employee would have to have the next Sun off for the 12 days of work example to work. That is two consecutive days off.
What's your point?
No the next Sunday would not have to be a day off.
I could go on and on but if you don't get the idea from the above you will never get it.
So what you are saying is that the continuum just keeps going on. I don't think that is what the law contemplated.
It has, however, been held up by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts.
while discussing the myriad possibilities of schedules is fun, I think it strays from the question asked and simply unnecessarily extends the thread into discussion irrelevant to the original poster.
But in this most recent description of a scheduled, it does not allow for a day in the six days next after a working Sunday to be a day off. That violates section 50.
What the employer can't do is change the pay week in order to screw the employee(s) out of days off. The same goes for overtime.
Bud, you may have forgotten or never known, but MA is my state as well. It's been some years since I had reason to research this, but I assure you that I researched it thoroughly (since I had to satisfy corporate owners who lived in a different state) and the law has not changed since then. My research including conversations directly with the state officials as well as with more than one MA attorney. You can see that a MA attorney responding on the thread I posted above concurred with my definition.
Regardless of how you may be reading this, PG is quite right. The law looks at each individual work week and as long as there is one 24 hour period of rest in any 7 day work week as defined for payroll purposes, the law is satisfied. There are so many exceptions in 47-50 (and yes, I have read them all many times) that without more knowledge of what industry the OP is in, it's impossible to say that he's supposed to get Sundays off. MA LAW DOES NOT REQUIRE TWO DAYS OFF IN A WORK WEEK. Consecutive or otherwise.
You can argue till the cows come home, but on the basis of the information we have, the OP's employer is legal with regards to the questions asked.