pay Lapine for lost wages and can subtract the amount of wages he actually earned working at other jobs, but the Town may not subtract the approximately $10,000 Lapine received in unemployment payments. See Boston & M.R.R. v. Bentubo, 160 F.2d 326, 328-29 (1 Cir., 1947) (the VRRA “imposes a categorical obligation upon district courts to reduce the damages awarded in cases of this sort” by the amount of wages actually earned); Chesna v. International Fueling Co., No. 80-2230, 1983 WL 21386, *2 (D.Mass., Dec. 17, 1983), aff'd 753 F.2d 1067, 1984 WL 180698 (1 Cir., 1984) (back pay under VRRA “is to be reduced by amount of wages the plaintiff actually received in other employment.”); National Labor Relations Bd. v. Gullett Gin Co., 340 U.S. 361, 364-65, 71 S.Ct. 337, 95 L.Ed. 337 (1951) (<HOLDING>). Finally, it is within my discretion to award
holding that unemployment compensation should not be deducted from a back pay award under the national labor relations act because failing to deduct unemployment payments does not make the employee more than whole holding that pursuant to statute unemployment benefits must be offset against workers compensation payments holding that legislature clearly intended that workers compensation act and unemployment security act be construed together thus prohibiting worker from receiving both unemployment compensation and workers compensation payments for same period holding that district court had discretion to decline to deduct unemployment insurance benefits from damages award holding that compensatory time used by plaintiff police officers can be deducted from award of back pay