Feds: Stadium subcontractor ‘repeat violator’ of wage laws (NV)

May 11, 2020 10:21 am

The company hired to paint portions of Allegiant Stadium is alleged to be “a repeat violator of the FLSA (Federal Labor Standards Act)” according to a U.S. District judge citing a Department of Labor complaint against Unforgettable Coatings, its owner Cory Summerhays and his partners for failing to pay overtime.

The DOL, which filed a complaint against Summerhays and the others on March 12, filed a similar complaint in 2013, that resulted in an order that Summerhays make good on overtime owed to employees.

“Instead of coming into compliance, it appears that Defendants then devised a new set of procedures to obscure its continued failure to pay overtime and then commenced a campaign to deter their workers from speaking truthfully to government investigators,” U.S. District Judge Kent Dawson wrote last month when he enjoined the company from cutting pay and from firing workers in alleged retaliation for cooperating with investigators.

“Defendants have tried not only to silence their workers, but also to actively manipulate them to provide false information to the government’s investigators,” Dawson’s order says. “When workers are first hired, Defendants advise them that they will not be paid overtime premiums, but they will make a flat $12 to $25 per hour – not minimum wage.”

“DOL investigators showed Defendants’ pay stubs demonstrating how an individual worker’s gross pay, when divided by the number of hours worked, always showed the worker being paid the worker’s straight time regular rate for all his hours worked – regardless of the number of overtime hours worked.”

“Wage theft is a rampant problem in the non-union construction industry and it drives down standards for all workers,” says the Laborers International Union of North America.

Between 2010 and today, the DOL has recovered more than $19 million in back wages from 1,615 employers in Nevada.

Taxpayers are often on the hook for providing services when workers don’t receive wages to which they are entitled.

The cost to taxpayers of providing Medicaid to Unforgettable Coatings’ eligible employees and family members in Nevada was $93,703 in fiscal year 2018, according to an annual report required by the Legislature.

(Read More)

unnamed

You Say Independent Contractor; Virginia Says Employee (VA)

Michael Marr
May 14, 2020

Effective July 1, 2020, Virginia will expand its reach into the employee versus independent contractor misclassification issue. Previously, Virginia had focused its efforts on the construction trade, where the Commonwealth believed most misclassifications occurred and workers were most vulnerable. With this new law in place, the cost to business owners of getting the classification of their workers wrong has grown exponentially and has unfortunately become potentially, financially catastrophic. See Va. Code §§ 40.1-28.7:7

The law contains two key elements that represent a real sea change in Virginia’s labor and employment law. First, the law establishes a presumption that a worker is an employee, not an independent contractor. In other words, Virginia law will now deem a worker to be an employee until proven otherwise by the business owner. That presumptive status of the worker as an employee can only be rebutted if the business owner can prove that the worker meets the Internal Revenue Service’s test for an independent contractor. Please see https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/understanding-employee-vs-contractor-designation and the IRS SS-8 form for guidance.

The IRS test is complicated and anything but a bright-line rule. The only easy answer, and quite frankly the one Virginia is apparently compelling business owners to make, is every worker is an employee; there are no independent contractors unless it is unmistakably, inarguably, and unambiguously obvious that the worker is an independent contractor.

The more complex the misclassification test, the more case-by-case determination required to satisfy that test, the greater the expense will be to make the correct determination at the beginning of the employment relationship-bearing in mind, of course, this law presumes your initial classification of a worker as an independent contractor is wrong. The legal expenses required to prove that the worker is not an employee are difficult to quantify but, whatever they may be, these expenses will fall squarely upon the business owner.

Please note that the business owner’s good faith and due diligence in making the right call are not available defenses under the statute as it is written. Rather, the issue framed by the statute is simple: Can the business owner prove the employee is an independent contractor based upon a multitude of IRS factors directed towards financial control, behavioral control, and the relationship between the parties? The resolution of that issue, however, is complex and uncertain, which leads to the second key element of the statute.

The new Virginia law expressly creates-for the first time-a private right of action for the worker. The new statute openly invites workers, and their labor and employment lawyers, to test a business owner’s classification determination before seven jurors, in a jury trial, in a Virginia circuit court, with no automatic right to appeal to the Virginia Supreme Court.

This private right of action expressly authorizes the worker-presumed employee to sue the employer directly for a violation of this misclassification statute and then to recover from the employer (if the employer cannot rebut the employee presumption) the full amount of any (i) wages, (ii) salary, (iii) employment benefits, including expenses incurred by the employee that would otherwise have been covered by insurance, or (iv) other compensation lost to the individual.

This statute also authorizes the court to award the employee’s reasonable attorney’s fees and the costs to file and prosecute the lawsuit, if successful. In other words, the statute allows the employee to shift the entire cost of the misclassification litigation onto the employer-that is, not only the employee’s but also the employer’s attorney’s fees if the employer/business owner is found to have misclassified the worker as an independent contractor.

Note that this civil lawsuit by the plaintiff-employee against the defendant-business owner is in addition to any sanction or penalty the Virginia state government or the U.S. federal government might impose for a misclassification. In a separate, but related law, which will take effect in January 1, 2021, Virginia may impose the following penalties (see Va. Code § 58.1-1901):

  • First misclassification offense: Up to $1,000 per individual worker.
  • Second misclassification offense: Up to $2500 per individual worker.
  • Third and following offenses: Up to $5000 per individual worker.

Note also that the business owner’s woes are still not over. In yet another new and related law, a business owner may not retaliate against a worker who reports a potential misclassification issue or who prompts a state investigation. Such an alleged retaliation will result in an administrative action against the business owner before the Virginia Department of Labor & Industry. see Va. Code § 58.1-1901

(Read More)

COVID-19 creates more competitive bidding for city construction projects (SD)

Posted: May 11, 2020

SIOUX FALLS, S.D. (KELO) – It’s not business as usual for public construction projects but it isn’t poor business.
While the coronavirus pandemic is causing likely declines in local sales tax revenue, it’s also caused some lowering of prices for city street projects.

“The majority of our (bids) have come in at the estimates or below since COVID-19,” Mark Cotter, director of public works in Sioux Falls, said.

“With the bids coming in the last month, we’ve had more bidders and very competitive prices,” Cotter said. “It’s a great time for cities, states and counties for bidding on projects if they’ve got the resources (for projects).”

Increased competitive bidding has resulted in at least $1.6 million when approved bids are compared to original estimates in three major projects, which illustrates the benefits of more bidders.

Cotter said the construction project on 57th Street between Minnesota and Western was estimated to cost $2.07 million but the approved low bid was $1.7 million.

(Read More)

IDOL Reminds Local Governments They No Longer Need to Approve Prevailing Wage Ordinances (IL)

Published May 11, 2020

SPRINGFIELD – The Illinois Department of Labor (IDOL) wants to remind local units of governments that while they still must pay prevailing wages for public works projects, a 2019 change in the law means they no longer need to adopt a prevailing wage ordinance or file it with IDOL.

“While most local governments are aware of the change, some continue to adopt prevailing wage ordinances and attempt to file them with the Illinois Department of Labor. That is no longer a requirement,” said IDOL Director Michael Kleinik.

The enactment of Public Act 100-1177, which took effect June 1, 2019, relieves local units of government from the former requirement of passing a prevailing wage ordinance, publishing it and filing it with the Illinois Department of Labor.

The prevailing wage schedules for each county in the state are now ascertained by IDOL and published on its website.

The changes to the Prevailing Wage Act also required IDOL to create an electronic database of certified payrolls where contractors will submit certified payrolls directly online rather than filing them with the local government.

Here is a link to the current prevailing wage rates for Illinois counties: https://www2.illinois.gov/idol/Laws-Rules/CONMED/Pages/Rates/2020/March-Rates.aspx

(Read More)