NJ Labor Department Bars Two South Jersey Contractors from Engaging in Public Work (NJ)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

April 11, 2019, 3:40 pm

TRENTON – The New Jersey Department of Labor and Workforce Development’s Wage and Hour Compliance Division has barred two public works contractors from doing business in the state for violations outside the state’s prevailing wage law, heralding a tough and progressive new enforcement approach against dishonest contractors.

…

“As I have often said, working on public projects is a privilege, not a right,” said Labor Commissioner Robert Asaro-Angelo. “These cases signal a new and bold effort to ensure that privilege is extended only to contractors who follow our laws, and pertinent laws in other jurisdictions.”

…

New Jersey already has one of the strongest prevailing wage laws in the country. The Public Works Contractor Registration Act requires all contractors, including named subcontractors, to register with the Labor Department before submitting price proposals or engaging in public works contracts exceeding the prevailing wage threshold of $15,444 for municipalities and $2,000 for non-municipal work.

(Read More)

Connections: Discussing the debate over the “prevailing wage” (NY)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

By EVAN DAWSON & MEGAN MACK * APR 1, 2019

Are construction workers paid fairly in New York State? The legislature has been debating the so-called “prevailing wage.” Non-union workers and business leaders have warned that expanding the prevailing wage will cripple businesses that want to expand, while stalling the clean energy industry. Union leaders have joined many Democrats in calling for more wage protections, arguing that the business community always claims the sky is falling when they have to pay people a little bit more.

Our guests debate it:

(Listen to Discussion)

Fair Wages are Good for the Economy, Albany Should Pass an Expanded Prevailing Wage (NY)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

March 28, 2019 | by Kevin Duncan

As the next state budget is being debated in Albany, increasing attention is being paid to the state’s prevailing wage laws. With so much misinformation out there, let’s set the record straight. Paying construction workers a middle class wage is a net positive for New York’s economy.

Specifically, the issue is how construction workers are paid for projects that receive public funds. Since 1897, projects receiving taxpayer funds are required by New York State law to pay fair wages to their workers. The problem is that developers are increasingly exploiting loopholes created by the growth of public-private projects, which blur the lines of what’s considered “public work.”

One recent example is the Chelsea assisted living facility on Long Island. The project received $15 million in public funding, but because that money came through the Brookhaven Industrial Development Agency (IDA), there was no requirement to pay workers a middle-class wage.

Legislation currently making its way through the legislature would close that loophole.

The bill,S 1947(Ramos)/A1261(Bronson), would clearly define “public work” as any large-scale project that is paid for with public funds. By ensuring that projects subsidized with public funds support middle class wages, the law will strengthen the middle class and the state’s economy.

Chances are that you’ve seen folks in the business community argue the opposing viewpoint – but when you look under the surface, those arguments tend to rely on overly simplistic or just plain inaccurate information.

Take the industry-backed argument that paying workers a middle-class wage would force costs to skyrocket and immediately put an end to all development. When a wealthy developer complains that much about paying a fair wage, you have to wonder how little they’re actually paying their workers.

As an academic, I rely on data and evidence to form a judgment. The data show that labor costs for construction projects usually amount to about 23-24 percent of the total project cost. To keep the math simple, let’s say that a prevailing wage law results in a 10 percent raise for construction workers in a given region. At most, that would increase total cost by 2.5 percent. A 2.5 percent cost can be easily offset by the efficiencies gained from paying the highly-trained workers you attract with a prevailing wage. Trained, skilled workers mean higher productivity along with fewer accidents, errors and change orders.

(Read More)

(See PDF of Full Study)

2-Minute Preview: Lawmakers to hear bills on prevailing wage for school construction, … (NV)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

Tuesday, March 19, 2019
David Calvert

Lawmakers on Wednesday will consider reversing a 2015 Republican-backed law limiting prevailing wage for school construction projects, …

Prevailing wage on school construction projects

Lawmakers on the Assembly Government Affairs Committee will review AB190, a bill that reverses some changes to prevailing wage rules that were passed under Republican control in 2015.

The measure would eliminate the requirement that public schools and colleges pay 90 percent of the prevailing wage – a sort of minimum wage for construction work – and revert it to 100 percent. It would also lower the threshold at which prevailing wage kicks in, from projects that cost $250,000 and up to $100,000 and up.

The measure is sponsored Democratic Assemblyman Skip Daly. The committee meets at 8:30 a.m.

(Read More)

NH Voices: Jeff Sullivan — Prevailing wage: Working families prevail (NH)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

By JEFF SULLIVAN
Apr 7, 2019

MR. REAP’S RECENT commentary on SB 271 (An Act to Require Prevailing Wages on State-Funded Public Works Projects) misses the mark and distorts the reality. Trying to turn the debate to a union issue is an effort to contort the facts, and the benefits, of the proposed legislation.

Despite wide-spread public misconception, a misconception also apparently shared by the CEO of the Associated Builders of New Hampshire (he should know better), prevailing wage is not “union” wage. Prevailing wage, both federally and in the states with similar laws, is based upon extensive surveys conducted in which contractors disclose wages and benefits paid to its workforce. There is no distinction between union and non-union workers. These surveys will then set direction for wage rates to be paid to construction workers on government-funded projects.

The “facts” tossed around by Mr. Reap have no support when put to the test. Simply put, a prevailing wage law will require contractors to compete for public projects in New Hampshire based on a set of criteria that ensures its workforce is the best-trained, best-equipped and best managed. Projects will be awarded to high-performing contractors; not to those that can assemble the cheapest, least-trained workforce. It is no coincidence that jurisdictions with prevailing wage law protections have the lowest incidence of workplace injury and death. Supporters of SB 271 understand all the ancillary benefits of a well-codified prevailing wage law.

Mr. Reap’s loudest claim is that prevailing wage will drive up the costs of construction and that the sky will fall with “higher property taxes…service cuts [and] busted budgets.” These are the bellwether sounds of those who try to influence public policy by threatening taxpayers with threats of increased government intrusion into our pockets. Again, the facts of prevailing wage laws in other jurisdictions belie these assertions.

In a recent, first-of-its-kind nationwide study on the impact of state prevailing wage laws, the reality of legislation such as SB 271 was proven to provide positive results across economic, social and fiscal areas. In its nationwide survey, “The Economic, Fiscal and Social Impacts of State Prevailing Wage Laws: Choosing Between the High Road and the Low Road in the Construction Industry” (Manzo, et al, 2016), it was shown that states with prevailing wage laws have higher workmanship, productivity and job-safety than states with no prevailing wage protections. Additionally, states without prevailing wage laws have a higher percentages of public health insurance and other forms of public assistance. New Hampshire’s rolls of those on public assistance is a prime exhibit in support of the argument that good paying jobs are the best social program any state can provide its citizens.

(Read More)

Connections: Discussing the debate over the “prevailing wage”(NY)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

By EVAN DAWSON & MEGAN MACK
4/1/19

Are construction workers paid fairly in New York State? The legislature has been debating the so-called “prevailing wage.” Non-union workers and business leaders have warned that expanding the prevailing wage will cripple businesses that want to expand, while stalling the clean energy industry. Union leaders have joined many Democrats in calling for more wage protections, arguing that the business community always claims the sky is falling when they have to pay people a little bit more.

Our guests debate it:

  • Brian Sampson, president of the New York State chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors
  • Dan Maloney, president of the Rochester & Genesee Valley Area Labor Federation
  • Dave Young, president of the Rochester Building and Construction Trades Council

(Listen to Discussion)

Union workers and day laborers join forces in push for prevailing wage (NY)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

By DENIS SLATTERY
NEW YORK DAILY NEWS
MAR 27, 2019

Albany – An unlikely coalition of activists, union workers and day laborers joined forces Wednesday to call on New York lawmakers to grant raises to construction workers on publicly subsidized projects.

Hundreds of construction workers, decked out in orange and yellow, filled the state Capitol Building, shouting “End corporate welfare, pass public works!”

The workers want so-called prevailing wage rules, requiring all publicly funded construction projects pay at least the average wage paid on all projects completed in that area, to be expanded to all projects that use even a portion of public funds.

Gov. Cuomo and both chambers of the state Legislature have backed the measure, but whether it will be included in the final budget, due by April 1, remains unclear.

“The Legislature has a simple decision to make: do blue-collar workers deserve an honest day’s pay for an honest day’s work, or do developers deserve to grow their bottom-lines using our tax dollars?” Michael Hellstrom, the assistant business manager of the Mason Tenders District Council of Greater New York said. “This is about ensuring our tax dollars are no longer used to line the pockets of out-of-state contractors who exploit workers and drive wages down. The clock is ticking and construction workers need to know what the Legislature’s decision will be.”

Manuel Castro, the executive director of New Immigrant Community Empowerment, said the measure would provide protections to both union and non-union workers.

“I think it’s important to show unity on these issues because for a long time we’ve known that contractors, by using a variety of different schemes, like subcontractors or brokers, they look for cheap labor and don’t pay workers a living wage.

Sixteen states have already passed similar legislation.

(Read More)

unnamed

L&I fines 99 Tunnel subcontractor for failing to pay prevailing wage (WA)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

Glacier Northwest ordered to provide $370,000 in back pay

By Brandon Macz
2/28/19 12:12 pm

Washington’s Department of Labor & Industries has hit Glacier Northwest with more than $74,000 in civil penalties for reportedly failing to pay workers a prevailing wage for their work disposing of dirt during construction of Seattle’s new State Route 99 Tunnel.

Seattle Tunnel Partners tapped Glacier Northwest as a subcontractor for the project for an estimated $28 million, according to an L&I news release, and tasked the company with disposing of dirt and other materials excavated by the Bertha tunnel-boring machine.

“This was the only project that the Glacier Northwest disposal site was accepting dirt from, so L&I was able to identify the specific workers and hours worked,” the news release states. “Because the tunnel is a public works project, those workers are entitled to prevailing wages, which they did not get.”

The L&I investigation was prompted by a June 2016 complaint, and the labor department reports 46 Glacier Northwest employees were collectively deprived of $370,666 in prevailing wages for spreading around 2.2 million tons of dirt at the former Mats Mats Quarry near Port Ludlow.

Glacier Northwest and STP are appealing the decision by L&I to fine the subcontractor $74,133 and order those workers receive back wages.

The 46 operating engineers were owed a journey level rate of $48.49 per hour, time-and-a-half for overtime and hours worked on Saturdays, and double-time for hours worked on Sundays, according to L&I’s Notice of Violation issued last December.

The range for owed compensation is from nearly $90 to $30,572. Ten engineers are owed at least $20,000 in back pay, according to the Notice of Violation.

(See Article)

The case for prevailing wage (NY)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

Foes say it adds costs to projects, but New York should strengthen this mandate


Patrick Purcell
February 19, 2019 12:00 AM

New York cannot afford to continue subsidizing a developers’ paradise with little to no public responsibilities tied to these taxpayer dollars.

This is a reality that Gov. Andrew Cuomo understands well. His inclusion of prevailing wage requirements on publicly subsidized projects in his budget proposal is a testament to that.

On the other side, there are forces with little interest in understanding just why prevailing wage requirements are so critical to the economic health and development of New York. An analyst for the Empire Center for Public Policy was quoted in a recent article stating, “New York’s prevailing wage mandate is an archaic law that needlessly adds 25% to the cost of construction in the city.” He said that outside of New York, the law increases project costs by 13%.

Now, these claims aren’t completely wrong. New York does have legislation that is archaic-legislation that gives private developers a loophole to take public subsidies for their projects with no responsibility to taxpayers in return. Countless projects across the state have received subsidies with zero wage requirements attached them. Just one example is Fresh Direct in the Bronx.

…

Those opposed to prevailing-wage legislation based on mistaken beliefs about increased construction costs also fail to take into account that the cost of living in New York is high. When developers come to New York-and especially when they building on taxpayers’ dime-they should have to pay their workers livable wages.

Counter to the idea that prevailing-wage mandates needlessly add to the cost of construction are the actual facts.

Fact: Prevailing wages would boost the economy upstate and downstate.

Fact: Mandating wage standards and taxpayer benefits would generate an additional $3.5 million to $6.9 million in annual sales tax revenue.

Cuomo sees the bigger picture. He recognizes that prevailing wage requirements are critical to get the best return on investment for taxpayer dollars and create jobs that serve New Yorkers rather than exploit them as many developers would do if it were up to them. Without these mandates and a clearer definition of public works, developers will continue to capitalize on loopholes in definitions of private projects and a lack of accountability to workers and taxpayers alike.

It’s up to Albany to do what is right for New York and pass public-works legislation before April 1. Tick tock.

Patrick Purcell is executive director of the New York State Laborers’ Union, which represents more than 40,000 construction workers

(Read More)

Council bill aims to impose prevailing wage on all city-subsidized projects (NY)

Posted by National Alliance for Fair Contracting on

Wage and safety bills would incentivize union labor, but critics fear higher price tag.

By Jeff Coltin
JANUARY 8, 2019


New York City Councilman Ben Kallos is reintroducing a stalled bill that would require all construction workers to get paid the prevailing wage on any projects getting city subsidies.

Under state law, any project built under a government contract must pay workers the prevailing wage. Kallos’ bill would cast a much wider net, mandating the prevailing wage for not just direct government contracts, but for any projects getting grants, bond financing, tax abatements or any other sort of support valued over $1 million from the New York City government.

“The same rules should apply when the city is doing the work directly or when they’re subsidizing somebody else to do the work,” the Manhattan lawmaker told City & State.

…

Critics like the Real Estate Board of New York, which represents developers, have spent heavily in the past to oppose efforts to expand the prevailing wage requirements, claiming higher labor costs would discourage private developers from building affordable housing.

Kallos countered that paying workers less than prevailing wage actually makes the affordable housing crisis worse by creating demand for housing at deeper levels of affordability.

“I’m disappointed to learn even the construction workers can’t afford the affordable housing that they are building,” he said.

(Read More)