For years, construction trade labor unions have alleged that non-union contractors are not complying with prevailing wage laws and have demanded access to the payroll records of non-union contractors. When a contractor works on a publicly funded job, that contractor normally is required to pay a state-set rate known as a "prevailing wage."
Governor Doyle attempted to use the state budget to respond to their charges. The governor's budget bill contained a provision that all contractors submit payroll records to the Department of Workforce Development on a weekly basis rather than just maintaining them for state verification.
It seems this is not exactly what the unions had in mind. During a weekend session of the Joint Finance Committee, closed-door negotiations resulted in a motion exempting union contractors from the payroll record reporting requirement.
There only are two possible reasons to exempt the union portion of the industry from reporting wages. Either they recognize the new requirement is too burdensome or they are afraid to let others see their records. What are they hiding?
Under the amendment, union contractors need only provide state regulators with a copy of their collective bargaining agreement, not the actual payroll records. Unions argue they are "self-policing" and there is no need for them to submit payroll records.
Once one industry segment is protected from reporting, the law can be used as a weapon against the other (non-union) portion of the industry.
The union rate is not automatically the prevailing wage rate. To simply submit the collectively bargained contract as "proof" the correct wage is being paid is a false assumption. The amendment creates a huge loophole of favoritism. Exempting themselves from their own provisions is a strong admission that the prevailing wage law is a bureaucratic monster with requirements even its own creators can't meet.
The budget introduced by Governor Doyle included massive expansions of prevailing wage laws to many private construction projects and smaller projects by local governments. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau identified the provisions as non-budgetary policy that should be removed from the budget.
Despite being flagged for removal and having numerous flaws pointed out by citizens and legislators, the provisions were expanded even more in an amendment developed behind closed doors!
As the State Assembly debates the budget over the next few days, it should be encouraged to remove prevailing wage expansion from the bill or at the very least apply the same reporting requirements to the entire industry and not play favorites.
- Stephen L. Stone is president of the Associated Builders and Contractors of Wisconsin in Madison.
Governor Doyle attempted to use the state budget to respond to their charges. The governor's budget bill contained a provision that all contractors submit payroll records to the Department of Workforce Development on a weekly basis rather than just maintaining them for state verification.
It seems this is not exactly what the unions had in mind. During a weekend session of the Joint Finance Committee, closed-door negotiations resulted in a motion exempting union contractors from the payroll record reporting requirement.
There only are two possible reasons to exempt the union portion of the industry from reporting wages. Either they recognize the new requirement is too burdensome or they are afraid to let others see their records. What are they hiding?
Under the amendment, union contractors need only provide state regulators with a copy of their collective bargaining agreement, not the actual payroll records. Unions argue they are "self-policing" and there is no need for them to submit payroll records.
Once one industry segment is protected from reporting, the law can be used as a weapon against the other (non-union) portion of the industry.
The union rate is not automatically the prevailing wage rate. To simply submit the collectively bargained contract as "proof" the correct wage is being paid is a false assumption. The amendment creates a huge loophole of favoritism. Exempting themselves from their own provisions is a strong admission that the prevailing wage law is a bureaucratic monster with requirements even its own creators can't meet.
The budget introduced by Governor Doyle included massive expansions of prevailing wage laws to many private construction projects and smaller projects by local governments. The nonpartisan Legislative Fiscal Bureau identified the provisions as non-budgetary policy that should be removed from the budget.
Despite being flagged for removal and having numerous flaws pointed out by citizens and legislators, the provisions were expanded even more in an amendment developed behind closed doors!
As the State Assembly debates the budget over the next few days, it should be encouraged to remove prevailing wage expansion from the bill or at the very least apply the same reporting requirements to the entire industry and not play favorites.
- Stephen L. Stone is president of the Associated Builders and Contractors of Wisconsin in Madison.
