Information about http://www.lsc.state.oh.us/membersonly/126prevailingwagelaws.pdf
Members Only AN INFORMATIONAL BRIEF PREPARED…
Tags: brief history, collective bargaining agreements, commission staff, dominic, federal government, legislative service commission, mcinerney, minimum wage, minimum wages, ohio general assembly, prevailing wage, public construction projects, research supervisor, staff attorney, state laws, three states, wage laws, wage rates,Pages: 16
Language: english
Created: Fri Feb 11 10:51:05 2005
Display cached document
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Members Only
AN INFORMATIONAL BRIEF PREPARED FOR MEMBERS OF THE OHIO GENERAL ASSEMBLY BY THE LEGISLATIVE SERVICE COMMISSION STAFF
Volume 126 Issue 2
February 25, 2005
Prevailing Wage Laws*
PREPARED BY: ELIZABETH DOMINIC, STAFF ATTORNEY
REVIEWED BY: VIRGINIA MCINERNEY, RESEARCH SUPERVISOR
Prevailing wage laws require that workers on certain public construction
projects be paid a specified minimum wage (typically termed in those laws the
"prevailing wage"). Depending on the state, the wage rates used may be taken
from local collective bargaining agreements or may be the result of calculations to
determine what wage rates are "prevailing" in a given community. This Members
Only Brief discusses the history and theory of prevailing wage laws in Ohio, in other
states, and in the federal government, and provides an overview of the differing Thirty-three states
views on these laws. and the federal
government have
prevailing wage laws
that require the
A BRIEF HISTORY OF PREVAILING WAGE LAWS payment of specified
minimum wages to
workers on public
State Laws construction projects.
Enacted in 1891, the nation's first prevailing wage law provided that "not
less than the current rate of per diem wages in the locality where the work is
performed shall be paid to laborers, workmen, mechanics, and other persons so
employed by or on behalf of the State of Kansas, or any county, city, township, or
other municipality of said State."1
State prevailing wage laws, though dissimilar, share a common history. Many
of these laws were enacted as part of general reform efforts to improve working Most prevailing
conditions at the end of the 19th and the beginning of the 20th centuries.2 Between wage laws were
1891 and 1923, seven states adopted prevailing wage laws that required payment enacted during the
Great Depression in
of specified hourly wages on government construction projects.3 Eighteen additional an attempt to prevent
states,4 including Ohio, and the federal government adopted prevailing wage laws government from
during the Great Depression of the 1930s amidst concern that acceptance of the using its purchasing
low bid, a common requirement of government contracting for public projects, when power to reduce the
government had become the major purchaser of construction, would operate to wages of its citizens.
reduce the wages paid to workers on those projects to a level that would disrupt
the local economy.5 As one commentator on prevailing wage laws notes:
* This Members Only Brief is an update of an earlier Brief on this subject
dated November 20, 1998 (Volume 122 Issue 11).
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
[t]he proponents of prevailing wage
the like) in the civil subdivision where
legislation wanted to prevent the the contract is to be performed. 8
government from using its Additionally, 60 separate federal laws
purchasing power to undermine the currently specify the payment of Davis-
wages of its citizens. It was believed Bacon wages for work prescribed.9 The
that the government should set an
example, by paying the wages
United States Supreme Court has stated
prevailing in a locality for each the public policy underlying the Davis-
occupation hired by government Bacon Act as one of "protecting local
contractors to build public projects.6 wage standards by preventing con-
tractors from basing their bids on
Thus, prevailing wage laws are meant wages lower than those prevailing in
to ensure that wages commonly paid to the area . . . [and] giving local labor and
construction workers in a particular the local contractor a fair opportunity to
region will determine the minimum wage participate in this building program."10
paid to the same type of workers Since 1985, USDOL regulations
employed on publicly funded con- have defined "prevailing wage" as the
struction projects. Most public con- exact wage, to the penny, paid to at
struction projects contracted for or by the least 50% of the workers in the same
federal government or the District of job classification on similar projects
Columbia are covered by the federal in the civil subdivision during the period
prevailing wage law, the Davis-Bacon in question. If the same wage is not paid
Act,7 while 33 states have prevailing to a majority of those employed in the
wage laws, often referred to as "little classification, the prevailing wage will
Davis-Bacon Acts," that encompass be the average of the wages paid,
projects financed by states and their weighted by the total employed in the
political subdivisions. classification. 11 To determine the
prevailing wages and fringe benefits in
The Davis-Bacon Act various areas throughout the country,
is the federal prevailing The Davis-Bacon Act USDOL periodically surveys the
wage law, and it applies wages paid to workers in building,
to public construction
The Davis-Bacon Act was enacted residential, highway, and heavy con-
contracts of the federal
government that cost by Congress in 1931 and amended in struction. According to Peter Philips
more than $2,000. 1935 to substantially its present form. of the University of Utah, in 1994, 29%
The Act requires workers employed of all local-level federal Davis-Bacon
under public construction contracts of the prevailing wage rates were taken from
federal government in excess of $2,000 collective bargaining agreements, 48%
to be paid a minimum wage that the were based on average wages, and the
United States Department of Labor remaining 23% were based on a mix
(USDOL) determines to be prevailing for of these two sources of wage rates
corresponding classes of workers (such depending on the occupation.12
as plumber, electrician, carpenter, and
2
February 25, 2005
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
Different Meanings of York, the dilemma was resolved by
"Prevailing" adopting the collectively bargained rate
for a particular occupation as the
The exact prevailing wage varies, prevailing wage. Other states use a
depending on the classification of the variety of methods to determine what is States use
worker, the geographic area where the meant by "prevailing." different formulas to
project is located, and the type of Some states use the modal rate (the determine which
construction. Since prevailing wage laws rate that occurs with the most wages are
frequency), the median rate (the rate "prevailing" in a
are intended to prevent the government community. Ohio
from pulling down wages, the attempt to that falls in the middle when all the rates uses the wage rates in
discern what is meant by "prevailing" are arrayed by increasing amount), the collective bargaining
creates a dilemma for policy makers: average rate (the sum of all rates agreements for a
divided by the number of different particular occupation
The dilemma is that if the state rates), the weighted average rate (the as the prevailing
p a y s the average wage, it will wage.
automatically undercut the most
sum of all rates times the number of
commonly found wage. Alternative- workers receiving that rate divided by
ly, if government pays the highest the number of workers), or the plurality
wage found, it will always be pulling rate (the rate that occurs among 50,
the average wage up. When is the 40, or 30% of the applicable workers).
highest wage sufficiently common
that it should be called the prevailing
The formulas are not meant to reach
wage rate, even though it will never different results; rather they are
be the average wage?13 attempts to identify what the legislature
meant in enacting a law that requires
In the Davis-Bacon Act, this payment of wages "prevailing" in a
dilemma was resolved by use of the community. 14 As the table shows,
50% rule described above. In Ohio, different formulations may yield
Massachusetts, New Jersey, and New different results from the same data.
RESULTS OF DIFFERENT FORMULAS FOR CALCULATING PREVAILING W AGE RATES
Hypothetical Simple average Median Mean (sum of Modal digit Greatest
employee wage (sum of diff. rates/# (middle all rates/total # (most common number, but
rates of diff. rates) number) of rates) number) at least 40%
10.75, 11.25, 12.46 13.75 13.48 15.04 15.04
11.50, 11.90,
12.25, 12.25,
13.50, 13.75,
15.04, 15.04,
15.04, 15.04,
15.04, 15.04,
15.04
3
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
OHIO'S PREVAILING Application
WAGE LAW
A construction project must satisfy
Ohio's Prevailing Wage Law three elements in order to be covered by
(Chapter 4115. of the Revised Code) the Prevailing Wage Law. First, the
The Ohio Prevailing was enacted in 1931 by House Bill 3 project must be a "public improvement"
Wage Law applies to the of the 89th General Assembly. The as defined in law, which includes all of
construction and the following:
Prevailing Wage Law requires that any
renovation of public
public authority wishing to engage in (1) All buildings, roads, streets,
improvements that meet
the following criteria: construction of a public improvement alleys, sewers, ditches, sewage disposal
(1) The project must that costs more than the statutory plants, water works, and all other
fall within the statutory threshold amount ensure that the structures or works constructed by a
definition of "public public authority or a person who
workers employed on the project are
improvement."
paid the prevailing wage. The pre- constructs a structure for a public
(2) The total cost of
the project must exceed vailing wage is defined as the sum of authority pursuant to a contract with the
the statutory threshold. the basic hourly rate of pay, certain public authority;18
(3) The project, or employer contributions to funds, plans, (2) When the public authority rents
the persons employed on or leases a newly constructed structure
and programs, and fringe benefit costs
the project, must not
such as insurance and vacation leave.15 within six months after completion of
otherwise be exempt
from the Law. This requirement applies to any officer, construction, all work performed on the
board, or commission of the state, any structure to suit it for occupancy;19
political subdivision, any instrumen- (3) Construction on certain projects
tality of these governmental entities, and and facilities specified in law, including
any institution supported in whole or in projects undertaken by or through the
part by public funds. Department of Development Financing
The Director of Commerce ad- Advisory Council, Minority Business
ministers and enforces the Prevailing Enterprise Loan Fund, industrial
Wage Law. The Ohio Supreme Court development bonds, and the economic
has declared that, "[a]bove all else, the development program. 20
primary purpose of the prevailing wage
law is to support the integrity of the
collective bargaining process by The Prevailing Wage Law requires
preventing the undercutting of employee the threshold to be adjusted for
inflation each January 1 of every
According to the wages in the private construction even-numbered year, not to exceed
Ohio Supreme Court, the sector."16 The Court further has held 3% per biennium. As of January 1,
Prevailing Wage Law
that the Prevailing Wage Law preempts 2004, the current thresholds are
preempts any state or
any state or local law to the contrary. 17 $65,843 for new construction and
local law to the contrary.
$19,752 for renovations.21
4
February 25, 2005
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
Second, a project's total cost must improvement projects are exempt,
exceed the statutory threshold. As along with certain participants who are
originally enacted, the threshold for all not paid the prevailing wage even if the
public improvement projects was project is covered under the Prevailing
$4,000.22 In 1994, the threshold was Wage Law. Public improvement pro- Ohio law
raised to $50,000 for new construction jects that are exempt from the Law under generally prohibits a
and $15,000 for the reconstruction, Chapter 4115. of the Revised Code are: public authority from
subdividing a project
enlargement, alteration, repair, remodel- (1) Public improvement projects
in order to circum-
ing, renovation, or painting of a public subject to the Davis-Bacon Act;25 vent the threshold
improvement.23 A public authority is (2) Participants in specified types of amounts.
prohibited from subdividing a project to subsidized employment programs or
circumvent the threshold amounts unless work experience programs when a public
the projects are conceptually separate authority uses a participant's labor to
and unrelated to each other or encompass construct a public improvement;26
independent and unrelated needs of the (3) Public improvements under-
public authority.24 taken by, or under contract for, the
Finally, a project must not be speci- board of education of any school
fically exempted from the Prevailing district or the governing board of any
Wage Law. A variety of public educational service center;27
Recent legislation proposing changes to Ohio's Prevailing Wage Law
Considered but not enacted
Since 1993, several bills have been introduced to amend or repeal the Prevailing Wage Law. In the
120th General Assembly, bills were introduced to impose a statute of limitations for alleging
violations of the Prevailing Wage Law and to exempt small townships from the Law.28 The 121st
General Assembly considered bills to subject all public improvements to that Law and to require the
use of a blended rate of union and nonunion wages rather than the rate specified in collective bargaining
agreements.29 The 122nd General Assembly considered proposals to exempt the following from the
law: (1) colleges and universities, (2) construction of an improvement by the armed forces reserves,
and (3) state historical facilities constructed by an arts organization.30 In the 123rd General
Assembly, proposals were made to exempt contracts and projects of a transportation improvement
district (TID) and construction of erosion control structures from the law.31 The 124th General
Assembly considered a bill that limited the Prevailing Wage Law only to construction projects
undertaken by or pursuant to a contract with the state on state-owned structures instead of also to
construction projects undertaken by political subdivisions. Two bills sought to remove the statutory
exemption for school facilities. The 125th General Assembly considered bills that removed the
exemption for school facilities and exempted contracts and projects of a TID.32 Legislation to repeal
the Prevailing Wage Law was introduced in the 120th, 121st, 122nd, and 123rd General Assemblies.33
Enacted
The 124th General Assembly passed a bill (effective on March 14, 2003) that exempts the
construction of project facilities built under the Innovation Ohio Loan Program.34 The 125th General
Assembly passed H.B. 95 (effective on September 26, 2003), which requires an employee who files
a written complaint with the Director alleging a violation of the law to include documented evidence
to support the complaint. Additionally, H.B. 95 extends the time in which an employee may file
a lawsuit before being barred from further action under the law from 60 days to 90 days from the
date on which the Director determines that there has been a violation of the law.
5
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
(4) In certain circumstances, public bargaining agreements relating to the
improvements undertaken by, or under particular trade. If there is no collective
contract for, a county hospital;35 bargaining agreement in that county,
(5) Certain improvements made the prevailing rate of wages becomes
pursuant to a contract with a soil and the rate in effect for a particular trade in
water conservation district and certain the nearest county in which a collective
improvements concerning single county bargaining agreement exists.39
ditch projects where no less than 75%
of the project is on private land and no Wage Records
less than 75% of the project's cost is paid
by private property owners.36 Contractors on public improvement
The exemptions explained above are projects are required to keep full and
just a few examples of those that exist accurate payroll records for each
throughout the Revised Code. employee and to report specified infor-
mation from these records.40 A public
authority must appoint one of its
Administration employees as wage coordinator for each
project to monitor compliance with the
Determination law or maintain a permanent employee
to perform this function for all projects.
A public authority
Before a public authority may If the public authority or its wage co-
must have the Director of
Commerce determine the advertise for bids for, award a contract ordinator fails to monitor as required by
prevailing rate of wages for, or begin construction of a public law, the Director must notify the public
for workers on a improvement that is subject to the authority or prevailing wage coordinator
particular project before Prevailing Wage Law, it must have the that compliance is required within a time
the public authority may
Director of Commerce determine the the Director prescribes. If the public
advertise for bids or
award a contract for the prevailing rate of wages of workers for authority or wage coordinator still fails to
project. the class of work called for by the public comply, the Attorney General must bring
improvement in the county where the suit to compel compliance.41
work is to be performed.37 If the contract
is not awarded or construction not
undertaken within 90 days after the Enforcement and
prevailing wage for the project is deter- Penalties
mined, the Director must redetermine the
prevailing wage.38 Who May Bring an Action
Bidders, subcon-
tractors, labor unions, The prevailing rate of wages may
employees, and the not be less at any time during a contract An employee who has not been paid
Director of Commerce than the prevailing rate of wages then the prevailing wage may either file a suit
may bring actions to payable to persons in the same trade or file a complaint with the Director to
enforce the Prevailing
in the county in which the public work recover wages not paid and damages.
Wage Law.
is being performed under collective The employee may file suit for recovery
6
February 25, 2005
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
within 90 days of the Director's deter- subcontractors. Upon receipt of the
mination that the employer violated the complaint, the Director must determine
Prevailing Wage Law. If the employee whether the employer violated the
does not file a suit, the employee may file Prevailing Wage Law. If the Director
a complaint with the Director. Upon determines that no violation has
receiving a written complaint, the Director occurred or that the violation was not
must take an assignment of the intentional, then the interested party
employee's claim in trust and bring any may appeal to the court of common
legal action that is necessary to recover pleas. If the Director does not rule on
for the employee.42 the merits of the complaint within 60
If the employee does not file a suit or days after it is filed, the interested party
file a complaint with the Director and may file a complaint with the court of
the Director determines that an common pleas. If the court finds a
An employee who
employer has violated the law, the violation of the law, the court must is not paid the
Director must still bring any legal action award the relief specified under the prevailing wage is
necessary to recover for the employee Prevailing Wage Law as it applies to entitled to recover
and the Director.43 the interested party. If the court finds the difference in the
rates, 25% of that
The employee can recover the that no violation has occurred, the
difference, and costs
difference between the fixed rate and court may award court costs and and reasonable
the amount paid to the employee, plus attorney's fees to the prevailing party, attorney's fees.
25% of that difference. The Director other than the Director or a public
also collects a penalty from the authority, if the court finds the action
employer equaling 75% of the brought was unreasonable or without
difference between the fixed rate and foundation, even if the action was not
the amount paid to the employee. brought in subjective bad faith.45
Additionally, the employer must pay the
employee's or the Director's costs and Debarrment
reasonable attorney's fees. For actions
brought by the Director and not the Contractors, subcontractors, and
employee, the Director must collect the their officers who have been prosecuted A contractor who
employee's recovery on the employee's and convicted for violations of or have violates the
behalf and pay that recovery amount to been found to have intentionally Prevailing Wage Law
the employee.44 violated the Prevailing Wage Law are is subject to
debarrment, which
An interested party also may file a prohibited from contracting directly or prohibits the
complaint with the Director. An indirectly with any public authority for contractor from
interested party is defined as a bidder the construction of a public improve- contracting for
on a project, a subcontractor of a ment and from performing any work on public improvements
bidder, a labor union authorized to a public improvement as a contractor, for a specified period
of time.
represent employees of bidders or their subcontractor, or officer for a one-year
subcontractors, or any association period from the expiration date for
having as members bidders or their filing an appeal, or if there was an appeal,
7
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
from the date of the final court judgment. General must then bring suit against the
If the same person is found to have person, public authority, or prevailing
intentionally violated the law another time wage coordinator to enjoin awarding the
within five years after the first violation, contract for the public improvement, or
that person is prohibited from contracting if the contract has already been
or performing work for a three-year awarded, to enjoin further work under
period from the expiration date for filing the contract until the person, public
an appeal, or if there was an appeal, from authority, or prevailing wage coordinator
the date of the final court judgment. complies with the notice.48
Additionally, public authorities may not
award contracts for public improvements Criminal penalties and additional
to any such person during the time that fines
the contractor's, subcontractor's, or
officer's name appears on a list of In the following circumstances, the
defaulting contractors, subcontractors, person or entity listed below is guilty of
and officers which the Director must file a misdemeanor of the second degree for
with the Secretary of State.46 the first offense and a misdemeanor of the
first degree for each subsequent offense:
Stop work orders and injunctions (1) If a public authority, contractor,
or subcontractor does not pay the
If the Director determines that a prevailing wage rate as required by law;
contractor or subcontractor has failed to (2) If a contractor or subcontractor
pay the prevailing wage rate, the does not provide a prevailing wage
Under specified contracting public authority or the coordinator with a pay schedule and
circumstances, Director, after notice of noncompliance other specified payroll information;
violations of the
and a hearing, may order work halted on (3) If an employer does not pay
Prevailing Wage Law
can cause all work on a that part of the contract for which less employees in cash, but this applies only
public improvement to than the prevailing wage rate has been if that employer does not have a financial
cease until the paid. Work must be halted until the responsibility plan that is communicated
violations are corrected. defaulting contractor has filed a bond in writing to employees.
with the Director in an amount set by the If a public official advertises for bids
Director, conditioned upon paying the for, awards a contract for, or begins
prevailing wage rate.47 construction of a public improvement
If a public authority, contractor, that is subject to the Prevailing Wage
subcontractor, or prevailing wage Law before having the Director
coordinator violates the Prevailing Wage determine the prevailing wage rate of
Law and the Director gives notice of workers for the class of work called for
noncompliance, the Director must inform by the public improvement in the locality
the Attorney General if that notice was where the work is to be performed, then
given but the person, public authority, or the public official must be fined not less
prevailing wage coordinator has not than $25 nor more than $500.49
complied with the notice. The Attorney
8
February 25, 2005
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
COMMON ARGUMENTS Opponents of Prevailing
SURROUNDING Wage Laws
PREVAILING WAGE
LAWS Those opposed to the Davis-Bacon
Act argue that the federal law (1) is a
The prevailing wage issue is com- Depression-era measure that has long
plex, for it often involves a balancing of since outlived its usefulness, (2) interferes
sometimes competing interests and with the workings of a free competitive
philosophies. The Kentucky Legislative market, (3) is inflationary because it results
Service Commission, in its 1981 study in federal and federally assisted
of Kentucky's prevailing wage law, construction contracts costing more than
other construction contracts, (4) gives an The prevailing
gave the following evaluation of the then- wage has been a
existing literature on the subject: unfair advantage to union employers over contentious and
nonunion employers in bidding for controversial issue at
This is not to suggest that for every government construction contracts, and both the state and
point raised regarding prevailing
wage there is a counter-point, or that
(5) impedes entry of minority groups into federal levels. Pro-
the construction industry because they are ponents and
the points made on either side of the
opponents often draw
issue are equally valid. Many of the disproportionately represented among the different conclusions
points made on the issue are totally low-skilled labor force.52 Advocates of from the same data.
devoid of real world validity. The the repeal of Kentucky's prevailing wage
intent here is to underscore the fact
that it is extremely difficult to obtain
law testified that a repeal would permit
objective information on a subject greater participation by small and local
as controversial as prevailing contractors in the public works market
wage.50 and, in response to concerns that a repeal
would reduce the quality of workmanship
It is reasonable to say that this on public works, opined that increased
evaluation has not changed in the inspections would have more effect on the
intervening years. In the 1988 debate quality of work than the wage rates
to repeal the Massachusetts prevailing workers are paid.53
wage law, for example, proponents of
the repeal issued a report that said "in
1987, the prevailing wage law cost Advocates of Prevailing
Massachusetts at least $212 million."
Wage Laws
Opponents countered that a repeal
would result in "a total wage loss of
Supporters of the Davis-Bacon Act
$196 million and a net employment loss
argue that (1) the law is more than a
of 600."51 While a portion of the
Depression-era measure and is needed
discussion below centers on arguments
now as much as ever, (2) it prevents
for and against the Davis-Bacon Act,
cutthroat competition and promotes fair
the same arguments have been raised
competition based on decent labor
in support and opposition of state
standards, (3) it follows established
prevailing wage laws.
9
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
federal government policy to pay prevailing wages, (4) it is not inflationary and in
the long run it may reduce costs, and (5) its repeal or weakening would adversely
affect apprenticeship programs in the construction industry and hurt minority groups.54
Proponents of Kentucky's prevailing wage law similarly argued that the construction
industry is very seasonal and highly volatile and the law provides stability. A repeal
would permit large itinerant contractors to take advantage of local contractors by
bringing into the state cheap unskilled or unqualified labor for local projects.55
OTHER STATES' PREVAILING WAGE LAWS
The following table gives information commonly requested by legislators about
other states' prevailing wage laws.
S ELECTED INFORMATION ABOUT S TATE PREVAILING WAGE LAWS
State Year Adopted Threshold Definition of "prevailing wage"
Alabama 1969; repealed NA NA
1980
Alaska 1931 $2,000 Wage paid for work of similar nature in region where
(Id. § 36.05.070.) public work to be done. (Id. § 36.05.010.)
(Alaska Stat. §§ 36.05.010 to
36.05.110 (Michie 2004).)
Arizona 1912; repealed NA NA
1984
Arkansas 1955 $75,000 Minimum wage rate prevailing in county or locality
(Id. § 22-9-302.) where work is to be performed, for workers in work
(Ark. Code Ann. §§ 22-9-301 of a similar character. (Id. § 22-9-301.)
to 22-9-315 (Michie 2004).)
California 1931 $1,000 Not less than prevailing per diem wages for work
(Id. § 1771.) of similar character in same locality. (Id.)
(Cal. Lab. Code §§ 1771
to 1781 (West 2004).)
Colorado 1933; repealed NA NA
1985
Connecticut 1933 $400,000 new Customary or prevailing wage for same work in same
trade or occupation in town where project is being
(Conn. Gen. Stat. §§ 31-53 $100,000 constructed. (Id.)
to 31-55a (2003).) remodeling
(Id. § 31-53.)
10
February 25, 2005
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
S ELECTED INFORMATION ABOUT S TATE PREVAILING WAGE LAWS
State Year Adopted Threshold Definition of "prevailing wage"
Delaware 1962 $100,000 new Wages paid to a majority of employees performing
similar work, or in the absence of a majority, the
(Del. Code Ann. tit. 29, § 6960 $15,000 average wages paid to all employees. (Id.)
(2004).) remodeling (Id.)
District of Columbia 1931 $2,000 Prevailing wage for corresponding classes of workers
(Id. § 3142.) (50% rule) employed on projects similar to the work
(Davis-Bacon Act §§ 276a to in the area where it is to be performed. (29 C.F.R.
276a-7, 40 U.S.C. §§ 3141-3148.) § 1.2 (a) (1).)
Florida 1933; repealed NA NA
1979
Georgia NA NA NA
Hawaii 1955 $2,000 Not less than the wages for corresponding classes of
(Id. § 104-2.) laborers and mechanics on projects of similar character
(Haw. Rev. Stat. §§ 104-1 to in the state and not less than the rate paid
104-34 (2003).) under the Davis-Bacon Act. (Id.)
Idaho 1911; repealed NA NA
1985
Illinois 1931 None Prevailing hourly rate including fringe benefits for
work of similar character in same locality. (Id. 130/2.)
(820 Ill. Comp. Stat. 130/1
to 130/12 (West 2004).)
Indiana 1935 $150,000 Not less than the common construction wage for each
(Id. § 5-16-7-1.) class of workers in the county. (Id.)
(Ind. Code §§ 5-16-7-1 to
5-16-7-5 (2004).)
Iowa NA NA NA
Kansas 1891; repealed NA The Kansas wage-hour law makes no reference to
1987 prevailing wages, but the concept of a prevailing wage
(Kan. Stat. Ann. §§ 19-1417, does appear in several instances under the law that
68-110, 68-2317, 17-4748 concerns public contracts. (Kansas Construction
(2004).) Law 17.28 (1998).)
Kentucky 1982 $250,000 Basic hourly rate paid majority of workers employed
(Id. § 337.010.) in each class in locality where work is to be performed;
(Ky. Rev. Stat. Ann. §§ 337.010, if no majority rate, then the average rate. (Id. §
337.505 to 337.550, 337.990 337.505.)
(Michie 2004).)
Louisiana 1968; repealed NA NA
1988
Maine 1933 $10,000 Hourly wage paid to median number of workers
(Id. § 1304.) employed in same trade or occupation in the
(Me. Rev. Stat. Ann. tit. 26, second/third week of September. (Id.)
§§ 1303 to 1315 (West 2003).)
11
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
S ELECTED INFORMATION ABOUT S TATE PREVAILING WAGE LAWS
State Year Adopted Threshold Definition of "prevailing wage"
Maryland 1945 $500,000 Hourly rate, including fringe benefits, paid to 50%
(Id. § 17-202.) or more workers in same class for projects similar
(Md. Code Ann. State Fin. & to proposed public work in the locality where
Proc. §§ 17-201 to 17-226 work is to be performed. (Id. § 17-208.)
(2004).)
Massachusetts 1914 None For laborers, at least the wages paid to laborers
employed by town (or highest of the towns, if
(Mass. Gen. Laws ch. 149, applicable) where construction taking place, unless
§§ 26 to 27H (2004).) a collective bargaining agreement specifies
otherwise. For craftsmen, at least rate under
collective bargaining agreement, if any; otherwise
wages paid to unspecified plurality or majority by
private employers. (Id. § 26.)
Michigan 1965 None Wages and fringe benefits prevailing in locality
where work is to be performed. (Id. § 408.552.)
(Mich. Comp. Laws §§ 408.551
to 408.558 (2004).)
Minnesota 1973 $2,500 if one trade Prevailing hourly rates including fringe benefits
paid to largest number of workers in the same
(Minn. Stat. §§ 177.42 to $25,000 if more class of labor in the area. (Id. § 177.42.)
177.44 (Supp. 2003).) than one trade
(Id. § 177.43.)
Mississippi NA NA NA
Missouri 1957 None Hourly wages plus fringe benefits prevailing for
workers engaged in work of a similar character in
(Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 290.210 to the locality where work is to be performed.
290.340 (2003).) (Id. § 290.210.)
Montana 1931 $25,000 Prevailing wages including fringe benefits for
(Id. § 18-2-401.) similar work in district where work is to be
(Mont. Code Ann. §§ 18-2-401 performed. (Id.)
to 18-2-432 (2004).)
Nebraska 1923 None (except for Wages paid by at least 50% of contractors in same
school districts, business or field of endeavor. (Id. § 73-104.)
(Neb. Rev. Stat. §§ 73-101 to $40,000)
73-106 (2004).) (Id. § 73-106.)
Nevada 1937 $100,000 Hourly or daily rate prevailing in county where
(Id. § 338.080.) work is to be performed. (Id. § 338.020.)
(Nev. Rev. Stat. §§ 338.010 to
338.645 (2004).)
New Hampshire 1941; repealed NA NA
1985
New Jersey 1913 $2,000 Wage rate determined by collective bargaining
agreements paid by employers employing a majority
(N.J. Stat. Ann. §§ 34:11-56.25 $9,850 for cities of workers subject to the collective bargaining
to 34:11-56.47 (West 2004).) (adjusted every agreement in the locality where work is to be
five years) performed. (Id.)
(Id. § 34:11-
56.26.)
12
February 25, 2005
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
S ELECTED INFORMATION ABOUT S TATE PREVAILING WAGE LAWS
State Year Adopted Threshold Definition of "prevailing wage"
New Mexico 1937 $20,000 Prevailing wages of those employed on similar
(Id. § 13-4-11.) projects in state or locality. (Id.)
(N.M. Stat. Ann. §§ 13-4-11 to
13-4-17 (Michie 2004).)
New York 1897 None Rates prescribed under collective bargaining
agreements if those rates apply to 30% or
(N.Y. Lab. §§ 220 to more of workers in same trade in locality;
220-g (McKinney 2004).) if less than 30%, average wages paid to
trade in locality in last 12 months. (Id. § 330.)
North Carolina NA NA NA
North Dakota NA NA NA
Ohio 1931 $65,843 for new Basic hourly wage, including fringe benefits, paid
construction in same trade in same county under collective
(Ohio Rev. Code Ann. §§ bargaining agreements; if there is no collective
4115.03 to 4115.16; 4115.99.) $19,752 for bargaining agreement in the county, the wage
renovations described above for the nearest county with a
collective bargaining agreement. (Id. § 4115.05.)
(adjusted
biennially)
School districts
are exempt
(Id. § 4115.03.)
Oklahoma 1965; NA NA
invalidated by
56
court in 1995
Oregon 1959; will be $25,000 Hourly wage and fringe benefits paid a majority of
repealed (Id. § 279.357.) workers employed in same trade on similar projects
(Or. Rev. Stat. §§ 279.348 to effective in locality where work is to be performed.
279.380 (2003).) March 1, 2005 (Id. § 279.348.)
Pennsylvania 1961 $25,000 Prevailing minimum rate in locality where public
(Id. § 165-2.) work performed for workers in the same class during
(43 Pa. Cons. Stat. §§ 165-1 to the term the work is performed, as determined by
165-17 (2004).) state labor secretary. (Id. § 165-7.)
Rhode Island 1935 $1,000 Hourly rate and fringe benefits paid in appropriate
(Id. § 37-13-3.) political subdivision to corresponding types of
(R.I. Gen. Laws §§ 37-13-1 to employees on similar projects. (Id. § 37-13-6.)
37-13-17 (2004).)
South Carolina NA NA NA
South Dakota NA NA NA
Tennessee 1975 $50,000 Prevailing wage for same work in same district.
(Id. § 12-4-402.) (Id. § 12-4-405.)
(Tenn. Code Ann. §§ 12-4-401
to 12-4-415 (2004).)
13
Prevailing Wage Laws
LSC Members' Brief
Vol. 126 Issue 2
S ELECTED INFORMATION ABOUT S TATE PREVAILING WAGE LAWS
State Year Adopted Threshold Definition of "prevailing wage"
Texas 1933 None Daily rates for similar work in same locality.
(Id. § 2258.021.)
(Tex. Gov't Code
§§ 2258.001 to 2258.058
(West 2003).)
Utah 1933; repealed NA NA
1981
Vermont 1973 $100,000 Mean prevailing wage published periodically
by the department of employment and training.
(Vt. Stat. Ann. tit. 29, § 161 (2004).) (Id.)
Virginia NA NA NA
Washington 1945 None Hourly rate, benefits, and overtime paid majority
of workers in same trade in same locality; if no
(Wash. Rev. Code §§ 39.12.010 to majority, then the average hourly rate. (Id. §
39.12.900 (2004).) 39.12.010.)
West Virginia 1935 None Prevailing hourly rate for work of similar
character in the locality where work is to be
(W. Va. Code §§ 21-5A-1 to performed. (Id. § 21-5A-2.)
21-5A-11 (2004).)
Wisconsin 1931 $30,000 if one Hourly wage and fringe benefits paid majority of
trade workers employed in same trade in same area
(Wis. Stat. § 103.49 (2004).) where work is to be performed.
$150,000 if more
than one trade
None for state
highway projects
Wyoming 1967 $25,000 Wages and benefits of workers engaged in work
(Id. § 27-4-402.) of a similar character. (Id. § 27-4-402.)
(Wyo. Stat. Ann. §§ 27-4-401 to
27-4-413 (2004).)
Citations
1 Kan. Stat. ch. 114 (1891).
2 Early labor reformers typically sought to (1) standardize an eight-hour work day instead of
the prevailing ten-hour day, (2) provide that overtime, when authorized at all, was to be paid
on the basis of an eight-hour day, and (3) promote child labor legislation. See PREVAILING
W AGE LAWS IN CONNECTICUT, LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM REVIEW AND INVESTIGATIONS COMMITTEE,
Connecticut General Assembly i, 5 (December 1996) (advocating changes to Connecticut's
prevailing wage law); Peter Philips, e