International Operating Engineer - Winter 2017

Politics & Legislation
Prevailing Wage Law an Early Target in New Congress
Anti-worker “Right-to-Work” Laws Advance in States
SENATOR JEFF FLAKE, an antiworker
Republican from Arizona,
wasted no time in the newly sworn-in
115th Congress to propose the repeal
of the Davis-Bacon Act. On January
24th, Senator Flake introduced S.
195, the Transportation Investment
Recalibration to Equality (TIRE) Act,
which would eliminate the prevailing
wage requirement on all federal
highway construction contracts.
In his press release, Senator
Flake said, “By suspending onerous
prevailing wage provisions on all
federal highway construction projects,
the TIRE Act will ensure that tax dollars
go toward projects and jobs, not
overpriced union labor contracts.”
The prevailing wage applies to all
construction workers, whether a union
contractor wins the bid or not. Senator
Flake is saying that an Arizona Backhoe
Operator making $17.37 an hour, with
$3.85 in total fringe benefits, which is
the current Davis-Bacon prevailing
highway construction wage rate in
most of Arizona, gets paid too much.
The Davis-Bacon Act is a commonsense
policy. It requires that contractors
on a project with federal assistance –
whether through federal loans, grants,
or other types of financing – pay
construction craftworkers a minimum
wage that is established by the U.S.
Department of Labor through a local
survey of wages and benefits.
The law simply prevents the federal
government – a large, influential
construction owner – from using
our own precious tax dollars to
undercut the wage standards in our
communities. It prevents large out-ofstate
contractors from undercutting
local businesses. It ensures that
bottom-feeding contractors can’t
win a public construction project by
lowering workers’ wages in a neverending
race to the bottom. They must
compete on a level playing field with
IUOE union contractors. And, while
it’s no guarantee, it helps ensure the
quality of construction that taxpayers
ought to expect.
The Davis-Bacon Act has no
effect on total costs of construction.
Opponents of the law invent imaginary
savings to justify their crony-capitalist
positions. Numerous studies have
revealed that productivity makes up for
any additional labor costs, essentially
eliminating any cost-savings if the law
was repealed.
Senator Flake’s political career
has been a tireless assault on working
families. He is trying to lower wages
for blue-collar workers. It’s that simple.
He thinks making less than $18 an hour
to build highways is too much money.
He ought to tell his constituents that he
thinks they make too much money. But
you won’t hear him say that.
Members of the International Union
of Operating Engineers will beat back
Senator Flake’s most recent attack, as
we have successfully done in the past.
As General President Callahan has said,
“Together, we can successfully combat
these anti-worker attacks against the
members of the Operating Engineers.”
We must stay vigilant. Call your
Senators and Representative. Let them
know that you support the Davis-Bacon
Act and oppose S. 195. We’re tired of
the TIRE Act and its assault on workers.
Call the Capitol Switchboard at
202-224-3121.
[photo] IUOE Local 324
IN JANUARY, Kentucky became the
27th “right-to-work” state in the United
States, joining every other state in the
South.
For the first time in decades,
Republicans took control in the
Kentucky House of Representatives in
the 2016 elections. They wasted no time
enacting anti-worker policy. Governor
Matt Bevin, who surprised election
watchers and pollsters by winning
the governor’s race in 2015, actively
supported “right-to-work” throughout
the election cycle.
Once anti-worker majorities were
in place in both chambers of the
legislature, they didn’t waste any time.
Within weeks of convening, legislation
to repeal the state prevailing wage and
enact “right-to-work” were sent to the
Governor for his signature.
Unfortunately, that is not the only
bad news from the elections of 2016.
IUOE-backed candidates lost races for
governor in two key states that are now
likely to go “right-to-work:” Missouri
and New Hampshire.
HHHH ACTION ALERT HHHH
New Missouri Governor Eric
Greitens says he will sign “right-towork”
legislation when it gets to his
desk, making the “Show Me” State the
28th state in the country to intervene
in labor-management negotiations to
prohibit “union security” clauses.
Other parts of the country are
not exempt from the challenges in
the Midwest and the South. New
Hampshire currently has a “right-towork”
battle on its hands. The IUOEbacked
candidate lost to Republican
Governor Chris Sununu, and,
unfortunately, he is expected to sign
“right-to-work” legislation, perhaps
even by press time. It would become
the first state in New England to pass
such laws.
With twenty-nine states likely to
be “right-to-work” this year, it will not
be long before anti-union politicians
attempt to push a national “right-towork”
bill in Congress. Senator Rand
Paul (R-KY) sponsored the law in the
past, with the support of the Senate
Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.
• Fight back against national “right-to-work” legislation.
• Visit www.StopRTW.org for more information.
• Call your Senators and Reps at the Capitol: 202-224-3121
• Tell them to “right-to-work” is wrong for America.
WHAT IS
“RIGHT-TO-WORK?”
“Right-to-work” laws insert
the government into labormanagement
negotiations,
eliminating “union security”
clauses in collective bargaining
agreements. These “union
security” clauses simply
require workers who benefit
under a collective bargaining
agreement (CBA) to pay their
fair share for its administration.
To negotiate a major contract, it
takes time, legal costs, financial
research, strategic sense, and
commitment to get the job
done. To put it simply, a good
CBA is a lot of work.
Union security clauses do not
require union membership.
No one can be forced to join
an organization in the United
States of America. “Rightto-work”
laws compel union
officials to provide services to
workers under the agreement
without asking the worker
to pay his/her fair share to
support the maintenance of
the agreement. “Right-to-work”
laws even allow an individual
worker to avoid the union’s
cost for taking up a grievance
on their behalf. Yet the union
still has a duty to represent
the worker. “Right-to-work” is
wrong. It is wrong for workers,
employers, and they’re simply
un-American.
8
INTERNATIONAL OPERATING ENGINEER
WINTER 2017 9