What is the Davis-Bacon Act?

[goldie]

Whatever it is The Davis-Bacon Act, the Prez just repealed it.

Why?

[albed]

http://www.google.com/

[goldie]

i know what it is albed :S

what i'd like to know is why was it repealed....

the only purpose i can see is to open the door for lower-paid possibly illegal immigrants to come in.

surely this isn't the case and there's more to it than that.

and another thing.........since the media has katrina and rita plastered all over the place, why isn't this?

sigh

[tambourine-man]

Because the under-resourced, shabby and over-worked media can only possibly cover one scandal at a time (unless it involves some form of sexual solicitation). Asking them to do otherwise would be a terrible strain on their graphics and razzamatazz department.

Also, it's not being covered because people like stories they can understand and can be broke down into easily digestable chunks. Stories that can be outlined by uttering single words in a monotonous manner are good, like: "Flood... people died... that guy's fault...". Asking people to concern themselves with a complex union issue is being optomistic at best... and the networks know that.

[JackSpratts]

lack of imagination on the media's part or outright timidity. i'd call it the "bush pro-scab" decree. most viewers'd get that just fine.

- js.

[Mazer]

From a link in that article:

The Davis-Bacon Act can add weeks to federally financed construction projects, and it effectively discriminates against non-union contractors, often driving up costs.

Basically the Davis-Bacon Act requires government contractors to pay their employees wages similar to the ones that other employers in the reigion pay their employees, and those wages can be quite high depending on how unionized the local workforce is. Some contractors can't afford to pay those wages, so either they have to lay off some of their employees to get the contract, or else they just don't bid on it and hope they can find non-government funded projects to keep them busy. You can imagine that in a disaster zone like the one created by the hurricane that all the rebuilding jobs are being contracted by the feds.

Now, if a construction worker wants to find a job rebuilding his home town he can find a company that's willing to pay him prevailing wages, so obviously the act wasn't repealed for the benefit of employees. The president did this for small companies so they could get government contracts without hiring union labor. I'm not defending the president's decision here, but this is probably what he was thinking when he did it.

[goldie]

Originally Posted by Mazer

From a link in that article:

Basically the Davis-Bacon Act requires government contractors to pay their employees wages similar to the ones that other employers in the reigion pay their employees, and those wages can be quite high depending on how unionized the local workforce is. Some contractors can't afford to pay those wages, so either they have to lay off some of their employees to get the contract, or else they just don't bid on it and hope they can find non-government funded projects to keep them busy. You can imagine that in a disaster zone like the one created by the hurricane that all the rebuilding jobs are being contracted by the feds.

Now, if a construction worker wants to find a job rebuilding his home town he can find a company that's willing to pay him prevailing wages, so obviously the act wasn't repealed for the benefit of employees. The president did this for small companies so they could get government contracts without hiring union labor. I'm not defending the president's decision here, but this is probably what he was thinking when he did it.

sorry, didn't refresh and missed this.

Mazer i certainly can follow that reasoning, i just wonder if there are limits on how low even the smallest contractors will go. Most southern states don't have unionized anything - like where i live, it's a purely a right-to-work state.

In NJ (where i used to live) there were unions up the arse.

I can see the good and bad of both especially with the higher union wages up north.


According to this

Minimum Wage, Alabama, Louisiana and Mississippi among others, there is no minimum wage or it's well below the national average. So I guess in a way, if a contractor wants to pay $2-3 an hour using Mexican immigrants - they could and no questions would be asked. (and i am of no means slamming Mexicans or any other ethnic groups here).

I dunno, seeing any law repealed which serves to protect certain ideals (even ones such as Davis-Bacon) and nothing added to safeguard workers (minimum wage for instance) can't be entirely a good thing.

added: especially considering the incredible amount of destruction and equally incredible amount of $rebuilding$ capital that will be floating around.

Just thinking outloud here.

[ONEMANBANNED]

Any thoughts Nic

Thought you would be on this one like a fat kid on a smarty

[albed]

Just as you have the right to buy goods at the lowest market price, companies should have the right to hire labor at the lowest market price.



Probably too complex an explanation for some, but what can you do?

[JackSpratts]

Originally Posted by albed

Just as you have the right to buy goods at the lowest market price, companies should have the right to hire labor at the lowest market price.



Probably too complex an explanation for some, but what can you do?

not much to get or like. it's called feudalism.

- js.