The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“DAVIS-BACON ACT REFORM” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Labor was published in the Extensions of Remarks section on pages E366 on Feb. 16, 1995.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
DAVIS-BACON ACT REFORM
______
HON. WILLIAM (BILL) CLAY
of missouri
in the house of representatives
Wednesday, February 15, 1995
Mr. CLAY. Mr Speaker, today I am reintroducing legislation to reform the Davis-Bacon Act. The bill I am introducing is identical to legislation reported by the Committee on Education and Labor in the 103d Congress.
When Government enters the construction industry through federally funded contracts, its monopoly risks skewing this unique market unfairly. Construction wages vary greatly across the country, reflecting differences in communities' cost of living and business environments. The uncertain nature of construction work, however, where employees move constantly from job to job and employer to employer and regularly face periods of unemployment, makes the industry more susceptible to cutthroat business practices than most. The Davis-Bacon Act was enacted in 1931 by a Republican Congress in order to correct a procurement system that otherwise disrupted local employment practices and encouraged the exploitation of workers.
By law, the Federal Government awards contracts on the basis of the lowest qualified bid. Absent the protection of prevailing wage statutes, such as the Davis-Bacon Act and the Service Contract Act, the requirement that contracts be awarded on a low-bid basis, particularly in labor intensive economic sectors such as the construction industry, would inevitably result in contracts being awarded to the contractor bidding the lowest wages. In effect, Government procurement policy would act to undermine locally prevailing labor standards and reward those employers who pay the least to their employees. The Davis-Bacon Act serves the vital function of ensuring that Federal procurement policy does not act to drive down the wages of working Americans.
Opponents of the Davis-Bacon Act have created a number of inaccurate and misleading myths about the law. The most outrageous myth is that minority workers will somehow benefit from repeal. Our colleague from Texas, Mr. DeLay, has contended that repeal of the Davis-Bacon Act will
``reduce discrimination against women and minorities that so often occurs within the construction industry.'' George Will has purported similar nonsense in his column. Mr. Will begins this fabrication by misrepresenting the circumstances that led to enactment of the Davis-
Bacon Act, contending the law was enacted ``to impede blacks competing for federally funded construction jobs.'' In fact, the law was supported by and enacted to protect contractors from the exploitative and predatory practices that were driving legitimate contractors out of the Federal construction market. Mr. Will
goes on to claim that the law has a ``disparate impact disadvantageous to minorities.'' The plain and simple truth is that the disadvantage under which minorities typically suffer is not that they are paid the prevailing wage, the same money for the same work that most workers receive, but that historically and continually they have been paid less. Implicit in both Mr. Will's and Mr. DeLay's assumptions are that minority workers are not as productive and therefore not worth the same wages as white, male workers.
The second myth that opponents of the law have perpetuated is that the law requires union wages or somehow protects unions. In fact, the law requires employers to pay the same wages that are found to be prevailing in the local area. A union wage prevails only if most workers in the area are union employees. Seventy-one percent of all wage-based determinations issued by the Department of Labor in 1994 were based on nonunion scales.
The final falsehood being perpetuated by opponents of the Davis-Bacon Act is that repeal is sound Government fiscal policy. As leading construction industry economists have recognized, however, there is a direct correlation between wage levels and productivity. Well-trained workers produce more value per hour than poorly trained workers, low wage workers. Economic studies have demonstrated that construction projects built by under-trained and under-paid workers cost more to build than those using trained workers. Recent studies clearly illustrate the impact that repeal of the Davis-Bacon Act will produce. When Utah's prevailing wage law was repealed, there was a decrease in apprenticeship training, the availability of skilled workers, and a decline in average construction wages. More importantly, lowering the standard of living of American workers by cutting their wages and fringe benefits will not translate to lower costs for any government, be it Federal, State or local.
The legislation I am introducing strikes a balance between two important goals. While retaining the protection the law affords to ensure that the Government policy does not undermine the living standards of our citizens, it also updates and modernizes several provisions of the Davis-Bacon Act, including limiting some of its reporting requirements and raising the coverage threshold. I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting this legislation.
____________________
