Having trouble viewing this email? Click Here Hi, just a reminder that you're receiving this email because you have expressed an interest in Deborah Wilder, CCMI. Feel free to unsubscribe if you are no longer interested or have received this email in error. Thank you!   You may unsubscribe if you no longer wish to receive our emails.

Welcome to our newsletter! You will find important updates and industry related news, along with upcoming speaking events and educational opportunities. Thank you for your interest in CCMI. Sincerely,

Deborah Wilder CCMI President

WHATS NEW?     Watch out for Local Jurisdictions which have Implemented Additional Prevailing Wage Rules Just when you think you figured out all the different requirements for California prevailing wage, the local jurisdictions impose additional requirements. While CCMI is not convinced that all of the requirements discussed below are valid, it will likely take a company suing the local jurisdiction for the issues to be resolved. In the meantime, contractors should be aware of the following special requirements relating to prevailing wage in the following three cities. San Jose - San Jose imposes a maximum penalty of $300 per prevailing wage violation. This is $100 more than the maximum penalty imposed by the Department of Industrial Relations. San Francisco - San Francisco requires a contractor to actually pay out vacation to its workers during the course of the project and does not allow a contractor to “bank” the vacation time earned on a prevailing wage project. We understand that this policy is in direct contradiction to the DIR’s interpretation of employer payments. San Francisco also has a minimum prevailing wage penalty of $50 per violation. Most recently they imposed this penalty even when the contractor had identified the error and fixed it before being audited. Los Angeles - Last year the City imposed penalties against a contractor for not employing 20% apprentices on a project. Even though the contractor had properly requested apprentices from ALL applicable apprenticeship programs. The City’s labor compliance personnel stated that they wanted to see a more concerted effort to try and employ apprentices and required more than one request for apprentices from all programs. Once again, this is in direct conflict with the DIR’s regulations on this matter.  So, until a contractor is willing to spend the money to legally challenge the implementation of these additional/different rules (SF and LA), just be aware of these special local requirements.

UPCOMING SEMINARS AND SPEAKING OPPORTUNITIES Upcoming Training: More classes with LCPTracker Academy coming in February: “What is New in California Prevailing Wage”, “Skilled and Trained Workforce”; “Prevailing Wage for Developers on Low Income Housing Projects”. Stay tuned. March 7th – 9th Foundation Software Conference Orlando Florida. https://events.foundationsoft.com/user-conference/ April 13th and 14th Prevailing Wage workshop for California Public Agencies. www.csda.net Want to schedule your own prevailing wage workshop? We will customize a workshop or webinar for you and your Agency/Company. Contact us at: [email protected]

NEW BOOK UPDATE What Every Contractor Should Know About Prevailing Wages, 3rd Edition.   Available through www.ccmilcp.com $45 inclusive of tax and shipping.

FROM THE INBOX....You asked, we answered!

QUESTION: What are the Rules About Off-Site Work?

ANSWER: Off-site work depends on the jurisdiction where you are working. 49 states do not have an off-site prevailing wage requirement. The State of Washington requires off-site prevailing wages for making certain materials that will be used on the project. However, that is rarely enforced. Both Davis Bacon and most states have a requirement that all on-site work is covered and any work which is “adjacent or nearly adjacent” to the project site is also covered. That means a water truck or a sweeper truck going around the outside of the project perimeter would be considered covered work. Additionally, a construction yard which is placed outside the four corners of the project, but is obviously close to that project site and is servicing the project will trigger prevailing wages for covered work performed on that property. The federal government typically determines that any operation which is within a quarter-mile of the project site shall be considered adjacent or nearly adjacent.   California has the broadest rule in that any outside facility which is established purely to service the prevailing wage project site, regardless of its distance from the site, will trigger prevailing wage. For example: An electrical contractor leases a piece of property approximately 1 mile from the prevailing wage jobsite and has its workers assemble the electrical components before they are delivered to the jobsite. This is not a manufacturing task, but a task that would normally be performed on the jobsite itself. This work would be covered by prevailing wage. Another example is a contractor who set up a remote worksite just across state lines for the purposes of assembling and putting together as much of the modular building structure as possible. Then, has the modular buildings trucked eight miles across the border to the actual projects site. The contractor was required to pay prevailing wages to all the workers who performed the assembly of the modular structure on the remote side. Feel free to send your questions to [email protected]

CCMI is not just another firm.... We are not merely a "consulting" firm, but rather a team of individuals who understand the needs of the Public Entity and contractors to "get the project done." Our staff includes retired contractors, auditors, attorneys and industry veterans.

STAY CONNECTED

‌ ‌ ‌