The state's Apprenticeship Advisory Council opposes a proposed rule change that construction unions say would enrich contractors but reduce wages for apprentices.
The council's non-binding recommendation, made Oct. 26, followed 90 minutes of testimony about the change, which is being pursued by the Department of Labor and Industry at the request of the anti-union Associated Builders and Contractors.
The rule change, if implemented, would create a different way of calculating apprentice wage scales. Union representatives say the change is certain to reduce apprentice wages, especially in Greater Minnesota.
"Yes, a contractor has to make money," said Tom Hansen, president of the Minnesota Pipe Trades Association, "but not at the expense of apprentices."
Who benefits?
Union representatives scoffed at testimony claiming the rule change would attract more young workers and improve their training opportunities.
"We've been told this is an opportunity for youth," said Buck Paulsrud, training coordinator for the Metro Area Sheet Metal Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee. "An opportunity for what? For lower wages?"
"The apprentice's well-being should be the primary objective of any rule change," said Mark Wickstrom, apprenticeship coordinator for the state Bricklayers union.
John Quarnstrom, director of labor relations for the Sheet Metal, Air Conditioning and Roofing Contractors Association ? a group of union contractors ? said the proposed rule threatens a system in which contractors and unions privately finance training for hundreds of apprentices each year, with minimal cost to the state. Those apprentices go into well-paying careers, pay taxes, raise families and stabilize communities, he said.
Judy Rubin, of the Minnesota Electrical Association, said rural contractors can't afford to pay apprentices the wages required under the current system, which she said reduces training opportunities in rural Minnesota. That, in turn, makes it difficult to keep talented young workers from moving to the Twin Cities or elsewhere, she said.
But Scott Malcolm, executive secretary-treasurer of the Lakes and Plains Regional Council of Carpenters, said nonunion contractors are proposing the wrong solution. "We need to raise wages in rural areas, not lower them," he said.
Rule change would use different data. Apprentice wage scales now are a percentage of journey-worker wages, as determined by the prevailing wage rate for a craft in a given county.
The rule change would set up an alternative way of calculating journey wages for private-sector jobs that are not covered by collective bargaining agreements or by state prevailing wage requirements.
The alternative scale would be based on median wage data from Occupational Employment Statistics compiled by the federal Bureau of Labor Standards and the state Department of Employment and Economic Development. Its only restriction is that apprentice wages cannot fall below the minimum wage.
Accounting for differences
Nonunion contractors testified that they are more likely to register apprentices under a dual-rate system. The wages they'd be required to pay, they said, would more accurately reflect price competition in the private sector.
But Dick Anfang, president of the Minnesota Building and Construction Trades Council and a member of the advisory council, said nonunion contractors are incorrect about the impact that metro wage rates have in rural Minnesota. "There's not a statewide prevailing wage. It's county by county. It already takes into account local conditions."
The ABC's Dale Zoerb questioned the accuracy of prevailing wage rates, though, calling them "synthetic." He labeled DEED's wage data more statistically valid and more reflective of wages actually being paid in a given community.
But Quarnstrom, of the sheet metal association, said the DEED numbers don't measure journey-level wages. Instead, he said, they measure all wages in a broad job classification, regardless of a worker?s experience and regardless of whether job duties match the skills required in an apprenticeship program.
"The prevailing wage at least measures the right thing ? the journeyman wage," he said. "The DEED data does not."
Timetable uncertain
The rule change now exists only in draft form. The Department of Labor and Industry is still considering how to proceed, said James Honerman, communications director for the department. If the department moves forward, the rule change likely wouldn?t take effect for at least three months.
The final version needs to be published in the State Register, he said. That starts the clock on 30 days of public comment. If at least 25 people request a public hearing, that adds least 10 more days. A post-hearing comment period adds 5 to 20 days after that, he said, and the administrative law judge then has at least 30 days to issue a decision.
Adapted from The Union Advocate, the official newspaper of the St. Paul Trades and Labor Assembly. E-mail The Advocate at: advocate@stpaulunions.org
Share
The state’s Apprenticeship Advisory Council opposes a proposed rule change that construction unions say would enrich contractors but reduce wages for apprentices.
The council’s non-binding recommendation, made Oct. 26, followed 90 minutes of testimony about the change, which is being pursued by the Department of Labor and Industry at the request of the anti-union Associated Builders and Contractors.
The rule change, if implemented, would create a different way of calculating apprentice wage scales. Union representatives say the change is certain to reduce apprentice wages, especially in Greater Minnesota.
“Yes, a contractor has to make money,” said Tom Hansen, president of the Minnesota Pipe Trades Association, “but not at the expense of apprentices.”
Who benefits?
Union representatives scoffed at testimony claiming the rule change would attract more young workers and improve their training opportunities.
“We’ve been told this is an opportunity for youth,” said Buck Paulsrud, training coordinator for the Metro Area Sheet Metal Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee. “An opportunity for what? For lower wages?”
“The apprentice’s well-being should be the primary objective of any rule change,” said Mark Wickstrom, apprenticeship coordinator for the state Bricklayers union.
John Quarnstrom, director of labor relations for the Sheet Metal, Air Conditioning and Roofing Contractors Association ? a group of union contractors ? said the proposed rule threatens a system in which contractors and unions privately finance training for hundreds of apprentices each year, with minimal cost to the state. Those apprentices go into well-paying careers, pay taxes, raise families and stabilize communities, he said.
Judy Rubin, of the Minnesota Electrical Association, said rural contractors can’t afford to pay apprentices the wages required under the current system, which she said reduces training opportunities in rural Minnesota. That, in turn, makes it difficult to keep talented young workers from moving to the Twin Cities or elsewhere, she said.
But Scott Malcolm, executive secretary-treasurer of the Lakes and Plains Regional Council of Carpenters, said nonunion contractors are proposing the wrong solution. “We need to raise wages in rural areas, not lower them,” he said.
Rule change would use different data. Apprentice wage scales now are a percentage of journey-worker wages, as determined by the prevailing wage rate for a craft in a given county.
The rule change would set up an alternative way of calculating journey wages for private-sector jobs that are not covered by collective bargaining agreements or by state prevailing wage requirements.
The alternative scale would be based on median wage data from Occupational Employment Statistics compiled by the federal Bureau of Labor Standards and the state Department of Employment and Economic Development. Its only restriction is that apprentice wages cannot fall below the minimum wage.
Accounting for differences
Nonunion contractors testified that they are more likely to register apprentices under a dual-rate system. The wages they’d be required to pay, they said, would more accurately reflect price competition in the private sector.
But Dick Anfang, president of the Minnesota Building and Construction Trades Council and a member of the advisory council, said nonunion contractors are incorrect about the impact that metro wage rates have in rural Minnesota. “There’s not a statewide prevailing wage. It’s county by county. It already takes into account local conditions.”
The ABC’s Dale Zoerb questioned the accuracy of prevailing wage rates, though, calling them “synthetic.” He labeled DEED’s wage data more statistically valid and more reflective of wages actually being paid in a given community.
But Quarnstrom, of the sheet metal association, said the DEED numbers don’t measure journey-level wages. Instead, he said, they measure all wages in a broad job classification, regardless of a worker?s experience and regardless of whether job duties match the skills required in an apprenticeship program.
“The prevailing wage at least measures the right thing ? the journeyman wage,” he said. “The DEED data does not.”
Timetable uncertain
The rule change now exists only in draft form. The Department of Labor and Industry is still considering how to proceed, said James Honerman, communications director for the department. If the department moves forward, the rule change likely wouldn?t take effect for at least three months.
The final version needs to be published in the State Register, he said. That starts the clock on 30 days of public comment. If at least 25 people request a public hearing, that adds least 10 more days. A post-hearing comment period adds 5 to 20 days after that, he said, and the administrative law judge then has at least 30 days to issue a decision.
Adapted from The Union Advocate, the official newspaper of the St. Paul Trades and Labor Assembly. E-mail The Advocate at: advocate@stpaulunions.org