The “prevailing wage” expansion in Governor Andrew Cuomo’s FY2021 Executive Budget is far more complex than previous proposals to impose construction union contract terms—and drive up costs—on private projects receiving public subsidies.

In an apparent effort to placate critics, Cuomo’s bill language is riddled with catches, carve-outs and exceptions—capped by vast discretion for the governor to secretly decide which projects and builders might escape the mandate. But the “wage” mandate remains fundamentally a terrible policy—adding to taxpayer subsidies for shrinking unions that can’t compete effectively for work without it.

State Labor Law section 220—commonly known as the prevailing wage law, although it requires bloated compensation levels that are neither truly prevailing nor limited to wages—already applies to all public works construction jobs owned and bid by the state and its local governments, such as new school buildings and highway projects. Research by the Empire Center has found the mandate hikes building costs an average of 13 to 25 percent, depending on the region, and gives union contractors a leg-up in bidding. It inflates the price of everything from renovating schools to paving roads to repairing sewers—while generating high per-worker hourly payments to underfunded pension and welfare plans for unions.

Construction unions, which represent a shrinking share of workers in their fields, have been pressuring state lawmakers to expand section 220 to give the firms that hire them a better chance to win work in the private sector. Trade unions have asked lawmakers to explicitly deem projects getting tax incentives, capital grants, loans and other incentives as “public work,” saying their exclusion under current law is a “loophole.” (Whether these public subsidies are always justified in the first place is another question.)

The state Legislature last year came close to passing a bill broadly applying Section 220 terms to projects paid for “in whole or in part out of public funds” without a minimum and with only a handful of exclusions.

Cuomo’s version—contained in legislation submitted with his Executive Budget, although the proposal has no immediate budgetary impact—would impose Section 220 labor terms on private projects with total construction budgets exceeding $5 million for which public subsidies are covering at least 30 percent.

However, it would exempt any project from the prevailing wage mandate if the project owner forces bidders to sign a project labor agreement, or PLA, and to hire workers through local trade unions—the ultimate goal of Section 220, and the reason the state Department of Labor deliberately miscalculates prevailing wage schedules each year. The result would effectively be a union mandate either way.

As much as Cuomo has championed prevailing wage, however, his plan would exclude entire categories of subsidies from counting as “public funds.” Those exclusions include “421-a” property tax exemptions on new residential construction in New York City and funding that isn’t provided “primarily” for “construction work.”  Cuomo’s bill also would make exceptions for other types of subsidized construction, including:

  • Projects sponsored by non-profit organizations with annual revenues less than $5 million
  • Construction work on residential projects meeting criteria for “affordable” or “supportive” housing.
  • Projects funded by the state’s Restore New York’s Communities Initiative or the Downtown Revitalization Initiative
  • Work related to renewable energy systems, renewable heating or cooling systems, or energy storage systems (though many such projects are already subject to prevailing wage)
  • Grocery store constructions or renovations subsidized by New York City’s Food Retail Expansion to Support Health (FRESH) program
  • Certain New York City Economic Development Corporation small business incubation projects
  • Construction on “space to be used as a school” under 20,000 square feet leased by New York City Department of Education or the School Construction Authority (as the city does for charter schools)
  • Projects getting brownfield remediation, brownfield redevelopment or historic rehabilitation tax benefits

The bill would create an 11-person “public subsidy board,” comprised entirely of gubernatorial appointees, to decide—in some cases, confidentially—whether to exempt individual projects or entire categories of “public monies, credits, savings or loans” or types of “affordable or subsidized housing” projects from the mandate. Most importantly, the subsidy board would set the minimum amount and percentage of public money behind a project that would trigger the prevailing wage mandate.

Such a move would be, to say the least, constitutionally dubious, since lawmakers would be vesting policymaking powers in an appointed board—not that they’ve had any qualms about doing that lately.


About the Author

Ken Girardin

Ken Girardin is the Empire Center’s Director of Strategic Initiatives.

Read more by Ken Girardin

You may also like

On Measuring School Quality, Education Week Misses the Mark

Education Week’s rankings do not measure what counts. New York’s substandard achievement coupled with highest-in-the-nation spending and above-average wealth means that when it comes to school quality, New York fails to pass the mark. Read More

Even After Aid Cut, New York Will Spend Most on Education

If New York was a country in 2016—the most recent year for global education spending data—it would have boasted the highest per pupil expenditure in the world, even after subtracting 20 percent of state aid. Read More

Rochester schools: bad to worse

There's good news and bad news about Rochester schools from a new study comparing the variation in educational quality within urban educational systems. The good news: measured by standardized pupil proficiency scores, there's only an 8.6 percentage point gap between good and bad schools in Rochester. The bad news: even Rochester's good schools—those in the 75th percentile—have the lowest proficiency scores among the 68 largest urban school systems in the country. Read More

NY per-pupil spending reaches $23k

New York's spending on elementary and secondary education reached a record $23,091 per pupil in 2017, once again topping  all other states in this category, according to the latest U.S. Census data. Read More

Where NY’s school money goes

It’s commonly perceived that New York’s education funding system directs more money to wealthier, whiter schools than to poorer, less white schools – and that the distribution of state aid reinforces those inequities. Looking at the totality of school spending across the state, however, different patterns emerge. Read More

NY school spending tops $22k per pupil

New York surpassed all states with per-pupil elementary and secondary school spending of $22,366 per pupil as of 2016, according to the latest U.S. Census data. Read More

Albany matchup: Medicaid vs. schools

With the state facing its grimmest budget outlook in years, the legislative session shows signs of becoming a tug-of-war between public schools and health care—the two biggest recipients of state spending and, not coincidentally, the two heaviest-hitting lobbying forces Albany. Read More

NYS teacher pension costs to rise

New York's second largest public pension fund continues to move—at a glacial pace—towards a more reasonable and prudent assumption of its future investment earnings. Read More


Sign up to receive updates about Empire Center research, news and events in your email.


Empire Center for Public Policy
30 South Pearl St.
Suite 1210
Albany, NY 12207

Phone: 518-434-3100
Fax: 518-434-3130


The Empire Center is an independent, non-partisan, non-profit think tank located in Albany, New York. Our mission is to make New York a better place to live and work by promoting public policy reforms grounded in free-market principles, personal responsibility, and the ideals of effective and accountable government.