NEW HAMPSHIRE’S economy is booming, thanks in no small part to our lower tax burden compared to the rest of the country and New England. But a proposal in the state legislature could undermine New Hampshire’s competitive advantage by needlessly making public construction more expensive.

SB 271, introduced by Sen. Dan Feltes (D-15) last month, would impose so-called “prevailing wage” regulations on all state construction projects that receive state funding, as well as virtually all state-assisted local work, forcing our schools, towns, cities and state agencies to pay more for construction services without getting anything more in return.

Research has found that prevailing wage requirements increase the cost of construction. In New York, a 2017 report released by the Empire Center for Public Policy found that prevailing wage requirements inflated the cost of publicly funded construction projects in the state by 13 to 25 percent. The state of Ohio saved almost $500 million after the state’s repeal of prevailing wage rules on school construction, according to an Ohio Legislative Service Commission study published by the state.

New Hampshire’s proposed 2020-2021 state budget includes a one-time allotment of $64 million in school building aid, but with a new prevailing wage law, it is feasible up to 25 percent fewer classrooms would be constructed. That equates to millions of dollars in wasted funds that would be better off invested in New Hampshire’s public school systems or other needs.

Unless state lawmakers also plan to increase the amount of money they plan to contribute to our public schools and other infrastructure investments, a prevailing wage law could inevitably lead to even higher property taxes and service cuts or busted budgets.

Prevailing wage supporters argue SB 271 will improve a project’s quality, schedule and cost, and result in better worker safety and training. But there is little credible evidence to back up those claims.

In addition, supporters of SB 271 say it ensures construction jobs for Granite Staters. Yet local employers who will have a difficult time complying with the inefficiencies, red tape and paperwork associated with typical prevailing wage rules would be discouraged from competing for construction contracts on projects in their own communities, while large companies from Boston, New Haven and New York well-versed in complying with their state’s complex prevailing wage laws would have a leg up and disrupt the local market at the expense of New Hampshire’s small businesses and skilled construction workforce.

Not only will SB 271 impose significant compliance burdens on New Hampshire contractors, but it requires prevailing wages to be determined through what the U.S. Government Accountability Office has called an unscientific and fundamentally flawed survey processadministered by the U.S. Department of Labor that typically mandates wage and benefit rates that are not determined by the free market and are anything but local, prevailing or accurate.

In fact, the GAO and the DOL’s Office of Inspector General have reported that DOL’s process to determine local prevailing wage and benefits rely on inaccurate survey data and suffer from potential bias and result in untimely wage determinations. In addition, the GAO says the flawed process mandates union wage rates more than 63 percent of the time, even though union members comprise a small percentage of the construction industry’s workforce.

Just 12.8 percent of the U.S. construction workforce belongs to a union and only 16.5 percent of New Hampshire’s construction workforce is unionized

When the government mandates union-scale wages, unionized contractors have a better chance at winning projects because it forces non-union firms to follow archaic and inefficient union work rules set by local union collective bargaining agreements, which are incongruent with non-union contractors’ ability to utilize construction workers for specific construction tasks across multiple craft disciplines.

Because of their anti-competitive and inflationary impact, 24 states have no prevailing wage laws and a total of eight states have repealed or significantly reformed their prevailing wage laws since 2015.

So much of New Hampshire’s economic success comes from having smarter policies than the rest of the country. Yet in this instance, New Hampshire would be moving in the wrong direction with SB 271 — a costly policy that would harm taxpayers, local businesses and construction workers.

© 2019 New Hampshire Union Leader

You may also like

Editorial: Cuomo’s problematic Medicaid maneuvers

“It’s everything that’s wrong with Albany in one ugly deal,” Bill Hammond, a health policy expert at the fiscally conservative Empire Center, told The Times. Read More

EDITORIAL: Cuomo’s latest ‘triumph,’ gold-plated at your expense

Gov. Andrew Cuomo’s latest economic development “triumph” is a deal to bring a high-tech chipmaker into the 450-acre Marcy Nanocenter outside Utica, where Cree Inc. will build a $1 billion plant with 600 skilled jobs at an average $75,000 salary. Read More

MTA, LIRR union relationship worse than ever; up next is collective bargaining

The MTA’s heightened focus on overtime follows an April financial report from the Empire Center for Public Policy that revealed alarmingly high overtime rates among some MTA employees, including former LIRR chief measurement officer Thomas Caputo, who made $344,147 in overtime on top of his base salary of $117,499. Read More

Business lobby opposes wage mandate

E.J. McMahon, research director of the Empire Center for Public Policy, estimated that expanding the prevailing-wage mandate in New York to all projects that get public support would boost construction costs significantly. In an essay published after the legislation was filed, McMahon argued the proposed expansion resembled a “costly protection racket” for New York’s “politically powerful labor cartel.” Read More

The labor movement’s push for farmworker rights

Fiscal conservatives fault the state prevailing wage requirement for driving up the cost of public infrastructure by double digits. A 2017 Empire Center for Public Policy analysis found the law “drives up total construction costs by 13% to 25%, depending on the region, which will translate into billions of dollars in added taxpayer-funded spending.” Read More

Expanding prevailing wage: a help to region’s fortunes, or hindrance?

But an Empire Center for Public Policy study estimated that the state's prevailing wage mandate would drive up the cost of publicly funded projects by at least 20 percent in the Buffalo area, compared to median private-sector construction wages. The study estimated the mandate led to increases of anywhere from 13 percent to 25 percent in the state, depending on the region. Read More

CLOCK TICKING ON MTA OVERTIME GLUT AS UNION SOURS ON GOVERNOR

An April report from the Empire Center for Public Policy highlighted a 16% surge last year in overtime costs at the MTA — where the $418 million payroll cost in 2018 was $82 million more than what the authority expects to take in from the last fare and toll increases. Read More

Lawmaker calls question about prevailing wage calculation a ‘deflection’

The Empire Center for Public Policy, a fiscally conservative think tank, has repeatedly highlighted the opaque process by which the state Department of Labor calculates prevailing wage in different regions and raised questions about the accuracy of the calculations. The group recently noted that the state “refused to publicly release copies of the construction union contracts and pay scales it uses as the basis for its prevailing wage calculation.” Read More

Subscribe

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

CONTACT INFORMATION

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

Phone: 518-434-3100
Fax: 518-434-3130
E-Mail: info@empirecenter.org

About

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.