Prevailing Wage question

KCHR

I work for a conglomerate of staffing firms. One of our temporary staffing services has been offered a contract with a client working on a government construction project. The client is paying its staff the prevailing wage for the project, but is telling us that he doesn't have to pay prevailing wage to our temporary workers until he hires them full time. However, he can't provide any documentation that this is legal. I think we classify as a "subcontractor" and therefore have to match the prevailing wage. What do you think?

Shadowfax

[font size="1" color="#FF0000"]LAST EDITED ON 09-02-05 AT 11:00AM (CST)[/font][br][br]Are you sure yuou come under Davis Bacon, or might you fall into the McNamara or Walsh-Healy provisions. I am fairly sure apprentices and trainees can be paid less, but I don't recall Temps being in that position. DOL could probably tell you right off.

My quick peek at the Field Ops Handbook says even apprentices, trainees and helpers are covered although they may be paid less than PW under certain circumstances. I still didn't see any direct ref to temps, but I would be concerned that temps would be a slick way to avoid DB requirements if it were permitted.

Watson

Everyone that works on the project has to be paid in accordance with the prevailing rates, whether they be Davis Bacon or Service Contract wages. The contract will have specific provisions on how apprentices and trainees must be paid, so ask for a copy of their contract so that you can make sure your people are being paid correctly. I am the contracts manager for a government subcontractor and our contracts always require that our subs and anyone else we use on the project pay according to prime contract provisions. Most likely you will have to submit certified payrolls to show proof that you are paying correctly. Hope this helps.