Labor News & Articles
Marty Glennon quoted in Newsday Article on Post-Sandy Clean-up Contract Probe
Tuesday, 16 April 2013 18:21

 

NY labor laws at center of Sandy cleanup contract probes

April 13, 2013 by KEITH HERBERT AND SARAH CRICHTON / This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it , This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Labor laws designed to keep workers from being exploited, and ensure taxpayers aren't shorted, are at the center of investigations into post-Sandy cleanup on Long Island.

Sources in Nassau and Suffolk counties have said in recent weeks subpoenas have been issued to county and town governments for records and contracts in connection with work done since superstorm Sandy hit on Oct. 29. The issue of whether the state's prevailing wage law was broken is part of the prosecutors' probes, sources said.

New York State's Labor Law requires all contractors and subcontractors to pay prevailing wages and benefits to workers on public works contracts.

Click here to find out more!

advertisement | advertise on newsday

The state's law sets different rates for skilled and unskilled trades -- for everything from janitors and groundskeepers to electricians, laborers and heavy equipment operators.

The amounts that workers must be paid according to the law is published on the state Department of Labor's website.

For example, in Nassau and Suffolk counties, an asbestos removal worker must be paid $40.95 per hour. A boilermaker has a set pay rate of $47.98.

Penalties for violating the state's prevailing wage law were stiffened in 2008, when a bill known as "The Spota Law," after SuffolkCounty District Attorney Thomas Spota, became law and made some violations of the prevailing wage law a felony instead of a misdemeanor.

Marty Glennon, a Long Island labor attorney with the Melville firm Archer, Byington, Glennon & Levine and who helped write reforms that led to the stiffer penalties, said cases prosecuted in Suffolk over the past five years have seen wage and benefit recoveries for workers ranging from between $10,000 to $850,000 a case.

The problem, Glennon said, is "unscrupulous contractors" exploit worker ignorance of prevailing wage rates or -- in a tough economic climate -- demand kickbacks to lower workers' entitlements, pocketing the difference.

"Some workers don't even know they're entitled to prevailing wages, others in the present economic climate might be prepared to work for less, and both sets are being exploited by unscrupulous contractors who do not obey the law."

The Suffolk district attorney's office said it has averaged around $1.2 million a year in recouped wages and benefits for employees since the reforms.

Contractors who don't pay full wages are likely to also not pay the full amount of benefits,unemployment insurance and other taxes, experts said.

"We might never have to raise taxes on Long Island again if we just enforced the labor laws on the books," Glennon said. "What happens is the bad employers take the money and put it in their pockets -- think how much more disposable income there'd be and how all businesses couldbenefit if these employees all got what's owed them from the start."

A 45-year-old Ecuadorean immigrant from Corona, Queens, who asked not to be identified because he is in the country without proper documentation, said he was one of as many as 80 immigrant workers who were taken advantage of at work sites throughout New York City and, in some cases, Long Island. His attorney said the man was part of an ongoing prevailing wage investigation being conducted by the state attorney general.

"We know that this is happening to us because we are Hispanic immigrants, and it's hard for us to defend ourselves because we don't speak English," the worker said in Spanish. "They have us working really hard and they don't recognize that work . . . That's the reason we're complaining."

He and many other workers, mostly undocumented Latino immigrants but also from other parts of the world such as Ireland and Africa, complained to the state attorney general about six months ago and have been hoping to receive compensation for the lost hours. The matter is still being investigated, the worker and his attorney said.

Richard Klein, a former criminal defense attorney and currently the Bruce K. Gould professor of law at Touro Law School, said the public's interest in making sure corporations aren't taking advantage of workers is what prevailing wage laws are about.

"We do have relatively high wages here," Klein said. "We have to make sure that the law [is] being followed and taxpayers' money is not being wasted and workers are not being exploited."

With Víctor Manuel Ramos

< back to article

 

 
Obama Nominates Justice Aide for Labor Post
Monday, 18 March 2013 17:15

The New York Times

WASHINGTON – President Obama on Monday nominated Thomas E. Perez, who heads the Civil Rights Division at the Justice Department, to be the next secretary of labor, a choice that promises to provoke a debate with Republicans about voting rights and discrimination.

Mr. Perez would replace Hilda L. Solis, who stepped down in January after four years running the Labor Department. Word of his possible selection had been circulating in Washington for days.

The announcement comes just days after a Justice Department inspector general’s report found that the voting rights section has been torn by “deep ideological polarization” with liberal and conservative factions in sharp conflict. The divisions date back to the George W. Bush administration, and most occurred before Mr. Perez was confirmed in October 2009. He portrayed the report as largely clearing the section on his watch.

But the report also raised questions about testimony he gave, and Republicans made clear that they would take issue with his handling of some cases over the last three and a half years. His critics question, for example, whether he acted inappropriately in persuading the City of St. Paul to drop a lawsuit seeking to limit fair housing claims when there is no intentional bias.

Liberals and labor leaders have hailed Mr. Perez, calling him a strong champion for workers and those who have faced discrimination. While at the Justice Department, he has pursued a record number of discrimination or brutality claims against local police and sheriff’s departments, including that of Joe Arpaio, the outspoken sheriff in Maricopa County, Ariz., who was accused of “a pattern of unlawful discrimination” against Latinos.

Mr. Perez also challenged voter identification requirements imposed by South Carolina and Texas, and his division reached the three largest residential fair lending settlements in the history of the Fair Housing Act. Under him, the voting section participated in the most new litigation in the last fiscal year than in any previous year.

Mr. Perez, 51, who would be the only Hispanic in the cabinet if confirmed, is the son of immigrants from the Dominican Republic. His father died when he was 12, but his family pressed the value of education so much that all four of his siblings became doctors. Mr. Perez graduated from Brown University and Harvard Law School.

He has spent a career fighting discrimination cases as a federal prosecutor, then, under President Bill Clinton, as deputy chief of the civil rights division that he now heads, and finally as head of civil rights enforcement at the Health and Human Services Department. He also served as an elected council member in Montgomery County, Md., and as the state’s secretary of labor, licensing and regulation.

The timing of the inspector general’s report on the voting section seems to ensure that it will come up during Mr. Perez’s confirmation hearings. The report found a toxic environment in which conservatives and liberals fought and maligned one another through the Bush administration and into the Obama administration.

The examples it cited generally preceded Mr. Perez, and he wrote the inspector general that he had made a point of correcting the situation. “Since 2009, the Civil Rights Division and the Voting Section have undertaken a number of steps to improve the professionalism of our workplace and to ensure that we enforce the civil rights laws in an independent, evenhanded fashion,” Mr. Perez wrote.

The inspector general, however, raised questions regarding Mr. Perez’s testimony about a case that preceded his time. Mr. Perez told the Civil Rights Commission in 2010 that no senior department officials were involved in a 2009 decision not to pursue further a case of voter intimidation involving the New Black Panthers. But the report noted that in fact senior officials did participate in discussions about the case, although the final decision was made by career lawyers as Mr. Perez had testified.

Senator Charles E. Grassley of Iowa, the senior Republican on the Judiciary Committee, said the report showed that Mr. Perez was “woefully unprepared to answer questions” about a matter that he expected to be asked about. “This is troubling as it suggests a failure to also prepare for hearings before Congress, including the Senate Judiciary Committee, when questioned on this same topic,” he said in a statement.

Moreover, Mr. Grassley said the report made clear that Mr. Perez had not done as much as he had said to end harassment of conservatives in the voting rights section. “The reports shows that despite claims that it’s a new era in the Civil Rights Division, they are sadly mistaken, and it’s business as usual,” Mr. Grassley said.

While conservatives have called him a radical, Mr. Perez has not backed off his aggressive approach, even as his name was up for consideration for the Labor Department job. Just last Thursday, he announced an investigation into excessive force complaints against the Cleveland Police Department.

 

MORE IN POLITICS (3 OF 24 ARTICLES)

Republicans Plan Overhaul for 2016 Primary Season

Read More »

 
«StartPrev12NextEnd»

Page 1 of 2