Home -> Law Blog Directory -> Labor & Employment Law Blogs -> New York Public Personnel Law

Labor & Employment Law

: New York Public Personnel Law

Determining the ?prevailing rate of wages? for positions in a negotiating unit

By Harvey Randall, Esq.

Determining the ?prevailing rate of wages? for positions in a negotiating unit
Matter of James F. Hanley v William C. Thompson, 41 A.D.3d 207, Appellate Division, First Department

New York City Comptroller William C. Thompson, Jr. determined that the ?prevailing wage rate? for the title of Supervisor Highway Repairer (SHR) should be the same as the ?prevailing wage? paid foremen who perform comparable duties in the private sector.

Thompson based his decision of his finding that SHRs and foremen of highway repairs in Local 1010 (Road and Street Construction Laborers) and Local 1018 (Sheet Asphalt Workers) perform comparable duties.

James F. Hanley, Commissioner of the City of New York Office of Labor Relations, objected and sued Thompson, naming Mickey McFarland, as President of Local 1157 of District Council 37, a co-defendant.

The Appellate Division confirmed the Comptroller?s determination and dismissed Hanley?s petition.

The court said that substantial evidence supports the Comptroller?s finding, including:

1. a thorough investigation that included a comparison of the civil service job specification and collective bargaining agreements,

2. field surveys of private and public sectors in other cities, and

3. a survey of private sector interviewees.

Hanley contended that SHRs should not receive the prevailing wage for performing manual labor because such work was not part of the SHR job specification.

The Appellate Division disagreed, ruling that the ?General Statement of Duties and Responsibilities? for SHRs includes ?performs related work.? The court then noted that:

?Testimony established that as part of their supervisory duties, SHRs were hands-on workers who performed ?related? manual labor in instructing new employees and pitching in where necessary to insure that the work was done properly and kept on schedule; they thus faced the same risks as their crew.?

Thus, said the court, ?SHRs are thus entitled to the same prevailing wage as the foremen who perform comparable duties in the private sector.?

Full post as published by New York Public Personnel Law on March 25, 2008 (boomark / email).