It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

NEWS: Proclamation by the President: 1931 Davis-Bacon Act Suspended

page: 2
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 09:00 AM
link   

Originally posted by spliff4020
wants to bring in a bunch of cheap migrant workers, hes more than welcome to pay them 5 bucks an hour (provided he has people WILLING to work for that)

Bring in migrant workers? These are going to be people from other states and the refugees themselves, not conscripted mexican labour gangs or something.

jahmuhn
Well, this is only for federally funded projects.

I'd think that all projects in NO will be federal at this point.

jsobecky
Coupled with housing incentives, this could be good business all around,

What incentives? People are hypothesizing that incentives would be a good idea, but what incentives have been offered? This law means that if you work for Acme Construction in minnesota and your company contracts out to help rebuild new orleans, that you don't make what new orleans construction workers normally make. This means if you are hired by a private company within new orleans that is contracted out to help rebuild, you will not be paid what construction workers are normally paid. As spliff notes tho, unionized workers still get the wages they are contracted for anyway, thank god for the unions then.
On the other hand, if you are Local Joe's Construction Co operating in Podunck, NC, you can afford to send your guys to NO because you don't have to pay them what construction workers in a big metropolitan city get paid. This would mean that lots of smaller, 'mom and pop' construction Co's can participate, rather than only Large Conglomerates who are probably completely unionized already.
Then again, a trend in this industry that is starting to emerge is to have temporary and part time, or even limited service contract employees, who aren't unionized and are paid out on a completely different schedule.

grover
to hell with the people

This really doesn't make sense if the contractors are anything other than large multinational corporations who use non-unionized contract labourers are used. So if its handled entirely by Walmart Construction (if such a thing even existss), then you'd be right.

esdad71
so people will bid high because it is a Fedearal project

Assuming there is bidding at all.

I do not see how this would have a negative effect

There is a question of whether its at all necessary tho. Of all the things to do right now, I don't think that this is that high of a priority. There's already a huge business oppurtunity for small and large construction companies in new orleans, I don't know the ins and outs of the business, I don't see this as making that much of a difference. IOW, if you have a small construction co, are you not going to go to NO simply because the law requires that you pay your workers the higher local wage??

Astronomer
This will give them jobs

These people would've gotten construction jobs anyway. What it migth encorage some of them to do is to form construction cos, but I don't know if this law means that local companies can pay below the local wage in the first place. I suppose it does, but you never know how some of these laws work out.




posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 09:02 AM
link   
JIMC5499


But repair the house of who, the poor or the rich that live in the area?

That is my question perhaps you can enlighten me on this, because I am confused and I am not joking.

You impute is welcome.

If people that has never hold a job in its life get the opportunity to get a house for free while getting some money while working that is one issue.

But who is going to work in the multi million housing while been under pay?

This is becoming complicated now banks and insurances adjustor's will benefit from this, not on the low income housing that is subsided by the government but the multi million dollar homes that is obvious are going to put pressure on the banks cheap labor will benefit them.


marg.


[edit on 9-9-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 09:04 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spiderj
considering all the newly homeless and out of work people now at detainee/evacuee/refugee camps this sounds like the perfect set up for a cheap labor force.

Next will be housing incetives for those who go back to new orleans and other cities to, in a sense, rebuild the home they lost. Not that incentives aren't a good thing, but it would be better if they didn't mess with the minimum wage.

Spiderj


reminiscence of slaves, dont cha think?
hate to use the sharp contrast, but it's something the south sure didn't want to get rid of without a fight.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 09:05 AM
link   

I think you need to look up the difference between "Minimum Wage" and "Prevailing Wage". I'd list the definitions here but I might be accused of getting them from Republican propaganda sources. This has nothing to do with the rebuilding or repair of people's houses. This only applies to Federal contracts for things like bridges, highways, leeves and other items of infrastructure that have to be replaced or repaired before the real work of rebuilding can begin.


Look at it this way....you're ABC Corporation, you make a bid to rebuild the devastated areas to the tune of $100 billion dollars and win. Now, you normally pay your people $20 an hour, but now under the suspension of this act, you're free to pay them $10 an hour. Your corporation is still going to charge the $100 billion dollars even though it just cust it's labor costs in half. Nothing more than increased profit.

Then look at the other side, Joe Taxpayer from New Orleans is getting screwed, TWICE. He has to pay the taxes to have New Orleans rebuilt, and now has to take a cut in pay himself to rebuild it, all the while ABC Corporation is rolling around in increased profits.

Do you think Bush was even aware this law existed? I seriously doubt it. They must have had to really look for this one, or I'm sure some companies that are going to be doing the rebuilding pointed it out to them because I seriously doubt Bush was aware of an act that was passed in 1931 that concerned construction companies.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 09:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by elderban
Look at it this way....you're ABC Corporation, you make a bid to rebuild the devastated areas to the tune of $100 billion dollars and win.


You forgot to add that most construction companies also pay some of their workers cash and under the table for cheap labor specially migrant workers.



Then look at the other side, Joe Taxpayer from New Orleans is getting screwed, TWICE.


You made a good point here, I wonder if the government in it's "generosity to the companies" will be generous to the workers and give them a tax brake, I mean under pay then "NO taxes"




Do you think Bush was even aware this law existed?


You nailed right on the spot, I imagine that "Cheney Corporate Brain" was the one to come with the great Idea.




[edit on 9-9-2005 by marg6043]



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 10:01 AM
link   
This will be interesting...
according to this, they should be lowering the pay for all FEMA/government contractors...
My girlfriend (logistics for a FEMA sub) is already locking in hundreds of security guys to work positions on the cruise ships... they are being assured resonable pay (which is good, since they work 12hrs day 7 days a week) this is no more than standard wage with overtime... but it works...
If they lower that wage , these security guys dont show up...(big mess)

So i have a feeling that the only contractors that will truly be able to pay less, will be those employing lots of "gray" labor... in the construction end of the process... typical...

So now, Bush can help more of his political conributors that like to hire cheap labor from over the border... (IMO)

So in essence... the government is going to be guilty of violating its own greencard labor laws, thru the contractors that get no bid contracts...

I hope someone keeps tabs and does an investigation to see how much money being thrown at NO actually stays there. I have a feeling there will be losts of excess and lots of rich fat piggies gobbling it up...



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 11:38 AM
link   
LazarusTheLong

I know exactly what you mean, I used to work for a lawyer that specialized in the rights of migrant workers.

Now the cheap labor will come from migrant workers that will accept a low pay under the table, they are hard workers but they are abused by low pay that can not be track when they get their money in cash.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 11:40 AM
link   
I am sorry if no one on here likes this and they give me a hundred warnings BUT after the last 5 years of this administration, I don't believe a single word they say...if Bush were to claim the sky was blue and the sun was shining, I would look to make sure myself. I have'nt seen a single instance where they have done anything to benefit the little guy, its always the corporations and their wealthy friends and I don't see this changing at all, humanitarian disaster or not...their motto is profits before people, always. And these vultures are going to figure out a way to screw the little guy and make a buck doing it every time...these people have lost everything...everything damnit and Bush is gonna screw them out of a decent wage as well. PIG!!!



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 12:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by grover
nonsense...those contractors, and who are they anyway, people like Kellog Brown and Root of Halliburton, that's who. And since they have already landed the juicy contracts or are lined up to; they are not going to cut their prices because they don't have to pay the workers a standard wage, they will just pocket the differance. This isn't to help anybody but Bush and cheney the dick's friends.


That's not true grover. Every single federal contract has to undergo several audits and during each audit the man/hour costs are paid particular attention to because of their effect on overhead and G&A costs. They cannot pay their workers one thing and claim another because they will get caught if they try. They can't dispense with holidays, sick leave, vacations, etc. either because these are all components of the overhead costs and must be justified and withstand audit. Nope, whatever they pay will show up and correct overhead, G&A and Man/Hour rates will drive the amounts they receive as progress payments. If they get cheaper labor, then the taxpayer gets cheaper labor.

Beyond the above though, where do you think the workers of that area are going to work unless they move? All the businesses are either shut down or destroyed and there is simply not any work to be had there just now. At least this will provide work for many of them and probably at greater wages than they ever earned before. The incomes throughout that area will increase substantially and the workers will end up better off and the area will get cleaned up and rebuilt. I've looked at this from every angle I can see right now and I don't see the negatives you seem to feel are there.

[edit on 9-9-2005 by Astronomer68]



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 12:10 PM
link   
construction requires skilled labor and chances are pretty damned good that if those people are as poor as it has been claimed then they are unskilled and other than the bottom rung gopher level, they are not going to be getting those reconstruction jobs...so again I ask who gets screwed? The low end workers thats who.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by Nygdan

jahmuhn
Well, this is only for federally funded projects.

I'd think that all projects in NO will be federal at this point.



Major projects, yes, but many residents/businesses either have insurance or other means to repair damage without having to rely on the federal government. I was in New Orleans yesterday, and there was already a lot of rebuilding occurring, so I think it's important to emphasize that this will not be applied to everyone living in that area.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 12:21 PM
link   
Again, not true Grover. If anyone gets screwed by this process it will be the taxpayers. This move by the President is simply a way to create jobs in the devastated areas. The work will not be up to par in many cases and some of it will have to be redone, because as you said the people who will be doing most of the work are not skilled at it. They will just have to learn as they go. I don't think I mind that, these people need jobs and the area needs to be cleaned up and rebuilt. If they screw up and have to do the same thing more than once, I believe I can live with that. At least they will get back their self-respect and not just go on the dole.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 12:22 PM
link   
Astronomer68 is right on the amount of paperwork government contracting requires. Certified payrols and the whole nine yards.


Grover. This has to do with federally funded projects only. Work that is paid out of state or private (i.e. insurance) funds will not be affected.

Given the enevitable shortage of labor that will develope, this is a moot point anyway.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 12:31 PM
link   
Well lets take in consideration that most of the people that "ARE" supposed to benefit from these are the low income residents of the devastated area.

Lets bring the fact that "These people" as now are nowhere around the NO but scattered with their families around the states.

How much money is going to take to bring them back give them temporary housing and feed them while their work as "most of them unskilled workers" under a low pay.

How many that were part of the workforce before will just walk away and find something better elsewhere.

Or pehaps that is the whole idea thin out the population. right?

Also what happen when is no more jobs because is over?

They are going back to their previous state?

I think and I rethink that this is the biggest slap on the faces of all this people.

Is like telling them "Take the job and stay poor because you will be working for peanuts."



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 01:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
Well lets take in consideration that most of the people that "ARE" supposed to benefit from these are the low income residents of the devastated area.

Lets bring the fact that "These people" as now are nowhere around the NO but scattered with their families around the states.


You're absolutely right marg6043, many of them are gone and gone for good; however, the likely wages that will be paid in the NO area will draw some of them back. They are not likely to earn--here in Texas--what they will be able to back there.


How much money is going to take to bring them back give them temporary housing and feed them while their work as "most of them unskilled workers" under a low pay.


That's a good question marg6043 and I don't know the answer; however, I'de be willing to bet they will be returned at no cost to them if they want to come back.


How many that were part of the workforce before will just walk away and find something better elsewhere.


Some, but probably not many. New Orleans (or elsewhere in the the area) is their home and many will want to return even if they don't have jobs.


Or pehaps that is the whole idea thin out the population. right?


Probably some people have had that idea cross their minds.


Also what happen when is no more jobs because is over?


Don't know the answer to that, but I don't see how it could be any worse than it was before.


They are going back to their previous state?


Many will, some won't. Bear in mind though this cleanup & rebuild process isn't going to be finished for years.


I think and I rethink that this is the biggest slap on the faces of all this people.

Is like telling them "Take the job and stay poor because you will be working for peanuts."


I think it's one of the best things that could happen for the people of that area. They won't be working for peanuts either, they will earn more money than most of them ever did before in their lives.

HowardRoark - I know this whole thing only applies directly to federal contracts, but the wages that will be paid under those contracts will drive up the wages for everyone else in the area. I'll bet the State & Local powers that be requested the President to try to hold wages down just so they wouldn't go broke trying to keep up.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 02:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043
JIMC5499


But repair the house of who, the poor or the rich that live in the area?

That is my question perhaps you can enlighten me on this, because I am confused and I am not joking.

You impute is welcome.

If people that has never hold a job in its life get the opportunity to get a house for free while getting some money while working that is one issue.

But who is going to work in the multi million housing while been under pay?

This is becoming complicated now banks and insurances adjustor's will benefit from this, not on the low income housing that is subsided by the government but the multi million dollar homes that is obvious are going to put pressure on the banks cheap labor will benefit them.


marg.


[edit on 9-9-2005 by marg6043]


This only applies to Federal contracts. Some millionaire is not going to get his house rebuilt at slave wages. The prevailing wage system will apply to him. I don't think that anyone is going to get a free house out of this.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 03:12 PM
link   
the whole damned area is either flattened or neck deep in a toxic sewer...you don't need any incentive to create work, there's years of work ahead of them...it's another corporate hand out pure and simple.



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 03:32 PM
link   
How is this a move on the presidents part to create more job and rebuild an entire economy by slashing the wage constructions workers will be paid? If you are insinuating the failed economics of Reagen, then apriorism dicates how far that economic ideology went.

Luxifero



posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 04:17 PM
link   
What gives you guys the idea he was voted into office??? hehehe...




posted on Sep, 9 2005 @ 05:31 PM
link   
Funny isn't it how the davis bacon prevailing wages law was suspended AFTER they gave halliburton a clean up contract isn't it?
Now some of you might knee jerk react and say this is just another example of some peoples wish to see ill intent in everything this administration does. But the plain fact is this, that contract was awarded when davis bacon was still in effect meaning the prices were based on the assumption that the prevailing wage was going to be paid to said workers. Somehow I just don't think halliburton will hand the money back. I am sure however they will gladly use this as a bludgeon on the out of state subcontractors they hire to do the actual work.



new topics

top topics



 
7
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join