Miami vs. Xavier
Miami RedHawks football
Black Friday
Dayton Daily News education reporter Scott Elliott writes about schools, kids, teaching and learning.
Home > Blogs > Get on the Bus > Archives > 2008 > May > 06 > Entry
Dayton schools require union wages
The city schools will require construction companies building its new schools to pay union wages going forward — for now.
The board voted unanimously to add language to is bidding requirements at its meeting tonight. The wage rules will apply to the next three schools. The move left non-union contractors — some of whom have worked on the district’s prior projects — miffed.
“We’re very disappointed,” said Kathleen Somers, president of Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., of the Ohio Valley, a non-union contractors group. “That vote tonight cost taxpayers a lot of money unnecessarily.”
School board President Yvonne Isaacs said the goal is to attract more local companies to the projects — companies board members hope will employ more local people and minorities to build Dayton’s new schools.
If the experiment works and the schools stay on budget, Isaacs said the rule will remain for the remaining nine schools still to be built.
“This is a once in a lifetime opportunity for Dayton and we want to make sure that we see the people actually paying the taxes have benefitted,” she said.
The district is about to begin the last phase of construction. In the first two phases, the district made no requirement for workers’ wages and projects mostly fell short of its goals for local and minority participation.
But in the last year, the Ohio School Facilities Commission gave districts more latitude to set wage rules.
Last month, the head of the company that is managing the next phase of construction for the district — Shook Construction — argued in a letter to contractors that union wages could increase local and minority participation on school building projects. Shook’s Vince Corrado said there would be little or no additional cost to the district if the bidders adjust their other costs to compensate.
Somers called that assertion “hogwash.” She said the new rule will raise construction costs and discourage local non-union companies from bidding.
“We are going to be watching closely to see if the numbers are hit,” she said.
Permalink | Comments (18) | Post your comment | Categories: School Construction
Comments
By woker looking fo wok
June 4, 2008 10:23 AM | Link to this
Where is these next 3 schools being built ,and when do they start?By dayton driver
May 30, 2008 11:10 AM | Link to this
Any news yet Scott?By Scott Elliott
May 23, 2008 10:45 AM | Link to this
Dayton Driver, they have not gotten back to me on this request but I just sent another request, this time to the legal dept. Thanks for reminding me.By dayton driver
May 22, 2008 10:40 PM | Link to this
Scott, did you ever find the answer to this question? Thanks.By Mary Gregory
May 13, 2008 4:46 PM | Link to this
Dayton Board of Ed made the correct decision in requiring proper wages be paid to the workforce who will work on their school projects. This means a well-trained workforce will construct the projects correctly the first time. I’m confounded by the misguided who say paying a proper wage will result in higher costs. In fact, experience as well as study after study has shown that using a properly trained workforce to correctly construct and install results in lower total cost. There are countless examples of crumbling school projects constructed by improperly paid (which often means improperly trained) workers. Inefficient and inadequate construction workers and processes have resulted in leaking roofs, collapsing walls, falling windows, inadequate plumbing systems, etc. What a terrible use of taxpayer money….and more taxpayer money is then needed to remediate, or demolish and replace the poor quality construction. Furthermore,a properly paid workforce further supports the community. I congratulate those who are sensible stewards of taxpayer money. Their decision will benefit the entire community.By Scott Elliott
May 9, 2008 2:19 PM | Link to this
Dayton Driver, I asked this morning if the district has all of its union contracts available in electronic files. I’ll let you know what I find out.By dayton driver
May 9, 2008 12:54 PM | Link to this
Thanks for your response Scott. I really appreciate it and understand where you are coming from. Just a tip if you are looking to publish any other contracts: ask for them in electronic form. Everything is digital before it goes to paper, and this makes it all easier. I talked to the legal department yesterday and they said they would provide copies in electronic format if they are available, which they are. Thanks so much for all you do.By Scott Elliott
May 9, 2008 10:34 AM | Link to this
Dayton Driver, the teachers’ contract is a good example. It already exists online and I have linked to it. I see no reason to copy it and host it at DDN.com. Beyond the teachers, there hasn’t been much discussion here about other DPS union contracts. But I will check to see if others are online. If they are, I’ll link to them. I just spent several minutes trying to find the district’s bus drivers union online to see if they post their contract but I struck out. For those contracts that are not online, I can get paper copies of them from the district through a public records requst. But again, converting the paper copies to digital is not a quick process. It’s not that I don’t think it would be a good thing to have every union contract readable online. But we have to balance the effort required with the usefulness to the public and prioritize. That is not as easy as it sounds. People are always angry with us because something they care deeply about doesn’t make it high enough on our priority list for them. I think some readers would find the contracts interesting and would read through them, but most probably wouldn’t look at them at all. If it were very easy to do, I’d push for DDN.com to go ahead and put them all online. But I am not convinced this would be an easy thing to do.By dayton driver
May 9, 2008 5:13 AM | Link to this
Wow, I’m kindof stunned you don’t see how fundamental and basic a job that I’m talking about. But I shall begin the arduous task of educating thee. First, the job of a newspaper is to be a watchdog of the government, although we all know that in this age of corporate logic and 1984 come to life, that this is very rare. Second: Publishing a union contract is not as nearly as difficult as you make out. Take for example the bus driver’s contract. It’s something like 40-pages. It is laid out in a desktop publishing program (most likely Micrisoft Word), that can easily be converted into html or a pdf with a click of the button. How do I know this? I have Adobe Acrobat Professional installed and have done it a thousand times myself. It seems that there is an awful lot of interest in union contracts on this blog. Your readers discuss the union contracts of teachers and various other education employees all the time, yet there is no kind of reference for them to refer to see filter out what is rumor and what is not. Publishing public documents can provide this context and offer an end to the rumor mongering based upon a lack of information. The murdered journalist Gary Webb used the power of the web, it’s ability to easily host fairly text-centric documents, to break the story of the CIA’s involvement in the crack trade in his groundbreaking piece of web and print based journalism: Dark Alliance. Using the web’s inherent power of document hosting, the San Jose Mercury News laid out the case for CIA involvement in the crack trade by using the CIA’s very own documents that were obtained via the Freedom of Information act. Right now Scott, it seems that you are just looking for an excuse to not provide your readers with the kind of context that the Internet has the power to provide. Use this medium for all of the advantages it offers. My question now is why any reporter wouldn’t LOVE the power of the internet to report on public documents? This technology seriously empowers you as a journalist. Just ask for the contracts in electronic form, and publishing them is easy as 1-2-3. And starting out with the Dayton teacher’s contract would be a great start for truly taking advantage of this fantastic and empowering technology. But perhaps this would upset the powers that be too much? That’s what it sounds like now to me, reading between the lines.By Scott Elliott
May 8, 2008 1:46 PM | Link to this
Dayton Driver, I don’t really see the point of what you are asking. We are a newspaper. We write news stories. We generally don’t just dump piles of data on our readers. I don’t know how useful that would be to most readers. Besides, as you point out, contracts are generally available and accessible (often online) already for anyone who has a keen interest and wants to look them up. Collecting, scanning/typing, coding and posting hundreds of documents would not be nearly as easy as you suggest.By dayton driver
May 8, 2008 1:26 PM | Link to this
Are you good folks at the DDN going to answer the question why union contracts are not published? All you need is a little server space for these important public documents. ThanksBy MeritShop
May 7, 2008 11:11 AM | Link to this
There is no motiviator to put Union scale on these jobs other than pure raw political PAC influences. What in the world does Shook mean that it will have “no impact” on costs if bidders “adjust their other costs to compensate”. A companies overhead recovery does not change like the wind and prime costs of materials and labor have limited wiggle to be manipulated..they are what they are. Therefore, if the employee is to be paid $32/hr vs. $22/hr…because someone has mandated union scales, the only variable that can “compensate” is the overall price of the job to the district. There’s no other way to do the math. Union subcontractors represent only 18% of the total construction industry…this decision was political to support the 18% and not the 82%. When will the taxpayers wake up and realize there is a reason 82% of the construction workforce CHOOSES not to join a Union? This issue, unfortunately, is not a function of right vs. wrong, it is a function of who supported who during the Governor’s race adn who supported who during the last election cycle.By dayton driver
May 7, 2008 10:50 AM | Link to this
Somewhat off issue, but Scott, why doesn’t the DDN publish the various union contracts of the district, or for that matter, all districts in your coverage area? They are public documents available under the Sunshine laws, and would be very accessible via .pdf, or conversion to html.By joe mamma
May 7, 2008 9:41 AM | Link to this
I’m with Old Prof. Not only should Kathleen Sommers share her salary and perks, but I think the local union officials should share their salaries and perks with the public too. I want to know whether the union officials would be willing to work for the same union wages and benefits that their members make. I’m guessing that reduction would save union members a boat load on their dues.By Legal workers only
May 7, 2008 8:06 AM | Link to this
I don’t have a problem with paying union wages, as long as those GETTING those wages are ONLY American citizens or those who have been VERIFIED and are legally allowed to work in our country. NO ILLEGAL WORKER should be paid with our taxes and we all know that contracters are some of the worst offenders in hiring illegals.By joe mamma
May 7, 2008 7:50 AM | Link to this
Sweet. Tax payers get to pay more. The Board of Ed gets to buy votes. This is a win win situation.By Oldprof
May 7, 2008 7:23 AM | Link to this
I wonder if Kathleen Somers will share her annual salary-bennies-and-perks package with us. Would she be willing to work for minimum wage so that her association’s members could pay lower membership fees? Maybe all the construction owners could limit their annual profits to, say, $5000 less than a starting teacher’s salary. THOSE income levels would save taxpayers a bundle! And it should be mentioned that these contractors don’t like unions for workers—but they maintain one for themselves.By charterschoolhater
May 7, 2008 12:50 AM | Link to this
I do not very often agree with decisions of the Dayton Board of Ed. But tonight they did the right thing in requiring union scale wages on future building projects. There may be hope for this group of people yet. I applaud your courage to put the quality of work that union scale provides. Kathleen Somers, president of Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., of the Ohio Valley, a non-union contractors group represents a group that for the most part pays sub standard wages. Their members stuff their pockets with the excess dollars that should be going to the hard working people that they employ. As a tax payer in the community I am proud that we will now be required to pay livable wages to those who build our schools. More money to the workers, less to greedy construction company owners. HOORAY!!