THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
Copyright (c) 1996, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: Tuesday, April 16, 1996 TAG: 9604160336
SECTION: FRONT PAGE: A2 EDITION: FINAL
SOURCE: ASSOCIATED PRESS
DATELINE: WASHINGTON LENGTH: Medium: 63 lines
The Supreme Court agreed Monday to decide whether states may enforce their prevailing-wage laws and set trade-by-trade minimum wages for workers on state construction projects.
The justices voted to review a ruling that said such a California law is pre-empted by a federal benefit-protection law.
A decision, expected sometime in 1997, should clarify how far states may go in overseeing the wages and training of construction apprentices.
California's appeal is supported in friend-of-the-court briefs from various trade and labor groups and 10 other states - Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Jersey, Oregon, Pennsylvania and Washington.
The wage dispute focuses on California's law and its similarity to the federal Davis-Bacon Act, which sets minimum wages on federal public works projects.
California law allows contractors to pay wages lower than the ``journeyman'' level to some workers on public projects as long as they can be classified as ``apprentices'' under a state-approved program.
Sonoma County in 1987 awarded a contract for construction of a new jail to Dillingham Construction. The project required state, but not federal, prevailing wages.
As the project's general contractor, Dillingham subcontracted the audio security work to Sound Systems Media.
Sound Systems paid apprentice wages to some employees who were not registered in state-approved programs, and the California Department of Industrial Relations withheld money from Dillingham based on Sound Systems' failure to pay the prevailing journeyman's wage to those workers.
Dillingham sued in 1990 over the withheld money.
A federal judge ruled for the state, but the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals reversed that last June.
The appeals court said the state's restriction of the apprentice prevailing wage to workers registered as apprentices was pre-empted by the federal Employee Retirement Income Security Act (ERISA).
The law protects employee welfare and pension plans, and protects employers from inconsistent state and local regulation of such plans. ILLUSTRATION: THE COURT ALSO:
Heard arguments in a challenge by Colorado's Republican Party to
federal limits on how much it can spend in campaigns.
Said it will try settling a dispute between Idaho and the Coeur
d'Alene Indians over control of waterways within the tribe's
reservation.
Agreed to use a case from New Jersey to decide how difficult it
should be for regulators to win lawsuits against officers of failed
federally chartered banks.
Rejected the freedom-of-expression appeal of artist J.S.G. Boggs,
whose color reproductions of U.S. currency are not appreciated by
those who enforce the federal anti-counterfeiting laws.
KEYWORDS: SUPREME COURT by CNB