Matthew and Julie Bos wrote: > On 10/1/05 7:54 PM, "Robert Seeberger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > wrote: > >> Good enough, you are not completely clueless as I imagined. > > Normally I am just called "just another asshole engineer". I'll > take > completely clueless anytime! :) > >> But you do need to understand the purpose >> of the Davis-Bacon Act. > > The original purpose of the law was to keep black non-union > contractors out of federal contracts.
Fortunately the original purpose has prectically no relation to DBAs current purpose, now that racism is no longer in vogue. > It's history, you can look it > up. The bill was a response by Rep. Bacon of NY because a > contractor > out of Alabama won an award to build a new Veteran's hospital in his > district. He was upset at outsourcing. After all why give good > jobs > to poor colored people, when you can write a law so that only union > shops can get business? Somewhat true, but even then it kept contractors from competing by lowering wages, which is what it does today. It also keeps contractors who hire the unskilled from bidding competitively, since the Gov. *has* to take the lowest bid. > Remember that this bill was written in 1931 > during the depression. This bill also had the effect of raising the > unemployment rates of blacks across the nation. Yes........and what party did the sponsers belong to?????? Ah yes......the party that calls itself the "Party Of Lincoln"! I'm glad you recognise the delicious irony. > >> The DBA provides security for established local contractors by >> preventing other contractors from undercutting their government >> contracts by using unqualified workers. It still happens sometimes, >> but only if the government does not enforce the law. > > It also still keeps many minority owned businesses, who are mostly > non-union out of federal contracts. Ah.......minority businesses get preferential treatment on government contracts. I've worked for minority contractors and have seen it firsthand. It is a good thing IMO, but DBA does *not* keep minority contractors out of the loop since they have other resources to draw on. >Thank goodness Habitat for > Humanity houses aren't covered by DBA. Those poor people couldn't > afford them. > >> So....if suspending DBA is no biggie for you, then you would be >> willing to go to your boss and offer to work for 40% of your >> current >> wage starting immediately? You know......suck it up for the team? >> That is my objection. > > The skilled will never work for less than they are worth. The > unemployed, unskilled "victims" will also need jobs. Do they need > to > be paid at union rates? Journeyman wages for untrained hands? You've mentioned this a couple of times. I suppose you have never heard of apprenticeship or "helpers". Jeez....our union takes in non-union workers all the time (in addition to your regular organizing campaigns). Of the 9 journeymen working on my job ATM, 3 are organized hands. Technically, I was organized into apprenticeship, and I have done organizing work for my local. > > What was the effect on wages after Bush 41 repealed DBA because of > Hurricane Andrew? You know there is a history on this if you want > to > find it. It has been done, but that doesn't make it right, then or now. > >> Each and every one of you......your personal wealth and the wealth >> of >> the nation is tied inextricably to the wealth of others, if you >> want >> to live in a nation like America has traditionally been. >> You can see the switch on the wall and the light fixture it serves, >> but you do not see the wiring or the skills and work that put it >> there. You like your house and your workplace? Would you prefer >> that >> someone less skilled built them? > > I know what you mean. My competition couldn't compete with me or my > products, so he copied my product in China and now sells it in > Lowe's. Now I have to move my factory to a place of cheaper union > labor just to keep my market share. And if that doesn't work? You > can guess the rest. Sounds like a case of patent infringement. Are you in one of those situations where skilled labor will not increase efficiency enough to remain competitive? > >> Of course there is political motivation, the act would not exist if >> there were none, nor would any other laws exist without political >> motivation. The thing is, the law is a good idea.....well, a great >> idea! Without it, people who do construction work would be poor and >> their employers would be much much richer. If you and your >> co-workers >> were to work for minimum wage, your employer would be much >> enriched. >> Now wouldn't that be nice!<G> > > I think the law was written to keep unions strong. Having worked both sides of the Union fence........................ >And I will always > remember it when my jobs get passed over for government work. > I'm not sure I understand what you are saying in this sentence. xponent A Better Enviroment Maru rob _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
