{
  "id": "96-228",
  "type": "CRS Report",
  "typeId": "REPORTS",
  "number": "96-228",
  "active": false,
  "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
  "versions": [
    {
      "source": "EveryCRSReport.com",
      "id": 347953,
      "date": "2007-11-26",
      "retrieved": "2016-04-07T03:56:31.468816",
      "title": "Davis-Bacon: Employment of Helpers on Federal Contract Construction",
      "summary": "The Davis-Bacon Act of 1931, as amended, requires that not less than the locally prevailing wage (not necessarily the union rate) be paid to workers engaged in contract construction work to which the government of the United States or of the District of Columbia is a party. The coverage threshold is $2,000.\nUnder Davis-Bacon, the Secretary of Labor makes wage rate determinations for \u201cthe various classes of laborers and mechanics\u201d employed on covered work. The Secretary has, through regulation, recognized apprentices and trainees, registered in formal programs, as special categories and allowed a special reduced wage for these workers. Some contractors, however, have created yet another category of worker: i.e., \u201chelpers.\u201d These may be informal trainees, or they may simply be general utility workers employed outside of a craft classification. These workers are most often not recognized as a separate category for wage rate determination purposes.\nThrough the years, the Department of Labor (DOL) had rigorously adhered to this general worker classification system as necessary to assure that not less than the locally prevailing rate would be paid to \u201cthe various classes of laborers and mechanics\u201d on a project. Were helpers indiscriminately substituted for journeymen or laborers, DOL holds, wage rates would be depressed and the intent of Congress in crafting the Davis-Bacon Act would be subverted.\nIn 1979, the Carter Administration began a general review of Davis-Bacon\u2014including the helper issue. New regulations were issued in January 1981. Before they could be implemented, they were withdrawn and rewritten by the Reagan Administration (1982). Through the next decade, these new Davis-Bacon regulations were largely implemented\u2014but the helper segment remained in litigation. When, in 1992 (following a series of legal maneuvers), judicial approval of the helper regulations was finally secured, Congress blocked their enforcement through the appropriations process, variously denying funding for their implementation.\nIn mid-1996, the Associated Builders and Contractors sought court assistance to require enforcement of the helper regulation. DOL responded by returning to the rulemaking process. Subsequently, DOL published a proposed rule (April 1999) defining the concept of helpers and soliciting comment. The proposed rule, essentially, reaffirmed Departmental practice of the 1970s with respect to the use of helpers: the issue had come full circle. This final rule was issued by the Department and took effect on January 19, 2001.\nAdministrative initiatives found a counterpart in legislative proposals, introduced periodically up through the 109th Congress. No such proposals have as yet been introduced in the 110th Congress. This report, which will be updated periodically as events unfold, tracks the administrative, judicial and legislative evolution of the \u201chelper\u201d issue.",
      "type": "CRS Report",
      "typeId": "REPORTS",
      "active": false,
      "formats": [
        {
          "format": "HTML",
          "encoding": "utf-8",
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/96-228",
          "sha1": "ef4dc6d255acf7764b4143bb45bc97e1da27848b",
          "filename": "files/20071126_96-228_ef4dc6d255acf7764b4143bb45bc97e1da27848b.html",
          "images": null
        },
        {
          "format": "PDF",
          "encoding": null,
          "url": "http://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/96-228",
          "sha1": "785507f26c54c174a7eb2e0ac64aba9d06cd561e",
          "filename": "files/20071126_96-228_785507f26c54c174a7eb2e0ac64aba9d06cd561e.pdf",
          "images": null
        }
      ],
      "topics": []
    }
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Appropriations"
  ]
}