Legislative Memos

Memorandum in Opposition
S.6050 (Mayer) / A.9172 (Bronson)

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 400 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

This bill would effectively mandate that any SUNY and CUNY construction projects funded by the State University Construction Fund that total over three million dollars must have a Project Labor Agreement (PLA). If passed, this law will negatively impact thousands of workers and all the SUNY and CUNY schools who rely on this funding to complete projects on time and on budget. A PLA is a pre-hire bargaining agreement that contractors must sign to work on a project. In New York, a typical PLA forces contractors to hire most of their workforce from the union hall, usually 3 out of 4 workers.

If a local, qualified contractor is forced to use unknown individuals from the union hall instead of their employees, they won’t bid. They refuse to walk into their office and tell their employees that while the company will benefit from the project, most of them won’t be able to work on it and will be replaced. Imagine if you were forced to sign an agreement that would replace your current staff with people you’ve never met, haven’t trained, and have no allegiance to your success. You probably wouldn’t sign that agreement, and neither do contractors.

When you look at the breakdown of construction workers in New York, these contractors not bidding on this work is a serious issue. According to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, over 80% of the construction industry is not part of a union and, therefore, would be unable to work on SUNY and CUNY projects due to the PLA mandate. The problem only worsens when you consider the number of projects with PLAs attached to them. New York State has mandated over $150B in PLA work over the next several years. How can the state expect to finish all this work when they’ve sidelined 80% of construction workers? We have no problems with the unions; however, they simply don’t have the workforce to handle all the work steered their way, and now all SUNY and CUNY construction. As a result, these projects will face delays and significant cost overruns due to the workforce shortage they will experience by sidelining most of the industry.

Not only will these projects face workforce issues due to the PLA mandate, but they will also face cost issues that negatively impact every taxpayer who has remained in New York. A study by Dr. Paul G. Carr, P.E., from Cornell University, illustrates what happens when the number of bidders on a project is reduced. The study looks at 125 public works projects in New York State. The study unequivocally found that reducing the number of bidders on public projects will significantly increase the construction cost. For example, reducing two bidders added more than 4% to the final bid cost. 4% is a lot of added costs when looking at millions and even billion-dollar projects.

The SUNY/CUNY system is part of the backbone of New York State and is under serious threat due to declining enrollment rates. ABC and our members unequivocally support investment in our education system to attract students with innovative projects. Let’s just say bluntly what will happen if PLAs are mandated on these projects: tuitions will rise, taxes will increase, and there will be major delays to much-needed projects all over the state. Instead, the state should remove the PLA and allow all qualified union and nonunion employees the same chance to benefit from these projects.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Public Affairs Manager Tanner Schmidt (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.

Memorandum in Support
Consumer Litigation Funding Act
S.2594A/A.2702

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors ("ABC"), representing over 400 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, supports S.2594A. This law would create the "Consumer Litigation Funding Act" to promote consumer protections related to consumer litigation funding transactions.

"Litigation funding" or "lawsuit lending" is the practice of advancing to individuals who are suing over injuries a portion for their potential legal recoveries while their case is pending. The money can be used for medical bills, living expenses, etc. The problem is that because the industry is entirely unregulated, lenders (often big money hedge funds) can charge massive interest rates as high as 100% or more.

According to Consumers for Fair Legal Funding, one New York City-based lawsuit lender has charged clients interest rates as high as 124%. Lenders, on average, make 68% profit on these loans, with lenders earning billions of dollars annually on the backs of injured New Yorkers. These unscrupulous lenders prey on vulnerable New Yorkers who lack a financial safety net and are desperate for income because they might be unable to work or have serious medical bills to pay before they're put into collections and ruin their credit score. This loan may cover their bills in the short term, but when and if a judge or jury finds it in their favor, they often see little of their award for their injuries or suffering because a lender takes it all.

Over the past 5 years, we’ve witnessed a growing trend between trial attorneys and for-profit medical providers to target the construction industry with fraudulent claims in order to access these loans. They are manipulating workers whose primary language is not English to use false identification to fake injuries so they can get a big payday. Unfortunately, the trial attorney and the medical provider are then taking a significant portion of the “lawsuit loan” leaving the worker with little and facing potential criminal charges. This is a practice that needs to stop.

In 2017, New York’s Attorney General filed a complaint against RD Legal Funding, a New Jersey-based lawsuit cash advance firm, for taking advantage of 9/11 first responders by offering high-interest advances on expected payouts from legal settlements. Elmer Santiago was a 9/11 first responder scammed out of his settlement funds by RD. In 2016, former NYPD officer Elmer Santago was sued by RD Legal for refusing to pay 66% interest on the advance loaned to him by the company as he awaited payment from the federally funded Ground Zero Victims Compensation Fund. The Attorney General’s filing also highlights the case of an unnamed first responder on the ground of 9/11 who was advanced $18,000 while she awaited settlement funds; after six months, she owed $33,000, an 83% increase in less than a year.

S.2594A would address these horrible situations by establishing that lawsuit lending loans be subject to state regulation and requirements regarding disclosure, licensing, funding company and attorney responsibilities and limitations, violations, and other critical items. Without a comprehensive bill, these lenders will continue to charge usurious interest rates without having to disclose their financial interest in the litigation process. If the legislature does nothing and allows the status quo of no regulation of the lawsuit lending industry, vulnerable New Yorkers will continue to be taken advantage of. Therefore, ABC and our members respectfully encourage the legislature to pass S.2594A.

Please contact Tanner Schmidt at (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org if you have any questions.

MEMORANDUM OF OPPOSITION
S5475-B (Jackson) / A373-B (Bronson)

The Empire State Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing hundreds of merit-shop construction contractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers across New York State, opposes S5475-B (Jackson) / A373-B (Bronson). This legislation will place prevailing wage mandates on custom fabrication work, leading to a disastrous loss of New York manufacturing jobs and increasing construction costs for critical projects that benefit the quality of life of all New Yorkers.

This includes the recent changes to the bill, which includes language that says if a project is over $250,000 it will be subject to prevailing wage and/or if you have projects totaling over $500,000. Additionally, companies will be required to pay them the prevailing wage for an entire year after that initial project. These thresholds and mandating companies to pay the prevailing wage for an entire year after the job is done will run businesses out of New York even faster than they already are. This will also serve as a serious financial barrier to entry for small businesses; only a handful of the largest businesses will be able to comply, meaning competition is eliminated, the price of projects increases, and we, as New York State taxpayers, will pay the price.

New York is one of the most expensive states to build in, largely due to the prevailing wage laws that impact almost all taxpayer-funded work in New York. Studies show that prevailing wage increases the cost of construction by 13 to 25 percent, depending on the region. As a result of those high costs, most schools, fire stations, hospitals, affordable housing projects, and other critical projects have relied on outsourcing work to custom fabrication shops because they can offset the high costs and don't have to pay the prevailing wage for that work.  Due to this, many large construction firms, union and nonunion, have opened large custom fabrication shops employing thousands of New Yorkers across the state. If passed, this bill will take away the incentive to use custom fabrication shops and not only waste the millions of dollars these companies have invested in building and staffing these facilities but, more importantly, cost thousands of people their jobs.

Even though the labor inputs of fabrication involve skilled labor, that does not mean it’s the same as on-site construction, which is subject to the prevailing wages required for public work. Manufacturers invest significant capital in technology, specialized machinery, and craftworker development to fabricate a product different from construction. It would be impossible for many fabricators to create their products on the job site.

Furthermore, this bill would create an administrative nightmare for the New York State Department of Labor, contractors, and fabricators to track and document the proposed requirements. Additionally, it’s questionable how state DOL would enforce the requirements. Fabrication is a manufacturing process that is not easily translatable into construction work processes. Applying prevailing wage would also be problematic for the unionized fabricator, as their collective bargaining agreement likely pertains to manufacturing, not construction, thus creating jurisdictional issues.

Sometimes, structures are built off-site because it’s more efficient, or the job site conditions demand it because of limited space, security issues, etc. DOL already enforces prevailing wages in these situations. To suddenly require manufacturers to adhere to the rigors of prevailing wage is seemingly not within the scope of the law’s original intent.

For all these reasons, ABC opposes S.5475-B/A.373-B and encourages the Legislature to reject this bill.

If you have any questions, please contact Tanner Schmidt, Government Affairs Manager, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., at (585) 730-1814.

Memorandum of Support
S.752 Sepulveda

The Empire State Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing hundreds of merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout New York, supports S.752.

If passed, the bill would require a feasibility study to be conducted before a Project Labor Agreement (PLAs) or apprenticeship requirement is mandated on a public project to understand `the impact those requirements would have on cost, competition, and on MWBE firms.

This bill will have a positive impact on all New Yorkers. PLAs and apprenticeship mandates increase the cost of construction, sideline most construction workers in New York, and make it virtually impossible for MWBE firms to benefit from New York State Public Work.

PLAs negatively impact MWBE firms as they dictate whom they can and cannot put to work on a project and enforce costly requirements that MWBE firms cannot meet. In the state’s most recent due diligence study, they asked MWBE firms about how PLAs impacted them, and there was a consensus that PLAs make it almost impossible for an MWBE firm to be awarded a state contract.

Apprenticeship mandates have an equally negative impact on these firms. Getting an apprenticeship program approved is not easy and can take over a year to get approved. It is also extremely costly for an MWBE contractor to have a program. Firms with only one apprentice on payroll can pay from $45,000-$80,000 annually, making it too expensive for smaller MWBE firms to manage. As a result, they cannot bid on work with apprenticeship mandates.

Supporters of Project Labor Agreements and apprenticeship mandates should have no problem with this legislation either. They frequently state that these measures positively impact construction and ultimately save money. This would put that view to the test, which is why these groups strongly oppose this legislation. It is also important to point out that any alleged labor savings are borne by the workers who are forced to give up pay and benefits.

That said, we are confident that these studies will show the negative impact of PLAs and apprenticeship mandates on construction projects and hopefully will lead our leaders in Albany to avoid them. Doing so will help New York State MWBE businesses to grow by benefitting from being awarded more state construction contracts.

For these reasons, we support S.752 and encourage the legislature to vote for it.

If you have any questions related to this issue, please contact Tanner Schmidt, Government Affairs Manager, Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc., at (585) 730-1814.

Memorandum of Opposition
S.2129 (Krueger) / A.3351 (Dinowitz)

The Empire State Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing hundreds of merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

This bill would create the Climate Change Adaptation Cost Recovery Program. The main goal of this law is to require entities that are directly attributed to the build-up of greenhouse gas emissions to fund projects associated with fixing that damage. We do not have an issue with the main purpose of this bill. We agree that New York must take steps to build our green energy future and fix the damage caused by greenhouse gas emissions. However, our organization does oppose some of the requirements when it comes to the construction of projects funded by this program.

The first problem is that the legislation mandates that prevailing wage be mandated on projects funded by this program. While many renewable energy projects are already subject to prevailing wages, subjecting all projects funded by this program to the wage will have a negative impact on the construction of climate-related projects. Studies have shown that prevailing wage increases the construction cost in New York by up to 25%, depending on the region of the state you are in. That is a major problem as the added costs will blow up budgets and cause projects to either be significantly scaled down or scrapped altogether.

The sponsors of this bill have stressed the importance of the payment of prevailing wages on these projects. However, they still included lines 35 & 36 in the legislation, which allows entities in charge of privately owned projects to avoid paying prevailing wages if they agree to sign onto a Project Labor Agreement (PLA).

That is a major problem because PLAs force contractors to hire most of their workers from union halls. That’s bad because 70% of all construction workers living in New York are not part of a union. How can these projects get done on budget and on time if this legislation encourages a provision that would limit the workforce to only 30% of all workers in the state? Because of this section, you will see out-of-state workers being brought in because the unions do not have the workforce to keep up with the workload. Their workers are going to be tied up building the new Buffalo Bills Stadium, the Kensington Expressway, I-81, the skyway reconstruction, and most renewable energy projects, and those are just some of the over $100 billion of work mandated to go union. These are New York projects, and New York construction workers should benefit from them. For these reasons, we ask for the removal of any reference to a PLA in this legislation.

Furthermore, we also oppose the apprenticeship language included in this proposal. Lines 23 through 28 of this bill require a public entity that receives over $25 million from this program for a project costing more than $50 million to mandate an apprenticeship program on that project. The problem is that most MWBE firms do not have an apprenticeship program and wouldn’t qualify to work on these projects. That would go against the state’s initiatives to build up MWBE firms by making it so they can work on larger projects like the ones referenced in this section of the bill.

Getting an apprenticeship program is not easy and can take over a year to get approved. It is also extremely costly for an MWBE contractor to have a program. Firms with only one apprentice on payroll can pay from $45,000-$80,000 annually, making it too expensive for smaller MWBE firms to manage. As a result, they cannot bid on work with apprenticeship mandates. For these reasons, the bill’s sponsors and the legislature must remove the apprenticeship language from this legislation.

Our organization fully believes New York must build more climate-related projects. Our members stand ready to build our green energy future. Therefore, we encourage the bill sponsor to make the abovementioned changes. Doing so will make the Climate Change Adaptation Cost Recovery Program more successful.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Public Affairs Manager Tanner Schmidt (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.

Memorandum of Opposition
S.4134 (Parker) / A.279 (Carrol)
New York State Build Public Renewables Act

The Empire State Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing hundreds of merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

This bill would create the New York State Build Public Renewables Act, which requires the New York Power Authority (NYPA) to provide only renewable energy and power to customers, be the sole provider of energy to all state-owned and municipal properties and require the payment of prevailing wages and the use of Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on all construction resulting from the legislation. New York State will NOT meet its renewable energy goals set by the CLCPA if PLAs are mandated on these projects.

Mandating PLAs on these projects will further increase the cost of construction and at the same time, sideline most construction workers in New York from benefiting from these projects. A PLA is a pre-hire bargaining agreement. In New York, a typical PLA forces contractors to hire most of their workforce from the union hall. If a local, qualified contractor is forced to use labor from the union hall instead of people they currently employ and are loyal to, they won’t bid on the work. Why would they? What if you were forced to sign an agreement that would replace your current staff with people you’ve never met, haven’t trained, and have no allegiance to your success? The answer is that you probably wouldn’t sign that agreement. That is the decision that most open-shop or merit-shop contractors reach when they are faced with a PLA mandate.

Fewer bidders mean more expensive construction, leading to tax increases and further strain on a rebuilding economy. A study by Dr. Paul G. Carr, P.E., from Cornell University, illustrates what happens when the number of bidders on a project is reduced. The study looks at 125 public works projects in New York State. The study unequivocally found that the construction cost will increase by reducing the number of bidders on public projects. Reducing two bidders added more than 4% to the bid cost. The magnitude of extra costs this level of bidder exclusion would lead to is hard to overstate, costing hundreds of millions of dollars for taxpayers and for no reason other than a handout to the unions.

For the contracting authority to put a PLA in place, it must first undertake a study that allegedly demonstrates savings can be achieved using the PLA. These studies are highly criticized for their lack of specificity regarding how the savings can be achieved and the fact that no post-project PLA studies are ever conducted to determine if the alleged savings are actualized. The Beacon Hill Institute reviewed multiple PLA cost studies conducted by New York Engineering firms. The report concludes that the engineering firms’ methods do not serve their intended purpose and fail to determine whether PLAs save on construction costs. In every instance, the PLA cost studies make the unsubstantiated claim that PLAs do provide cost savings. Beacon Hill went line by line through the so-called projected savings, and their analysis found that these “savings” are fictitious or could be realized without a PLA. Further, the implication of the PLA will often delay a project start date while courts determine if the PLA can be implemented.

Additionally, NYS has more than $100B in PLA work over the next several years, already straining the union workforce. The Buffalo Bills Stadium, I-81 in Syracuse, the Kensington Expressway, the Skyway reconstruction, and the Scajaquada Corridor project, to name a few. With less than 30% of construction workers in a union, they cannot handle the amount of work needed for the state to build its renewable energy infrastructure. If the state is serious about meeting its 70% renewables goal by 2030, it cannot attach PLAs to these projects, excluding the vast majority of construction workers in the state from this process the projects will drag out, being delivered late and over budget, if at all. This would result in bringing in even more workers from out of state to work on these projects while local workers are forced to sit on the sidelines and watch simply because they choose not to be part of a union. That doesn’t make sense.

The state needs to encourage NYPA to partner with the private producers and develop a plan that both can support, which increases what NYPA builds and creates a system where current private natural gas plants can be converted and explore other renewable other than just solar and wind. The partnering would allow the private company to access and benefit from available tax credits NYPA does not qualify to access. Those credits will help drive down the cost of construction, making the energy produced more affordable. That’s a win for everyone.

ABC supports the lofty goals set to build out the state’s renewable energy infrastructure, again, these goals will not be met if you exclude over 70% of the state’s construction workforce. Instead, allow all qualified New York construction workers the opportunity to bid and work on these projects regardless of their labor affiliation. New Yorkers should build New York projects.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation.

Memorandum in Support
S.8413a (Breslin) / A.8981a (Weprin)

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors ("ABC"), representing over 400 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, supports S.8413a/ A.8981a which will establish staging a construction site accident as a crime.

Workers' compensation fraud due to faked or staged construction accidents is an epidemic in New York. We’ve seen thousands of cases where the workers compensation system has been manipulated by filing a false claim as a means to get to a higher payout under the state’s notorious Scaffold Law, or LL 240/241 claims. Workers are being used as pawns by trial attorneys and for-profit medical providers who simply want to line their pockets. ABC7 Eye Witness News conducted an investigation in 2023 into these occurrences and found numerous cases of faked construction accidents.

Over the last decade, as fraudulent claims have become more common, workers compensation rates in the construction industry have increased in excess of 100%, doubling the cost for an average contractor. Correspondingly and not surprisingly, general liability insurance rates have risen by more than 300% when compared to bordering states like New Jersey. For some sectors in the industry, such as roofing and structural steel, those rates are more than 1,000% higher. One would think with such high premiums more carriers would flock to the New York market. The direct opposite has happened. Because of the potential for exposure to LL240 claims, more than 75% of insurance carriers will not write policies in New York.

Experts agree taxpayers are paying hundreds of thousands more for public projects simply because insurance costs are out of control in New York State. This dramatically adds to the affordability crisis all New Yorkers are experiencing. According to the Tax Foundation,  14.1% of New Yorkers' incomes go directly to state and local government, by far the highest of any state. In 2022, they concluded that New Yorkers faced the highest tax burden in the nation, with 15.9% of the net product in the state going to state and local taxes. Taking steps to eliminate workers' compensation fraud will help alleviate this taxpayer burden.

Passing this law will protect taxpayers and contractors by establishing the crime of staging a construction site accident, deterring bad actors from taking advantage of our worker's compensation system, and leaving New York taxpayers to pick up the tab. This way, we can also ensure that workers with actual claims get the help and support they need.

For these reasons, the Associated Builders & Contractors Empire State Chapter and our members support S.8413a/ A8981a. If you have questions, please contact our Government Affairs Manager Tanner Schmidt at (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.

Memorandum of Opposition 
S.2935-D (Parker)
"Just Energy Transition Act"

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 450 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation because it requires Project Labor Agreements (PLA) on any project undertaken by this act.

ABC and our members strongly support the development of renewable energy systems and the creation of a green grid. We oppose this bill because requiring a PLA will increase the cost of construction and, at the same time, sideline most construction workers living in New York from benefiting from these projects. New York State will NOT meet the renewable energy goals the CLCPA sets if PLAs are mandated on these projects.

A PLA is a pre-hire bargaining agreement that contractors must sign to work on a project. A typical PLA forces contractors to hire most of their workforce from the union hall, usually 3 out of 4 workers. If a local, qualified contractor is forced to use unknown individuals instead of the employees they trained and are loyal to, they won’t bid to work on the project. They refuse to walk into their office and tell their employees that while the company will benefit from the project, most of them won’t be able to work on it and will be replaced. Imagine if you were forced to sign an agreement that would replace your current staff with people you’ve never met, haven’t trained, and have no allegiance to your success. You probably wouldn’t sign that agreement, and neither do contractors.

When you look at the breakdown of construction workers in New York, it is a serious issue that these contractors are not bidding on this work. According to the most recent data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, over 80% of the construction industry is not part of a union and, therefore, would be unable to work on these projects due to the PLA mandate.

The problem only worsens when you consider the number of projects with PLAs attached to them. New York State has mandated over $150B in PLA work over the next several years. How can the state expect to build enough renewable energy systems to meet its goals when this legislation sidelines 80% of construction workers? We have no problems with the unions; however, they simply don’t have the workforce to handle all the work steered their way, and now all this work too. As a result, these projects will face delays and cost overruns due to the workforce shortage they will experience by sidelining most of the industry.

For the contracting authority to put a PLA in place, it must first undertake a study that allegedly demonstrates savings can be achieved using the PLA. These studies are highly criticized for their lack of specificity regarding how the savings can be achieved, and no post-project PLA studies have ever been conducted to determine if the alleged savings are realized. The Beacon Hill Institute reviewed dozens of PLA “due diligence” studies. The report concludes that these study’s methods did not serve their intended purpose and failed to determine whether PLAs save on construction costs.

In every instance, the PLA's due diligence studies make the unsubstantiated claim that PLAs provide cost savings. Beacon Hill went line by line through the so-called projected savings and found that these “savings” are fictitious or could be realized without a PLA. Further, the PLA's implications often delay a project start date while courts determine whether the PLA can be implemented.

If the state is serious about meeting its 70% renewables goal by 2030, it cannot attach PLAs to these projects. Excluding most construction workers in the state from this process, the projects will drag out, be delivered late, and be over budget, if at all. This would bring in even more workers from out of state to work on these projects while local workers are forced to sit on the sidelines and watch simply because they choose not to be part of a union. That doesn’t make sense.

ABC supports the lofty goals of building the state’s renewable energy infrastructure. Again, these goals will not be met if you exclude over 70% of the state’s construction workforce. Instead, all qualified New York construction workers should be allowed the opportunity to bid and work on these projects regardless of their labor affiliation. New Yorkers should build New York projects.

ABC strongly opposes this legislation for the reasons stated above. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this further. Please contact ABC’s Public Affairs Manager, Tanner Schmidt, at (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 400 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation which would mandate representation on local Industrial Development Agency (IDA) boards.

IDA boards are made up of local volunteers selected and appointed by local governments based on the unique economic needs of the communities they represent. These boards are designed to foster local economic development, with input from community members who have broad and diverse backgrounds, to ensure they adequately represent the best interests of their community. This includes board members from private business, financial experts, local government, academia, workforce development, as well as labor and schools.

If passed, this bill will mandate labor and school district representation on IDA boards. Based on their local needs, several IDA boards across the state currently have labor and/or school district representation, and value the input and perspective those appointees bring. However, the legislature cannot mandate that an appointee be given a seat to represent a certain interest. Doing so ignores and overrides the essential local control granted to IDAs to make the best decisions for their own communities, as well as the duty that board members have to further the purposes of the agency: promoting and assisting economic development.

There is already legislation that caps IDA boards to seven members. Mandating two representatives without allowing for a permanent increase in the membership of the board displaces the voices of community members appointed to serve the interests of their locality as a whole. S.4040/A.7532 would be an overreach by the state, usurping local control and home rule, and setting a concerning precedent for any interest group to advocate to mandate their own representation on IDA boards.

This legislation also fails to take into account how varied and diverse the economies and make ups of counties across New York State truly are. IDAs take on the responsibility of deciding where to grant assistance to encourage business and development in their communities.

It is critical those making these consequential decisions are the best possible representation of their local needs. For these reasons, the Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors opposes S.4040/A.7532.

We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Public Affairs Manager Tanner Schmidt (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.

Memorandum of Opposition
S.5868-B (Harkham) / A.7491-B (Bronson)

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 450 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

If passed, this law would mandate prevailing wages on brownfield construction projects. From the early 2000s on, the Brownfield Cleanup Program has provided developers with the much-needed incentives to remediate and revitalize environmentally contaminated sites. This program led to hundreds of contaminated sites, more than half of which are in economically disadvantaged areas to be cleaned up and developed. These developments create much-needed housing and jobs in the local communities. The legislature clearly sees the value in the program, if not it wouldn’t have been recently extended for another decade.

Mandating prevailing wages on these projects will mean many of these contaminated sites will sit idle instead of being developed into job creating businesses. While it’s positive to see the bill sponsors understand what a negative impact this law would have on affordable housing, which is carved out, applying the wages to other developments will mean those projects won’t happen.

We agree with the bill sponsors, mandating prevailing wages on brownfield cleanup projects that are developing affordable housing would negatively impact the state’s efforts to construct more housing units to combat the growing housing crisis New York is facing. However, New York is facing another crisis – affordability. The state must build more affordable housing to address the crisis, but it also must create jobs for individuals to pay for their housing. Job creation will also help tackle another crisis the state is facing: an affordability crisis.

People are fleeing in record numbers. Creating new jobs will attract more native New Yorkers to stay. New York State is one of the most expensive states in the country when it comes to construction. That’s why when the legislature expanded the prevailing wage to many projects that were traditionally considered private projects, they excluded brownfield projects. That’s because the legislature wisely realized that if prevailing wages are mandated for these projects, they simply will not happen.

That’s because prevailing wages add significantly to the cost of construction. According to the Center for Governmental Research, prevailing wage projects cost about 28% more than non-prevailing wage projects. In addition to this study, the Empire Center for Public Policy found that construction costs are inflated by between 13 and 25% due to New York’s prevailing wage law.

Adding over 10% in costs to already expensive environmental remediation projects will mean they won’t happen. That’s why the brownfield program exists, the state realized that these sites will sit idle if development is not incentivized. If this law passes, it will have a disastrous effect on the economic climate of New York State – which is already suffering.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Public Affairs Manager Tanner Schmidt (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.

Memorandum of Opposition
S.1604-F / A.8935-C
“Temperature Extreme Mitigation Program (TEMP) Act”

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 400 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

ABC and our members support practical and feasible measures to protect workers from heat-related hazards. S.1604-F/A.8935-C, however, would impose redundant and onerous requirements on contractors. Furthermore, as it relates to construction, it’s insulting that the sponsor only wants these requirements to apply to the 80% of the industry that chooses not to be in a union. Does the sponsor not care about the 20% of the union workers? If the intent of the bill is to promote a safe and healthy workplace, why does it only apply to some job sites? Applying this law to some job sites but not all makes enforcing this law impossible. Construction sites commonly have a mixture of union and nonunion employees working side by side. They don’t wear different clothing or PPE. How will the Department of Labor tell who the law should and shouldn’t apply to?

All contractors, both union and nonunion, are already mandated to take the necessary steps to ensure employees' protection from heat-related illnesses and injuries and these requirements are strictly enforced by the Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA). Under the OSHA General Duty Clause, Section 5(a)(1) of Occupational Safety and Health of 1970, employers are required to provide their employees with a place of employment that is “free from recognized hazards that are causing or likely to cause death or serious harm to employees.” The general Duty Clause extends to heat-related hazards, requiring employers to provide adequate resources to prevent employees from suffering harm or injury related to heat. Additionally, under OSHA’s personal protective equipment (PPE) standard, employers must conduct a hazard assessment to determine the appropriate PPE to protect employees, including in situations where employees work in the heat. Moreover, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has published criteria for a recommended standard for occupational heat stress. These federal requirements accomplish all the same objectives of this legislation but without the impractical requirements of this bill. Any employer deliberately exposing workers to extreme or dangerous heat conditions is already liable for significant fines and penalties under current law.

This legislation is far too rigid and unworkable in many situations and circumstances. How would this work for road construction or in areas where a tent can’t be set up? Would contractors have to block off additional sidewalks or road space in order to set up tents? Further, unless the business owner is a trained medical professional, they shouldn’t be administering any medical treatment. This puts both the employer and the employee at risk. If medical treatment is performed and creates a worsened medical situation, business owners’ risk being liable for damages in civil court.

In any situation, there needs to be flexibility and the opportunity for employers and employees to use realistic approaches to ensure safety. Instead, this legislation imposes far too excessive and inflexible requirements and would have a detrimental impact on construction. It’s unreasonable to require “at least enough shade to accommodate the number of employees on preventative breaks so that they can sit in a normal posture fully in the shade with at least four-square feet per resting employee.” Again, how does this work on a confined construction site or a section of highway that is being built? This doesn’t take into consideration the location of the worksite, the amount of space available, or the number of employees.

Furthermore, direct medical monitoring during preventative breaks is impossible in many circumstances and would drastically change business operations, particularly for small business owners. The owner of a small paving company may be at one location working while employees are at other separate locations. On an 80-degree day, the small business owner would need to directly supervise employees, meaning everyone would need to be at the same location at the same time. This would undoubtedly lead to small businesses cutting hours and being forced to take on less work, which impacts their ability to hire more or retain their current workforce.

This legislation also does not consider the variance in heat thresholds and other weather conditions such as humidity, cloud cover, or wind. An 80-degree weather day in New York State may be a beautiful summer day for workers in certain industries, which creates the challenge of directing employees to use air conditioning, seek shade, or drink water. This bill is silent on whether employers can take disciplinary actions against employees who ignore the mandated policies and training.

This legislation not only puts additional costs on large and small contractors but also impacts their ability to complete vital projects that New York State desperately needs. Imposing these additional significant impactful burdens on contractors will not only contribute to the declining quality of life in New York State but will force businesses and residents to invest elsewhere.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Public Affairs Manager Tanner Schmidt (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.

Memorandum in Opposition
S.8608 (Ramos) / A.9265 (Bronson)

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 400 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

This bill would require all contractors working on a “covered project” to submit their payroll records to the Commissioner of Labor every month. It also requires the Department of Labor to create an online searchable database to post these payroll records monthly.

This bill is duplicative because New York State already requires companies to submit payroll records. Article 8 of the New York State Labor Law requires contractors working on “covered projects” to submit their certified payroll records. Those records can be audited at any time by the Department of Labor or outside representatives. General Contractors are also required by law to keep certified payroll records for three years after the completion of the project. Forcing contractors to provide these records to the Commissioner does nothing more than add another layer of red tape for contractors to trip over when performing public work in New York State.

While we understand the intention behind this proposal, there are already proper safeguards ensuring fair wages and compliance with labor laws. Just last year the Governor signed legislation creating the contractor registration system; an online database of contractors performing work on “covered projects”. The information this law requires to be posted will already be hosted on that registration system’s public website. This legislation imposes yet another burden on contractors which hinders the efficiency of the construction industry in New York.

Instead of imposing duplicative mandates, we encourage lawmakers to explore solutions that will lower the cost of construction in New York. Doing so would mean more development will take place creating jobs and boosting the states economy.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Public Affairs Manager Tanner Schmidt (585) 730-1814 or tschmidt@abcnys.org.