CHARLESTON, W. Va. - People pushing to end West Virginia's prevailing wage law say the move is intended to cut the cost of building schools and other public construction projects. But several new studies warn that a repeal would raise costs instead.

The prevailing wage law mandates that construction workers on public projects make the going rate for their specialty in a given area. Sean O'Leary, policy analyst with the West Virginia Center on Budget and Policy, says his group's analysis of the new research shows repealing the law would actually cost the state in the long run.

"Our construction costs are actually lower than a lot of our neighboring states, like Virginia, Ohio, that don't have prevailing wage laws," says O'Leary.

Senate Bill 361 was set for discussion by the Senate Government Organization Committee on Thursday before being pulled from the agenda. Sponsors say they expect to bring it up this week.

West Virginia Chamber of Commerce President Steve Roberts says estimates are the state could save 25 to 30 percent with a repeal. But the prevailing wage law applies only to labor costs and according to the Center on Budget and Policy report, federal census figures say labor is only 27 percent of state construction costs, making 25 percent savings impossible. Roberts had this reaction:

"I wouldn't be too impressed by somebody's cursory look at this," he says. "We would have to look at the credibility of the report at this point."

Roberts has since received a copy of the report but hasn't commented further.

O'Leary says their findings are in line with a 2004 study of school construction, and a new study from the University of Missouri. He says in public projects the prevailing wage ensures a better end result, helps maintain a high-quality workforce, and keeps in-state contractors from being under-cut by out-of-state firms that use lower quality labor.

"You get what you pay for," says O'Leary. "There's fewer workplace accidents, the work gets done quicker, the productivity is substantially higher, rather than when you have public construction projects based on who can pay their workers the least."


get more stories like this via email

Nevada groups concerned about affordability, clean air and health care are speaking out against the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" recently signed by President Donald Trump.

The new law extends tax cuts from 2017, funded partially by huge cuts to Medicaid and SNAP food benefits.

Dr. Joanne Leovy, steering committee chair for the Nevada Clinicians for Climate Action, noted it also ends the tax credit for electric vehicles on Sept. 30, which drives up the price of an EV by $7,500 while promoting the sales of gas-powered vehicles.

"This bill will dump an extra 2.1 billion tons of climate pollution into the atmosphere over the next decade," Leovy pointed out. "Increasing greenhouse gas emissions by about 7% over prior projections; the equivalent of adding more than 400,000 cars to the road."

The new law also cuts tax credits for rooftop solar and energy efficient home upgrades. Backers said the savings were necessary to fund other administration priorities, such as increased funding for immigration enforcement.

Yolanda Kemp, a member of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees Local 4041, said she worries about job losses in the public sector.

"When states, cities, towns, and schools lose essential federal funding, they will be forced to make cuts to their budgets as well, putting all public services and jobs at risk of being cut," Kemp stressed. "And let me tell you, the 'Big, Beautiful Bill' that is supposed to help hardworking Americans is nothing more than another billionaire giveaway paid for by us."

The change to Medicaid and SNAP are not immediate but will be phased in mostly in 2027 and 2028.


get more stories like this via email

More than 1,100 caregivers at Portland's Providence St. Vincent Medical Center have voted to unionize, joining the Service Employees International Union Local 49.

Hospital staffers, including certified nursing assistants, cooks, lab assistants, pharmacy techs, environmental workers and patient representatives, will soon begin collective bargaining with management over a new work contract.

Finn McCool, senior food service attendant at Providence St. Vincent Medical Center in Portland, said changes to working conditions in the hospital were a major driver to organize.

"There's a lot that makes St. Vincent a great place to work, but we've also seen just tons of changes over the years around staffing and benefits," McCool explained. "My fellow caregivers really knew that jobs were only going to get harder."

The St. Vincent caregivers will join thousands of other unionized workers at Providence hospitals in Oregon, Washington state and other parts of the country. Providence officials released a statement, recognizing the union and saying they were prepared to work with it toward a new contract.

McCool noted the company made several changes to staffing and work policies without feedback from its employees, with changes to the employees' health care benefits causing a major upheaval.

"It's been a recent change to our health care plan with Aetna switching over, and that was probably a very large reason why a lot of us decided to vote yes," McCool pointed out. "We had our own internal health care system. We changed to a different thing. Co-pays changed. Things were definitely a lot harder with increased deductibles."

McCool stressed political uncertainty, particularly in the government's health care policies, was also a significant concern.

"We're seeing a lot of changes going on with the government with cuts, especially right now," McCool observed. "What threatens us is cuts to Medicare and Medicaid. Our CEO said, 'These cuts are threatening the hospital.'"

The multistate Providence Health System announced it will close the maternity center at one of its Montana hospitals in October.

Opponents are hoping the corporation will reverse its decision at negotiations starting next week. The Family Maternity Center at Missoula's Providence St. Patrick Hospital has delivered about 450 babies each year over the last several, and serves many people from the surrounding small towns.

Robin Haux, labor program director for the Montana Nurses Association, said the layoff notification came as a big surprise and will affect moms and babies, nurses and Missoula's other hospital.

"Not only were the nurses provided just a four-month turnaround, so was the community, so was Community Medical Center," Haux explained. "This has triggered a pretty large scrambling of trying to get prepared."

The cut comes as U.S. lawmakers close in on the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act," the Republican budget megabill proposing cuts to Medicaid which could close rural hospitals. Providence said the closure is due to "declining birth volumes" and "workforce shortages."

Megan Carey, labor and delivery nurse in the Family Maternity Center at Providence St. Patrick Hospital, said no one from the Family Maternity Center was included in the decision.

"We were told there was a discernment team as well as external stakeholders," Carey pointed out. "It's just really disappointing that administration could not look inward to better go about this process."

Carey added Providence sent what she calls an "unsettling" message informing nurses they could apply to work in other departments at St. Patrick Hospital but there would not be enough jobs for them all.


get more stories like this via email