Evening journal., 1909-08-05
STIR OVER THE
PAINTING AWARD
House Painters Union OBJ.
ieCtS to Contracts Given by
Board of Education
OFFICIAL OF BOARD
GIVES EXPLANATION

There is much dissatisfaction among
union painters in the city because Of the
manner in which the contracts for paint
ing schools were awarded by the repair
committee Of the Board Of Education The
following letter explains itself:
Editor THE EVENING JOURNAL.
The journeymen painters Of this city.
through their organization. desire 20
inform the public how the work Of tho
Board of Education is being dealt out.
Despite the fact that the city is we'll
supplied with resident painters and
taxpayers. but few of these are ever
recognized when job Of painting is
given out by said board.
Our organization communicated with
the board asking them TO give their
work to bona-fide business firms, who
pay license and taxes. not to so-called
firms that spring up just for the oc-
cssion, and in one instance taking into
partnership a certain member OF the
Board of Education, in order to have
passed bills for their inferior work,
but no attention was paid 10 the re-
quest. Even at the present time tho
contract for painting one of our schools
has been awarded to a non-citizcn, and
a man who pays no taxes for carrying
on the painting business. The very
fact that the Board of Education,
when they desire painting done, give
preference to these mushroom firms
/ who pay but % cents an hour (ani
! get 25 cent mem when the prevailing
| scale is 40 cents an hour show them
/ selves to be a short-sighted body. II
appears. Judging from the inferior
work done BY these mushroom firms
with their low class men. that in the
/ end it is the most expensive kind 0i
work for the taxpayers Of this city
( In the past. when the master painters
did this work il was done 20 per cent
cheaper on account of being done In
the dull season. The City Council
street and Sewer Commission and
Water Department all give out con-
tracts to the lowest and best bidder
mt we never hear of them being Sc
short sighted as TO award all theil
contracts to such firms as the Schoc
Board is and has been doing for som'
time. It also seems 10 ms that tn
Educational Board imagine that an
old thing" can be a member Of IN
house, but when it comes 60 iudividpn
members OF the board having paintih
done about their own premises, tho
want the best workmen, and give IAN
old thing" no consideration whatever
Judging from the above il is the candi
opinion Of our organization that AN
old thing can be a member OF IN
Board Of Educations
Yours truly. Hotisepainters Loca
Union. No. 6s4, Bro. of p, d. Of A.
Explanation of Awards.
{ An official Of the Board Of Educatio
, when seen by a reporter for THE EVEN
r ING JOURNAL to-day denied that
y member of tho board was In partnershl
n with a contractor who had received pam
ing contracts He stated that there wa
C one member who is not connected VIII
+. the repair committee but member OF az
- other committee who had been employe
y by a contractor painting on school wor
. but at the same wages paid any oth'
$ man in his employ.
This official said that the Board OF hd'
cation had no alternative but TO aWar
contracts to the lowest bidder. "The oha'
e ter Of the board sets forth that all col
I tracts must be given 10 the lowest bic
) der and that a bond shall be given fc
= the faithful performance Of the work an
s this is always done" said the official. I'll
e charters Of other city bodies give the la
3 ter authority TO award contracts to Il
lowest and best bidder.