Daily Kennebec journal. [microfilm reel] (Augusta, Me.) 1870-1975, 1923-02-02
Editors Letter Box
Far-Reaching Bill
But Looks Innocent

Augusta, Nc, Jan. 81, 1923
My dear SIR
| wonder if the newspapers OF our
state and the municipal officers of
our several cities have had their at
tention particularly called to an act
introduced in the present Legislature
by Senator Smith of Somerset, and
II you have sensed the far-reaching
possibilities of this act? 1t looks
entirely innocent, but in my judg-
mcnt is covered with barbs.
AS the law now stands, and as con-
tanned in Section 36 of Chapter 40 Of
the Revised Statutes. preference is
given to Maine workmcn and Maine
contractors on all contracts for con-
structlnE, altering, repairing, furn-
lshlng or cquippinG a building built
by municipality or the State. But
the law as it now stands leaves the
contractor free to make his trade
with the workmcn whom he employs.
Senator Smiths amendment to the
Act provides that in the employment
of Workmcn upon such works the
preference given State Of Maine
workmcn shall be at the customary
and prevailing rate of wages for a
days work in the same trade or oc-
cupation in the locality where such
public works are constructed" In
case of any dispute as to such GUS
tOmary prevailing rate, the Commits
sioncr of Labor shall investigate and
decide what rate of wages shall be
paid. From his decision there is no
appeal.
Not long ago | talked with the
manager of an association like the
one l represent, who told me that in
one Of the large cities in the state
where he operated, there was a
municipal ordinance in substance like
this proposed act, and in every in
stance there was a dispute in regard
to what constituted the prevailing
wage, the Commissioner of Labor
was called in, and in every case he
EaSccrtaincd what was the highest
union wage being paid in the locality,
and determined that was the prevail
ing wage which should be paid. SO
long as the ordinance remained in ef-
feet. it cost this particular city
number of hundreds of thousands or
dollars. You will. of course, readily
understand that if this law went into
effect a contractor would have TO
guess in some way what the COM
missioner of Labor would decide TO
be the prevailing wage during the
time the contract was being per-
formed He would guess high enough.
and if the prevailing wage turned out
to be less, he would he the winner,
and in any event could not lose, the
city paving every time. This man
also pointed out to me that upon no
broader foundation than the one con-
tanned in the proposed amendment TO
our statute was built the almighty
troublesome and diSgraccful Stfuc-
turc which we have seen IN the
building trades investigation in the
city and state of New York.
| hardly need point out to yoI that
this act would take away the right
of the contractor to make lndlvlduai
trades with his workmcn in accord
ance with their capacity, and cqually
take away his right to determine 1oT
himself what wage he could pay ana
ought to pay, and would turn the en-.
tire determination of this element or
cost in municipal and state building
contracts over to one man. who ordl-
narily has at least very strong SYM
pathetic leanings toward the SO
called Cause of Labor
This bill will later he advertised
for hearing, and it would seem to me
that people in the state ought 70 pc
informed Of the possibilities that lie
within the act, and given an oppof-
tunity to in some way protest II sucn
be their desire.
Most sincerely yours.
| Executive SCcy. p