[Comments on this legislation] [Post new comment] [Text and Analysis] [Add to Watch List]
[Previous] [Next]

• Introduced by Rep. Steve Conway, (D-Tacoma) (D) on January 15, 2003, to mandate that state agency contracts for public works meet certain quotas for using state-approved apprentices. This bill requires that from July 1, 2003, through December 31, 2003, all public works estimated to cost $2 million or more shall require at least 10 percent of the labor hours within each trade be performed by apprentices of that trade. During calendar year 2004, the requirement is 12 twelve percent of the labor hours within each trade be performed by apprentices of that trade and during 2005 the requirement increases to 15 percent of the labor hours within each trade be performed by apprentices of that trade. This section does not apply to agencies that adopt requirements that equal or exceed those set forth in this section. See also Companion SB 5755.
  • Referred to the House Commerce & Labor Committee on January 15, 2003.
    • Testimony in support offered to the House Commerce & Labor Committee on February 26, 2003, by Roger Boatwright, WA State Building and Construction Trades Council; Randy Loomans, WA State Labor Council; Kevin Koester, Iron Workers Local 86; John Little, Seattle-King County Building and Construction Trades Council; Evelyn O'Conner, apprentice carpenter; Jennifer Coyle, apprentice carpenter and Carpenters Local 502; Don McLeod and Dave Johnson, Iron Workers and Laborers Local 252; Bob Abbott, WA and Northern Idaho District Council of Laborers; Robert Elliott, Regional Council of Carpenters; and Lonnie Wangen, Pile Drivers Local 2396. They testified that the Governor's executive order should be expanded to include all state agencies. Apprenticeship is the most effective and underutilized workforce training program in the state. A highly-skilled workforce is essential to the state's economic vitality. Apprenticeship is essential for a skilled workforce in the building trades. We need skilled work, especially on projects funded with tax dollars. Training for high-wage jobs like these can transform lives. Apprenticeships open doors to the trades and helps citizens earn a living wage. Using apprentices on public works projects is key to competitively bidding for such projects. Other cities, counties, and school districts have used apprentice utilization programs. Large public projects like the King County Justice Center and Seahawk Stadium have successfully implemented such requirements. Concerns about an insufficient supply of apprentices are unfounded. On the Yakima Firing Range project, apprentice utilization goals were far exceeded. People are turned away from apprenticeship programs because there are insufficient jobs for them. This bill will make more work available to them. The slowdown in the economy is an important opportunity to get ready and address the skills gap of the future. State law requires that apprenticeships be open to everyone, both union and non-union.
    • Testimony in opposition offered to the House Commerce & Labor Committee on February 26, 2003, by Rick Slunaker, Associated General Contractors and WA Construction Industry Council; Tom Gaetz, Monat Construction Company; Chris Buchanan, Charter Construction, Inc.; David Spivey, Asphalt Pavement Association; David Gent, ICON Materials; Tom Dikeman, Wilder Construction Company; Timothy Lee, Lakeside Industries; Kathleen Garrity, Associated Builders and Contractors of Western WA and WA Electrical Contractors Association; Steve Cofchin, Air Systems Engineering; Don Backstrom, Backstrom Curb and Sidewalk; Jake Jacobsen, Osborne Construction Company; Paulo Da Cruz, Northwest Erosion Control Inc.; and Gary Smith, Independent Business Association. They testified that the construction industry is not opposed to training. This bill is not the executive order. It mandates the same requirements for a wide variety of projects. It does not have the same degree of flexibility that other programs have had. This bill sets quotas rather than goals, and imposes the requirements by craft rather than by job. It requires excessive documentation and reporting. Don't collect data to tell us what we already know. Noncompliance could result in debarment, even for the lowest responsible bidders. There are not enough apprentices and not enough training programs to meet these quotas. This bill does nothing to address the problem of a sufficient supply of qualified apprentices. The construction industry is contracting. There is already a surplus of skilled workers. Contractors may be forced to lay off skilled workers to hire apprentices to meet apprentice utilization requirements. In some contexts, like asphalt paving, there is no room to artificially increase labor costs on public works projects. The bill is not necessary because the market will encourage apprenticeship when the economy recovers. The construction industry is still working on parity for open shop contractors. The federal audit of the apprenticeship program prompted changes to laws and rules, but there is still discrimination against open shop contractors.
  • Substitute offered to the House Commerce & Labor Committee on February 26, 2003, to specify that the apprentice utilization requirements apply to public works done by state agencies and higher education institutions, but not state agencies headed by a separately elected public official, the Department of Transportation, or local governments. Contractors must make reasonable efforts to apply the requirements so that the appropriate percentage of labor hours is performed by apprentices within each separate craft or trade. Reasons for adjusting the requirements are the reasons listed in the original bill and because participating contractors have demonstrated a good faith effort to comply with the requirements. Awarding agency directors are required to adjust the requirements if a bidder asserts one of these reasons. Awarding agency directors that dispute the validity of the asserted reason must establish the invalidity of that reason. Contractors and subcontractors are not required to provide monthly payroll reports to the awarding agencies. The failure to comply may not be considered evidence bearing on a contractor's qualification for award of future contracts. The Department of General Administration must provide information and technical assistance to affected agencies, collect certain data on covered projects from those agencies, and make annual reports to certain legislative committees. The Department of Labor and Industries must provide information on skill shortages in each trade or craft to certain legislative committees. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on February 26, 2003.
  • Referred to the House Capital Budget Committee on February 28, 2003.
  • Substitute offered to the House Capital Budget Committee on March 8, 2003, to stipulate that all specifications for public works done by certain state agencies and higher education institutions must require that apprentices enrolled in state-approved apprenticeship training programs participate in the projects as follows: no less than 12 percent of total labor hours for contracts estimated to cost $2 million or more from July 1, 2003, through December 31, 2003; and no less than 15 percent of total labor hours for contracts estimated to cost $1 million from January 1, 2004, forward. The substitute passed in the House by voice vote on March 8, 2003.
  • Referred to the House Rules Committee on March 10, 2003.
  • Amendment offered in the House on March 19, 2003, to exempt employers with less than fifty employees from the apprentice utilization requirements. The amendment failed in the House (45 to 52) on March 19, 2003. [Vote Details and Comments]
• Passed in the House (52 to 45) on March 19, 2003, regarding public works apprenticeships. [Vote Details and Comments]
• Received to the Senate on March 20, 2003.
  • Referred to the Senate Commerce and Trade Committee on March 20, 2003, the bill did not pass both chambers during the 2003 regular session, so the bill automatically returned to the House Rules Committee when the regular 105-day session adjourned on April 27, 2003.
• Referred to the Senate Commerce and Trade Committee on January 12, 2004, and active in the 2004 Legislative Session.