HEADLINES
Gauthier, Houghtaling and Williams made possible the shipment of nine endangered Kemp’s Ridley sea turtles impacted by the oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico to a new home at Sea World in Orlando.
The National Bar Association and IMPACT named James Williams, a partner and head of litigation in Gauthier Houghtaling and Williams one of the Nation's Best Advocates: 40 Lawyers Under 40.
Attorney Brian Houghtaling took his boat into the Gulf waters on April 29 to survey the growing oil slick.
Attorney Stephen Huber of Gauthier, Houghtaling and Williams was named to the 2010 New Orleans CityBusiness Leadership in Law list.
The New Orleans Bar Association named Gauthier, Houghtaling and Williams its Pacesetter Campaign Winner for recruiting the most newly-enrolled and renewed members of any other firm. 100% of the firm's attorneys signed up as members of the Association.

Ohio Supreme Court Prevailing Wage Law

ShareThis
Publisher: GHW
Published On: 7/2/2009

Ohio Supreme Court confirms that Prevailing Wage Law only applies to work performed on the site of Public Improvement Project

The Ohio Supreme Court recently confirmed what has been the long-standing practice in Ohio that the prevailing wage law only applies to work performed on the site of a public improvement project. In Sheet Metal Workers International Assn., Local 33 v. Gene's Refrigeration, Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc., Slip Op. No. 2009-Ohio-2747, the plaintiff union filed a prevailing wage complaint and enforcement action against the defendant contractor alleging that the contractor had committed multiple prevailing wage violations on a certain public improvement project. The contractor had been awarded a contract to install the HVAC system on a new fire station being constructed in Medina County, Ohio. The fire station project qualified as a public works improvement subject to Ohio's prevailing wage law.

In the union's complaint, the union alleged that the contractor had violated the prevailing wage laws by failing to pay a certain employee at the prevailing wage rate for hours that he worked at an off-site fabricating shop where he fabricated duct work that was subsequently installed at the fire station.

As an initial matter, the Ohio Supreme Court found that the union only had standing to pursue the prevailing wage claims on behalf of the individual employee who had authorized the union to act on his behalf and not on behalf of other employees on the public improvement project. Specifically, the Court held "that a labor organization that obtains written authorization to represent one employee does not have standing as an 'interested party' . . . to pursue violations of the prevailing wage law on behalf of any other employee on the project."

Thereafter, the Court held that the prevailing wage statutes all refer to work performed on the job site and do not refer to off-site workers as being entitled to prevailing wage rates. The Court noted that its decision was in accordance with 70 years of industry custom and practice that the prevailing wage laws only apply to persons whose work is performed directly at the site of the public improvement project.