ILNews

Plea reached in first-ever common construction wage prosecution

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The Marion County Prosecutor’s Office has reached a plea agreement in a common construction wage violation involving an Indianapolis contractor, believed to be the first prosecution of this kind in Indiana.

White River Mechanical Inc. worked as a subcontractor on two Indianapolis Public School projects. A grand jury investigation in March 2011 showed that several employees of White River Mechanical were underpaid for work on the public school projects. The company incorrectly listed skill levels and pay rates on company payroll records and misrepresented the status of employees on required reporting to IPS.  

What used to be known as the prevailing wage law, Indiana Code 5-16-7, the Common Construction Wage Act requires any entity awarded a contract for public work – and any subcontractor of the construction – to pay no less than the predetermined common wage rate as set by a committee in each county. Employees are divided into three classes – unskilled, semi-skilled, and skilled.  A contractor or subcontractor who knowingly fails to pay the rate of wages commits a Class B misdemeanor. Changes were made to the law during the 2011 session of the Indiana General Assembly that went into effect July 1.

As part of the plea agreement, White River Mechanical will pay a $1,000 fine and submit to an audit by the Indiana Department of Labor to determine the amount it owes to current and former employees. The prosecutor’s office estimated that the amount of unpaid wages and benefits is more than $50,000.

“Today we are sending a message that we will abide by and enforce the Common Wage law in Marion County,” said Prosecutor Terry Curry.  “Contractors who undercut the Common Wage law are taking advantage of their employees, their peers, and the public by not paying their workers the amount that is required and set by law.  At the same time, they are competing unfairly against those companies who play by the rules and pay their employees the correct and fair wage they are owed.”

The Indiana Department of Labor reported that this is the first time this kind of violation has been prosecuted in Indiana.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in Indiana Lawyer editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Indiana State Bar Association

Indianapolis Bar Association

Evansville Bar Association

Allen County Bar Association

Indiana Lawyer on Facebook

facebook
ADVERTISEMENT
Subscribe to Indiana Lawyer
  1. First comment on this thread is a fitting final comment on this thread, as that the MCBA never answered Duncan's fine question, and now even Eric Holder agrees that the MCBA was in material error as to the facts: "I don't get it" from Duncan December 1, 2014 5:10 PM "The Grand Jury met for 25 days and heard 70 hours of testimony according to this article and they made a decision that no crime occurred. On what basis does the MCBA conclude that their decision was "unjust"? What special knowledge or evidence does the MCBA have that the Grand Jury hearing this matter was unaware of? The system that we as lawyers are sworn to uphold made a decision that there was insufficient proof that officer committed a crime. How can any of us say we know better what was right than the jury that actually heard all of the the evidence in this case."

  2. wow is this a bunch of bs! i know the facts!

  3. MCBA .... time for a new release about your entire membership (or is it just the alter ego) being "saddened and disappointed" in the failure to lynch a police officer protecting himself in the line of duty. But this time against Eric Holder and the Federal Bureau of Investigation: "WASHINGTON — Justice Department lawyers will recommend that no civil rights charges be brought against the police officer who fatally shot an unarmed teenager in Ferguson, Mo., after an F.B.I. investigation found no evidence to support charges, law enforcement officials said Wednesday." http://www.nytimes.com/2015/01/22/us/justice-department-ferguson-civil-rights-darren-wilson.html?ref=us&_r=0

  4. Dr wail asfour lives 3 hours from the hospital,where if he gets an emergency at least he needs three hours,while even if he is on call he should be in a location where it gives him max 10 minutes to be beside the patient,they get paid double on their on call days ,where look how they handle it,so if the death of the patient occurs on weekend and these doctors still repeat same pattern such issue should be raised,they should be closer to the patient.on other hand if all the death occured on the absence of the Dr and the nurses handle it,the nurses should get trained how to function appearntly they not that good,if the Dr lives 3 hours far from the hospital on his call days he should sleep in the hospital

  5. It's a capital offense...one for you Latin scholars..

ADVERTISEMENT