Waheyboys.com

I agree with you that we shouldn't need preferences if the laws regarding bidding on public construction are followed but as we have seen by the REO, politics often intrudes on the process. The REO is written to give union trades an edge over non-union. Union trades often bring suit against non-union companies that win in the bidding war. This is currently happening in Hanover and recently happened in Braintree and Quincy. REOs have become prevalent because of the amount of new school building that has gone on over the last decades. There would be no need for REOs, project labor agreements or any of these preferential practices if we abolished the outdated prevailing wage law. The reason women and minorities want in to this predominately white male monopoly is because of the prevailing wage which guarantees middle class wages regardless of the actual skill needed to complete the job. Many building trades jobs have become deskilled (people install the same windows, use the same type of wallpaper, now will build a prototype school) over the years in response to a desire to keep costs down. I initially became interested in this when our newly formed council passed the REO as one of their first orders of business. I was incensed that we would have an ordinance that mandated that private contractors pay their employees higher wages, the full cost of their health insurance and guarantee them a defined pension. All of this (except the pension) would mean that this predominately male work force would be better paid than the teachers working in the building they were remodeling (Academy Ave.) When I asked Joe Connolly how he justified this, he said "these guys have families." So the basis for a prevailing wage, REO and now adding veterans to the affirmative action law has nothing to do with skill and protecting the public and everything to do with maintaining the male breadwinner mythology. (Why do we pay a police officer $42/hr to direct traffic around construction workers and a crossing guard $13/hr to cross children?) And, of course, there is discrimination in this field against women and minorities. This discrimination occurs similiarily to any other discrimination-from exclusion. Most women do not frequent bars or mens clubs (like the Elks, VFW etc.) where the connections and greasing occurs. Most politicians are white men who need the support of their peers to stay in office-most politicians (even Martha Coakley!) know that having blue collar unions against you is political suicide. (Didn't you tell me this?)

Now-I also agree that women are complicit in this discrimination. Many women were brought up thinking that they were going to marry "well" and be supported so did not train or seek aneducation in a good paying field. These women tend to support unequal pay because they will never make a wage that could support their family (as well as their husband) by working in a female dominated pink or blue collar job. Also, by partnering with a man, women and minority own companies get some degree of confidence and work from association. The veterans affirmative action clause will be similarily and fraudently misused.

Sorry to ramble Stan, but I come at this from a feminist point of view. Great debating with you!