The move by Republican legislators and the business community to eliminate several aspects of local control took a big hit on Tuesday as the Michigan Supreme Court unanimously ruled that prevailing wage laws at the local level are constitutional.
The decision means that cities can establish their own ordinances that require union-scale wages and benefits on government and school construction projects.
The case was prompted by a lawsuit against the city of Lansing filed by the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), the state’s leading opponent of prevailing wage laws. ABC’s loss at the Supreme Court comes on the heels of a badly botched effort to eliminate all prevailing wage laws through a statewide ballot proposal.
An ABC-led petition drive, funded by the group “Protecting Michigan Taxpayers,” collapsed when the state Board of State Canvassers found that nearly half of the signatures collected were invalid. ABC had hired an out-of-state contractor to run the petition drive.
As for the legal challenge, the Ingham County Circuit Court initially ruled in favor of ABC, but that decision was later reversed by a three-judge panel of the Michigan Court of Appeals. The Supreme Court in a unanimous ruling determined the Michigan Court of Appeals arrived at the correct result.
The 6-0 Supreme Court opinion affirming the appeals court decision, written by Chief Justice Robert Young Jr., said simply: “The city of Lansing has the authority… to enact an ordinance that established a prevailing wage.”
“We are pleased to see the Michigan Supreme Court has ruled in favor of local prevailing wage ordinances,” said Bart Carrigan, co-chair of Protect Michigan Jobs, a union-backed group that has vocally opposed ABC’s efforts. “Prevailing wage policies help ensure Michigan has sufficient numbers of skilled construction workers by providing for training schools, fair pay that attracts good workers, and benefits that keep them on the job. We are pleased to see the highest court in the state agree with our position supporting prevailing wage policies at the local level.”
