Court Declines to Void Published Bay Bridge Electrician Staffing Decision
SAN FRANCISCO--The California Supreme Court refused Sept. 15 to depublish a ruling allowing a lawsuit over use of uncertified electricians on the San Francisco-Oakland Bay Bridge construction project to proceed to court rather than administratively (Alameda County Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee v. Roadway Electrical Works Inc., Cal., No. S185376, depublication request denied 9/15/10).
The state high court without comment at its weekly meeting rejected requests by the California Department of Industrial Relations and the Laborers union to strip the decision of its precedent-setting value (56 CLR 883, 9/16/10).
The case involves Class C-10 contractors, those who place, install, erect, or connect any electrical wires, fixtures, appliances, apparatus, raceways, conduits, solar photovoltaic cells, or any part thereof, which generate, transmit, transform, or utilize electrical energy in any form or for any purpose.
The California Court of Appeal, First District, in June cleared the way for trial on plaintiff allegations that using uncertified workers allowed Roadway Electrical Works Inc. and MCM Construction Inc. to unfairly submit a low bid and secure work on the $5.5 billion seismic retrofit of the bridge spanning San Francisco Bay (56 CLR 626, 7/15/10).
The lawsuit, filed by the Alameda County Joint Apprenticeship and Training Committee; International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers Local 595 Health and Welfare Trust; IBEW Local 595 Northern California Chapter; National Electrical Contractors Association Labor Management Cooperation Committee (NCECI); and Edward W. Scott Electric Co., returns to California Superior Court, Alameda County.
The decision “means now we are going to go after other C-10 contractors to start complying with the law and use only certified electricians,” plaintiffs' attorney Ellyn Moscowitz said Sept. 20.
The DIR is “considering our options on what the next steps could be,” spokesman Dean Fryer said Sept. 20.
By Joyce E. Cutler
Roadway Electric Court Decision.pdf