Legislative Memos

Memorandum of Opposition
S.3412 / A.3527 

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing more than 450 merit shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout New York State, respectfully opposes S.3412/A.3527. 

ABC and its members support practical, effective, and enforceable measures to protect workers from heat-related hazards. However, this legislation would impose duplicative, inflexible, and burdensome requirements on contractors while failing to improve worker safety beyond what is already required under existing federal law. Of particular concern, as applied to construction, the bill would only impose these requirements on non-union job sites, excluding unionized construction sites from its scope. If the stated intent of the legislation is to promote worker safety, applying its provisions to only a portion of the workforce undermines that goal and raises serious concerns about fairness and enforceability. 

Limiting the application of this law to certain job sites would make enforcement extremely difficult, if not impossible. Construction projects frequently involve both union and non-union workers operating side by side on the same site. These workers do not wear different clothing or personal protective equipment that would allow inspectors to easily determine who is subject to the law and who is not. This selective application creates confusion for employers and enforcement agencies alike and risks inconsistent and arbitrary enforcement. 

Importantly, employers are already required to protect employees from heat-related illnesses and injuries under existing federal law. The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA) mandates, through the General Duty Clause (Section 5(a)(1)), that employers provide a workplace free from recognized hazards likely to cause death or serious physical harm, including heat-related hazards. OSHA also requires employers to conduct hazard assessments and provide appropriate personal protective equipment where necessary. In addition, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) has issued detailed guidance and recommended standards addressing occupational heat stress. These existing requirements already address the core objectives of S.3412/A.3527 and carry significant penalties for noncompliance. 

The bill also contains several prescriptive mandates that are impractical in real-world construction settings.

For example, requiring sufficient shaded seating space for all employees on preventative breaks—defined as at least four square feet per employee—fails to account for the physical constraints of many construction sites, including confined urban job sites, active roadways, or highway projects.  

The legislation does not consider the availability of space, the location of the work, or the feasibility of erecting shade structures in certain environments. 

Similarly, the bill raises concerns by placing responsibility on employers to provide direct medical monitoring and treatment during preventative breaks. Most contractors, particularly small business owners, are not trained medical professionals, and requiring them to assess or administer medical treatment exposes both employers and employees to unnecessary risk and potential liability. If an employer’s intervention inadvertently worsens an employee’s medical condition, the employer could face significant civil liability. 

The requirement for direct monitoring during preventative breaks would also be unworkable for many small businesses. In industries such as paving or road construction, employees often work at multiple locations simultaneously. Mandating direct supervision under specific temperature thresholds would force small employers to consolidate crews or reduce operations, leading to lost productivity, reduced hours, and fewer employment opportunities. 

Additionally, the legislation does not adequately account for varying weather conditions such as humidity, wind, or cloud cover, nor does it recognize that a single temperature threshold may affect workers differently depending on the nature of the work being performed. The bill is also silent on how employers should address situations in which employees refuse to comply with required preventative measures, creating further uncertainty and enforcement challenges. 

Ultimately, S.3412/A.3527 would impose significant costs and operational burdens on both large and small contractors without meaningfully improving worker safety beyond existing protections. These burdens would negatively impact the construction industry’s ability to complete critical infrastructure and development projects across New York State. 

For these reasons, the Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors respectfully opposes S.3412/A.3527. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Brian Sampson (585)-967-2133 Sampson@abcnys.org 

Memorandum in Support
S.37 (Walczyk) / A.2118 (Ra)

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), representing more than 450 merit shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers across New York State, strongly supports S.37/A.2118. This legislation, known as the Learn for Work Act, would establish a Youth Apprenticeship Program, create an enhanced Regents and professional diploma pathway, and provide a youth apprenticeship tax credit for participating employers. 

The Youth Apprenticeship Program offers a one- or two-year opportunity beginning in a student’s junior or senior year of high school, combining academic classroom instruction with mentored, on-the-job training in a specific occupational field. ABC has long advocated for the expansion of apprenticeship programs statewide, as they are proven tools for developing job-ready skills while allowing students to gain hands-on experience and determine whether a career path is the right fit for them. 

According to a recent college and career readiness study released by the New York State Education Department, only 35 percent of high school graduates are considered college or career ready. The Learn for Work Act represents a meaningful step toward addressing this gap and preparing a more informed and capable workforce. Beyond technical skill development, students in youth apprenticeship programs gain valuable professional exposure, build personal networks, and develop workplace habits that will benefit them regardless of their ultimate career choice. 

Even participants who ultimately decide not to pursue a career in the skilled trades, the program offers lasting value. Students will earn a professional diploma that may be applied toward up to 15 college credits, ensuring that participation expands—not limits—their future options. In an increasingly dynamic and uncertain job market, programs like Learn for Work provide young people with the flexibility, experience, and foundational skills necessary for long-term, self-sustaining success. 

For these reasons, the Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors strongly supports S.37/A.2118. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Brian Sampson (585)-967-2133 Sampson@abcnys.org 

Memorandum in Support
S.6134 (Parker) / A.7727 (Bronson) 

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), representing more than 450 merit shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers across New York State, strongly supports S.6134/A.7727. This legislation would establish a New York State public housing painters apprenticeship program for New York City public housing residents. 

Painters are a critical yet often overlooked component of nearly every construction project. This program presents an excellent opportunity to create pathways to employment while building a large, skilled workforce in an industry with consistent demand. The bill would also directly benefit traditionally underserved individuals living in public housing by providing access to a stable and rewarding career path. Despite fluctuations in the broader construction job market over recent years, demand for painters grew by 4 percent in 2024, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, demonstrating the long-term viability and stability of careers in this field. 

Apprenticeship programs not only benefit participants but also provide clear advantages to contractors. Graduates enter the workforce with essential skills, certifications, and hands-on experience, significantly reducing the time and resources employers must dedicate to training. Workers who complete apprenticeship programs also tend to be more reliable and committed, strengthening the overall workforce and improving project outcomes. 

For these reasons, the Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors strongly supports S.6134/A.7727 and urges its passage. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Brian Sampson (585)-967-2133 Sampson@abcnys.org 

Memorandum in Opposition
S.5379 (Harkham) / A.4914 (Bronson)

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 450 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

If passed, this law would mandate prevailing wages on brownfield construction projects. From the early 2000s on, the Brownfield Cleanup Program (BCP) has provided developers with the much-needed incentives to remediate and revitalize environmentally contaminated sites. This program led to hundreds of contaminated sites, more than half of which are in economically disadvantaged areas to be cleaned up and developed. These developments create much-needed housing and jobs in the local communities. The legislature clearly sees the value in the program, if not it wouldn’t have been recently extended for another decade.

Mandating prevailing wages on these projects will mean many of these contaminated sites will sit idle instead of being developed into job creating businesses. A recent example of this is seen in Ruby Square, a 713,000-square-foot mixed-use development in New York City’s Downtown Jamaica, Queens. The site was redeveloped under the New York State BCP; environmental remediation included the removal of 114,000 tons of contaminated soil. Without the BCP this site would’ve remained a rarely used parking lot on toxic soil.

The bill sponsors clearly understand what a negative impact this law would have, because they’ve made sure this new law won’t apply to affordable housing. The BCP has a much wider reach than just on housing projects, they have an enormous impact across the state. The 199–203 Park Club Lane Campus Expansion and Tenant Improvements mark a pivotal enhancement in Roswell Park Comprehensive Cancer Center’s commitment to delivering accessible, world-class cancer care in Western New York. This new facility will increase convenience and reduce stress on some of our most vulnerable residents. This $23 million renovation wouldn’t have been possible without the current BCP. Applying the prevailing wages to other types of developments means those projects won’t happen.

New York must build more affordable housing to address the crisis, but it also must create jobs for individuals to pay for their housing. The BCP helps to create opportunities for more affordable housing, improves our towns and cities, and is a consistent job creator across the state. Changes to this law will have a devastating, but very predictable outcome.

People are fleeing in record numbers. Creating new jobs will attract more native New Yorkers to stay. New York State is one of the most expensive states in the country when it comes to construction. That’s why when the legislature expanded the prevailing wage to many projects that were traditionally considered private projects, they excluded brownfield projects. That’s because the legislature wisely realized that if prevailing wages are mandated for these projects, they simply will not happen.

That’s because prevailing wages add significantly to the cost of construction. According to the Center for Governmental Research, prevailing wage projects cost about 28% more than non-prevailing wage projects. In addition to this study, the Empire Center for Public Policy found that construction costs are inflated by between 13 and 25% due to New York’s prevailing wage law.

Adding over 10% in costs to already expensive environmental remediation projects will mean they won’t happen. That’s why the brownfield program exists, the state realized that these sites will sit idle if development is not incentivized. If this law passes, it will have a disastrous effect on the economic climate of New York State.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Brian Sampson (585)-967-2133 Sampson@abcnys.org

Memorandum in Opposition

S.7485 (Mayer) / A.8465 (Otis)

The Empire State Chapter of the Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 450 merit-shop contractors and subcontractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers throughout the State of New York, opposes this legislation.

If passed, this bill would increase the cost of construction drastically by forcing contractors to pay prevailing wage for any work involving the delivery and hauling of concrete as well as any return hauls. While currently limited in scope to 4 counties and NYC, this legislation is clearly the first step in attempting to expand this PW mandate statewide.

This bill would drastically increase costs for the MTA, New York City DOT, and publicly owned affordable housing like the New York City Housing Authority. Also, this bill ignores how an expansion of PW would handicap New York-based concrete facilities and hauling companies. New York laws don’t determine wage rates of other states or countries, providing an advantage to out of state competitors while New York employers would have to contend with the added costs of this law. The increased costs would also disparately impact smaller and MWBE owned companies that simply can’t afford another costly NY mandate in the same way larger and out of state companies can.

Another consequence will be increased truck traffic on roads and bridges because contractors and subcontractors will have to split loads between public and private work to comply with this mandate. With critical infrastructure across the state in need of investment and improvements this increased traffic from among the heaviest vehicles on the road could be disruptive at best, and disastrous at worst. By essentially doubling the number of trips these trucks have to take they will also greatly add to carbon emissions, directly countering any progress the state hopes to make towards its emissions reduction goals.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Brian Sampson (585)-967-2133 Sampson@abcnys.org

Memorandum in Opposition
S2536-A (Jackson) / A2747 (Bronson)

The Empire State Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors (“ABC”), representing over 450 merit-shop construction contractors employing hundreds of thousands of workers across New York State, opposes this bill. This legislation will place prevailing wage mandates on custom fabrication work, leading to a disastrous loss of New York manufacturing jobs and increasing construction costs for critical projects that benefit the quality of life of all New Yorkers.

This includes the recent changes to the bill, which includes language that says if a project is over $250,000 it will be subject to prevailing wage and/or if you have projects totaling over $500,000. Additionally, companies will be required to pay them the prevailing wage for an entire year after that initial project. These thresholds and mandating companies to pay the prevailing wage for an entire year after the job is done will run businesses out of New York even faster than they already are. This will also serve as a serious financial barrier to entry for small businesses; only a handful of the largest businesses will be able to comply, meaning competition is eliminated, the price of projects increases, and we, as New York State taxpayers, will pay the price.

New York is one of the most expensive states to build in, largely due to the prevailing wage laws that impact almost all taxpayer-funded work in New York. Studies show that prevailing wage increases the cost of construction by 13 to 25 percent, depending on the region. Most schools, fire stations, hospitals, affordable housing projects, and other critical projects have relied on outsourcing work to custom fabrication shops because they can offset the high costs and don't have to pay the prevailing wage for that work.  Due to this, many large construction firms, union and nonunion, have opened large custom fabrication shops employing thousands of New Yorkers across the state. If passed, this bill will take away the incentive to use custom fabrication shops and not only waste the millions of dollars these companies have invested in building and staffing these facilities but, more importantly, cost thousands of people their jobs.

Even though the labor inputs of fabrication involve skilled labor, that does not mean it’s the same as on-site construction, which is subject to the prevailing wages required for public work. Manufacturers invest significant capital in technology, specialized machinery, and craftworker development to fabricate a product different from construction. It would be impossible for many fabricators to create their products on the job site.

Furthermore, this bill would create an administrative nightmare for the New York State Department of Labor, contractors, and fabricators to track and document the proposed requirements. Fabrication is a manufacturing process that is not easily translatable into construction work processes. Applying prevailing wage would also be problematic for the unionized fabricator, as their collective bargaining agreement likely pertains to manufacturing, not construction, thus creating jurisdictional issues.

Sometimes, structures are built off-site because it’s more efficient, or the job site conditions demand it because of limited space, security issues, etc. DOL already enforces prevailing wages in these situations. To suddenly require manufacturers to adhere to the rigors of prevailing wage is seemingly not within the scope of the law’s original intent.

For the reasons stated above, ABC strongly opposes this legislation. We welcome the opportunity to discuss this with you further. Please contact ABC’s Brian Sampson (585)-967-2133 Sampson@abcnys.org