Uniform Deal Irks City Officials
The revelation surprised many of the members of the Board of Estimates Monday night when the panel deliberated awarding Cintas a larger contract to supply uniforms to several city agencies.
Board members, made up of City Council members, were also taken aback when they heard Dan Bohrod of the City Comptroller's Office explain that his office had advised Cintas that, under the pending city contract, it could pay all its employees a share of the required minimum wage, rather than assign particular employees to the contract and pay them each the full living wage of $9.75.
This would amount to just a couple of pennies difference in the wages of the some 115 workers in Cintas' Madison plant, Bohrod said.
But Bohrod explained that, given the nature of the uniform business, there isn't an easy way to determine how much of an employee's time is spent fulfilling a city contract.
Ald. Judy Olson said Tuesday she was shocked to learn the law was being carried out in this manner.
"It's very different from what I understood our approach would be to implementing our living wage ordinance," she said.
City Council President Brenda Konkel also expressed concern to her colleagues at the Board of Estimates meeting.
"There are values on the council that are not reflected in purchasing decisions," Konkel said.
The board delayed action, for the second time in a row, on Cintas' pending contract and directed City Attorney Michael May to undertake a review of the living wage law.
The contract was already mired in controversy over allegations of unfair labor practices that have been made against Cintas.
The purpose of the city's living wage ordinance, in place since April 1999, is to ensure that city employees, as well as employees of companies that have a service contract of more than $5,000, or that are receiving more than $100,000 in city financial assistance, "earn an hourly wage that is sufficient to enable a family of four to live at or above the federal poverty level."
Nonprofit agencies are covered under the ordinance.
The current living wage is $9.74 an hour. It will increase to $9.97 Jan. 1, 2005, Bohrod said.
Companies that fall under the city's living wage ordinance are required to post a "notice of employee's rights" alerting workers that if they perform work as part of the contract they must be paid the city minimum hourly wage.
Greg Kaldor, general manager of the Cintas plant in Madison, said Cintas' contract with the Parking Utility was secured under a "service agreement" supplied by the company.
"Our service agreement made no reference to the living wage," Kaldor told members of the Board of Estimates Monday.
Kaldor referred all inquiries on Tuesday to his media relations office, which could not be reached for comment.
The City Comptroller's Office gathered information on the parking utility contract Tuesday but was not prepared to comment further, Bohrod said.
He did confirm the Parking Utility's contract with Cintas is for more than $5,000, which makes it subject to the living wage ordinance.
Olson said that either the city's purchasing department never sent along the right documents alerting Cintas of the need to pay a living wage or Cintas received the documents and ignored them.
"Either way, it's a serious problem," she said.
If Cintas was fully informed, Olson said, she would vote against the proposed new contract.
Bohrod said companies or nonprofits contracting with the city are checked for compliance with the living wage ordinance only if a complaint is made.
"We don't actively enforce or monitor compliance," Bohrod said.
He said the city's contract with Octopus Car Wash is the only other contract he is aware of where the contractor does not segregate the employees that work on a city contract.
The most recent figures on the number of city service contracts that fall under the living wage ordinance date to 1999, the year the ordinance was passed, Bohrod said.
At the time, the city contracted with more than 60 nonprofit service organizations whose contracts were greater than $5,000. It was also estimated that about 128 purchase order contracts with for-profit vendors might be subject to the living wage ordinance.
In addition, the city also had almost 30 tax incremental financing contracts for projects that exceeded the $100,000 threshold for implementation of the living wage ordinance.