California Surveyors Forums

bjarvis wrote:Jim,
If you work as a sub-contractor you have to be registered and pay the annual $300 fee (extortion). I got my invite from a contractor with whom I regularly work. The renewal is tricky, because there is no reminder. Suddenly you find yourself having to re-register.

As a production superintendent at a bakery once told me, "If you don't like it, there's the door. There's a line of people waiting to get in here."

Gary Schenk wrote:

bjarvis wrote:Jim,
If you work as a sub-contractor you have to be registered and pay the annual $300 fee (extortion). I got my invite from a contractor with whom I regularly work. The renewal is tricky, because there is no reminder. Suddenly you find yourself having to re-register.

As a production superintendent at a bakery once told me, "If you don't like it, there's the door. There's a line of people waiting to get in here."

Unfortunately that's true, no matter how bad it is in the oven.

The street racers say "There is always someone faster". In Surveying there is always someone cheaper and with govt there is always someone with a new way to steal money from the citizens.

What will the prevailing wage rates be in January, 2016 for survey crew positions?

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

DWoolley wrote:Apparently San Bernardino County is a little softer than Orange County on the folks that don't pay prevailing wage correctly

FWIW, the DA's press release ends with a request that anyone who knows of or suspects Workers Comp fraud contact the DA's office. The PW fraud appears to be an afterthought.

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

Mr Woolley,

Your thoughts and discussion are great, however you and me see the work through a different lens and different frame of reference.
As a business owner I understand that we are only as good as our employees therefore “ripping them off” does not enter into the discussion.

I submit that those abuser’s who cheat will never prosper in the long term. I also stand by my opinion that checking for compliance and weeding out those cheaters can be done more efficiently by a private sector company.

I guess I am one of those old farts that think we already have too many laws and regulations, one of those old farts that think once the Local, County, State, and Fed government payrolls exceed 50% of the work force the unfunded liability will become unattainable. I worry if and when this happens the 50% of us private sector companies will not be able to fund the government, even with confiscatory tolls, taxes, fees.
Just my opinion, again we have different frame of reference.

Merry Christmas and Happy New Year

after reading this it seems the "I's" have it i, i, i, my poor written communication skills

P.S. Another form some of us must fill out is 700 FPPC for those contract employees if you work for any City or County, with some exceptions

Brian

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

Amazing how when it comes to govt moneys they find a way around the corp vail, but when corp's rip off the private citizens the corp has the option to dissolve the corp, open up the next day under a new corp name and the citizens get nothing. Even if they don't dissolve the directors are held harmless.

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

Mr. Wolley do you really think CLSA members
are abusing the system?

Do you think that Corporations and or business (large and small) are the enemy and the State is the good guy??


Again we see the world through a different lens. You sound as if you have been a victim from
an unscrupulous employer?


Brian

Do you think that Corporations and or business (large and small) are the enemy and the State is the good guy??

In some cases, yes. One of my biggest and most consistent clients for the last two decades came my way after the guy who'd been doing most of their work for years got caught not paying PW.

Labor law compliance can be (okay, is) a pain in the tush, but my business has certainly benefited from enforcement of the statutes.

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

Thanks for the comments Mr. Woolley,
Guess I have been gullible over the past 25 years thinking that the majority
of land surveyors are honorable people in an honorable profession.

One thing I got right is being the most expensive in the area.

As a footnote If you are only a dedicated land surveying firm you are not seeing all the red tape that’s
crushing both public and private works. From DWR to DIR through the DGF, Corps, on to infinity, the regulations
and monitoring are staggering. Costs to the tax payer are incalculable.

Just my opinion.

Brian

[Post intentionally deleted]

DWoolley

Mr. Woolley,

Good Grief sounds like you are working in a devils den, I am glad I live up here In the Jefferson State.
I understand your frustration, you may want to lobby BPELSG to become an enforcement operative instead of a Land Surveyor, from reading your posts this may better suit you. This is not a DIG just an observation.

Land Surveyors’ should think of filing a record of their work an honor not a burden.
Not to defend those who break the rules, but, has the local controlling authorities down south made filling a ROS so burdensome and costly that many in our profession have given up?, for me the County fee is $107 per ROS if that cost was say $1507 per ROS I can assure I would have filed fewer ROS (without violating the act of course).

Again the different frame of reference is huge.


Have a great year.

Brian

At his sentencing today, Mr. Mousavi received a “tentative” sentence of 2 years, 8 months in state prison. The judge offered that he will likely only have to serve half of that sentence. The basis for a tentative sentencing is it allows Mr. Mousavi until February 19th to get his affairs in order. If he was formerly sentenced today he would have likely been taken into custody at the end of the proceedings. In some respects he got off easy- the DA was asking for 5 years, 8 months. The judge has the authority to change the sentence before February 19th - although I think it is unlikely, hearing the judge comment "I am not feeling a lot of love for Mr. Mousavi".

Also present was a Deputy Attorney General requesting that the judge revoke Mr. Mousavi's contractor's’ licenses as part of his sentencing. The judge said that Mr. Mousavi is entitled to due process on that request. He further stated that he was not familiar with the applicable Bus. & Prof. Code sections and that would be a matter for another time.

The defendant’s attorney stated Mr. Mousavi had no previous record or criminal history. He hoped to have his client serve his time in jail versus prison, offering that he is a family man and that the message is clear, "If you're on a public works job you better dot your I's and cross your T's or they'll come after you". He also mentioned that these laws, although not new, were regularly violated until the last few years, “…it was part of the industry”. The judge stated he did not accept that perspective. He stated he knew something about the construction industry - vaguely referencing signing work orders for a city at some point in his career. The DA also countered that there were several people in the room that had dedicated their life to prevailing wage enforcement and had served more than 25 years in doing so. In the sentencing of Mr. Mousavi, the judge stated that as a judge he does not serve to "make an example" of someone. His role is to hear each case individually and sentence accordingly. My take away from that statement is that if there is a similar fact set a first time defendant can expect to be sentenced to 2 years, 8 months in state prison for cheating on prevailing wage and falsifying certified payroll records.

Lastly, beginning January 1st, 2016, under SB588 the laws now extend beyond the owners to officers, directors and managers.

DWoolley

DWoolley wrote:...Lastly, beginning January 1st, 2016, under SB588 the laws now extend beyond the owners to officers, directors and managers.

Do you know what qualifies as a manager?
Thanks!

Do you know what qualifies as a manager?

I imagine that anyone supervising the damaged employees who knows or should have known about the violation would qualify.

P.S. The quote button isn't working for me (Firefox, Win7 Pro). Anyone else having that problem?

Jim Frame wrote:

Do you know what qualifies as a manager?

I imagine that anyone supervising the damaged employees who knows or should have known about the violation would qualify.

P.S. The quote button isn't working for me (Firefox, Win7 Pro). Anyone else having that problem?

quote working here, Firefox on Linux Debian

I found a copy of "Los Angeles Business Journal" Jan 11-17, 2016 issue on my dwy today. On page 11 a headline caught my eye "Nonunion Contractors Still Don't Work for L.A." too long to quote here but here are some highlights.
Nonunion contractors are once again frozen out as the city of L.A.'s Public Works Dept renewed it's project labor agreement (PLA) with the Los Angeles and Orange county building and construction trades council for 5years. PW has a catalog of 116 eligible projects worth $116 billion so this is a big deal.
Under a PLA all contractors must abide by union rules and pay into a benefits fund jointly operated with the building trades union.
These agreements are popular with govt agencies for several reasons; provisions banning strikes or work slowdowns, local hiring requirements and the likelihood of more generous union support for local elected officials come election time.
A particular sticking point for nonunion contractors; if they already have private health coverage for their employees they end up double paying benefits if they participate in a project. Even when nonunion contractors do win contracts on PLA projects they encounter more administrative problems than their union counterparts.


IMO it appears we still have the best politicians money can buy.

In another article about the moonbeam express to nowhere the CA high-speed rail authority considers a business that employs less than 100 people and generates less than $14million annual revenue is a small business.

the CA high-speed rail authority considers a business that employs less than 100 people and generates less than $14million annual revenue is a small business

That's more restrictive than the federal definition, which is less than $15M with no limit on number of employees for surveying services firms.