200 Cal. App. 4th 785
Cal. Ct. App.2011Background
- Caltrans contracted Reliable to prune and remove diseased trees along state highways; issue is whether prevailing wage applies.
- Director determined the work was maintenance under Reg. 16000 and Labor Code 1771; Reliable sought mandamus against that decision.
- Project ran May 2006 to Jan 2007; about 80% tree removal, 20% pruning; Caltrans maintains rights-of-way thereafter.
- Contractor bid and pre-bid communications indicated prevailing wages would apply; Caltrans withheld funds for underpayment.
- Court independent-review upheld Director’s interpretation; contract found to be a public work and to involve maintenance under the statute.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Reliable's contract is a public work under 1720(a)(1). | Reliable contends it is not a public work. | State-interpreting authorities: contract falls within public works scope. | Yes; contract constitutes a public work. |
| Whether the work qualifies as maintenance under 1771 and Regulation 16000. | Work is not routine maintenance; mainly tree removal under a one-time contract. | Tree maintenance on public highways is routine, recurring maintenance of property. | Yes; work qualifies as maintenance. |
| Whether maintenance on public properties by private contractors falls within the Prevailing Wage Law when performed under contract. | Maintenance by private contractors is not within public-work scope for one-time tasks. | Maintenance work on public property is encompassed by the Prevailing Wage Law when performed under contract. | Consistent with the law; includes private contractor maintenance on public property. |
| Whether the Director's long-standing interpretation of Regulation 16000 should be given deference. | Director's interpretation should be limited or reconsidered. | Regulation-based interpretation is entitled to deference and harmonizes with the statute. | Director's interpretation affording deference is sustained. |
| Whether interplay of 1720 and 1771 supports a broad, liberal construction of scope. | Limiting scope to narrowly defined construction trades. | Interplay supports broad interpretation to cover maintenance on public works. | Yes; independent judgment supports broad construction. |
Key Cases Cited
- State Building & Construction Trades Council of California v. Duncan, 162 Cal.App.4th 289 (2008) (explains scope and purposes of the Prevailing Wage Law; independent review)
- Azusa Land Partners v. Department of Industrial Relations, 191 Cal.App.4th 1 (2010) (independent judgment with agency interpretation guidance)
- Reclamation Dist. No. 684 v. Department of Industrial Relations, 125 Cal.App.4th 1000 (2005) (maintenance inclusion in broader public-work doctrine)
- Cornette v. Department of Transportation, 26 Cal.4th 63 (2001) (statutory interpretation and avoid inserting unintended language)
- City of Long Beach v. Department of Industrial Relations, 34 Cal.4th 942 (2004) (liberal construction of Prevailing Wage Law; policy considerations)