Pennsylvania House Bill HB846

Pennsylvania 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/10/25
• Refer: 3/10/25
• Refer: 6/4/25
• Report Pass: 6/9/25
• Engrossed: 6/9/25
• Refer: 6/18/25

Caption

Further providing for definitions, for specifications, for prevailing wage and for duty of secretary.

Impact

If enacted, HB 846 would further enforce compliance with prevailing wage laws on a broader scope, encompassing various types of work under the public works umbrella. It would ensure that even those involved in custom fabrication processes—typically less regulated—are paid fairly according to their trade's prevailing wage rates. This could have a significant effect on labor practices within the construction and manufacturing sectors, promoting fair compensation for more workers engaged in state-funded projects.

Summary

House Bill 846 seeks to amend the Pennsylvania Prevailing Wage Act by expanding definitions and compliance requirements related to public works projects. The bill specifically introduces new provisions for 'custom fabrication,' which refers to nonstandard goods or materials produced for public works. By stating that these custom fabrication firms are subject to the same compliance and reporting requirements as other contractors, the bill aims to ensure that all workers employed on public works projects receive at least the prevailing minimum wage for their respective crafts. This aligns with the intent of the original act, which mandates fair wage practices in public sector contracting.

Sentiment

Overall, sentiment around HB 846 has been positive among labor rights advocates who view the bill as a necessary step towards enhancing protections for workers. Supporters argue that expanding the prevailing wage framework is crucial for maintaining wage standards and preventing exploitation of workers in the public sector. However, there may be concerns from businesses about the potential costs of compliance and the administrative burden associated with meeting these expanded requirements.

Contention

Notable points of contention may arise from discussions over the implications of broadening the definitions and compliance obligations outlined in the bill. Business groups may argue that increased regulation could deter smaller firms from participating in public contracts, setting up a potential conflict between labor rights and economic competition. Additionally, the bill's provisions on custom fabrication could spark debates about the extent to which state regulations should shape industry standards, particularly in a sector known for varied practices and norms.