(C) Daily Montanan This story was originally published by Daily Montanan and is unaltered. . . . . . . . . . . Wages for Montana broadband contracts, prices for customers, debated – Daily Montanan [1] ['Nicole Girten', 'More From Author', '- November'] Date: 2023-11-07 Getting broadband to rural Montana may be more difficult without requiring competitive wages for workers, according to state labor leaders. But some customers might not be able to afford the cost, a $70 maximum, in the end, according to some legislators. The commission tasked with doling out $629 million in federal dollars for rural broadband projects voted Tuesday on a plan for scoring project proposals without requiring prevailing wages for workers, which labor representatives said may leave Montana behind. Companies said prevailing wages would limit their impact in rural networks, as it would cost them more money. And Republicans on the commission said market forces would ultimately keep workers’ pockets full. “There are other states that have already required prevailing wage in their plans, making them much more competitive at recruiting the workers needed to complete these jobs. This includes Idaho, our most populous neighboring state,” said Michelle Harris, president of Rocky Mountain contractors, during the commission meeting. “The reality is, we are competing with Idaho for talent.” Prevailing wage, or an established minimum wage for construction jobs, as well as broadband plan affordability for low-income residents were debated in a meeting Tuesday but ultimately took a hit in a plan for ranking contracts as broadband companies submit proposals for federal dollars for rural projects. The plan was voted against by Democrats, with Republicans and state directors on the commission in favor. Rep. Ed Buttrey, R-Great Falls, moved to reduce the weight prevailing wage had in a project score and up the points for compliance with labor standards. “The market, I’m sure, will dictate some higher prices for those workers, that would be my assumption,” Buttrey said. “I think that it’s about compliance with all sorts of workforce standards, training, how they’re treating the employees.” Sen. Janet Ellis, D-Helena, asked what compliance actually meant, to which commission co-chair and Director of the Department of Administration Misty Giles said there were federal guidelines everyone would need to comply with but the question would ultimately need to be followed up on by the department. Labor leaders in the state spoke in favor of requiring a prevailing wage during public comment. Sen. Jason Small, R-Busby, with the AFL-CIO, said he was glad to see prevailing wage get preference points in scoring projects, but ultimately, the labor movement would like to see it become a “baseline instead of a secondary thought.” Chris Sanderson with a labor union out of Helena passed around copies of an article from KTVQ Billings where residents were upset after a Wisconsin-based company left huge holes in their front yards meant for internet cables, without notice. Sanderson feared cheap labor could mean poor results. “We don’t want out of state contractors like the one employed by the ISP in this article, undercutting the bids of those companies that are committed to doing the work right,” Sanderson said. Jarad Falk with Charter Communications, which owns Spectrum, said requiring prevailing wage would increase costs to build out the network, meaning these federal dollars wouldn’t reach as many people. “The basis for what they’re trying to accomplish through this [Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment] program is to get as many of these dollars out and build out to as many people as we probably can,” he said. Affordability at the forefront There was bi-partisan consensus among legislators their work would be all for naught if consumers couldn’t ultimately afford the broadband being installed in their neighborhoods. However, what affordable means has been a debated issue and continued during Tuesday’s meeting. Companies are required to provide a low-cost plan to receive the funds. Ultimately, after the vote on Tuesday, the most an internet provider receiving these federal dollars can charge for a low-cost plan was $70, which was calculated by the Montana Broadband Office, under the Department of Administration, citing averages and medians from surveys of western states in FCC data. Ellis said that if that’s too high for consumers to pay, “the system doesn’t work.” “I would argue those people are still unserved,” she said. Chairperson Dan Salomon, R-Ronan, said the internet providers will be working for years without seeing profit on this project, but acknowledged Ellis’ point. “If they build it and nobody hooks onto it, they don’t get paid for it. So it’s a chicken or egg thing, and it’s a tough one. But I think the way we’ve structured this, it’s a price point that makes sense,” he said. “There’s no good answer, so you just have to do what you want to do.” Director Giles said companies can always go lower, but the $70 was the most they could charge. The commission will submit the amended plan voted on Tuesday later this month and meet again Dec. 7. [END] --- [1] Url: https://dailymontanan.com/2023/11/07/wages-for-montana-broadband-contracts-prices-for-customers-debated/ Published and (C) by Daily Montanan Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds: gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/montanan/