In a legal landscape where terms and conditions often seem as intricate as a mechanical blueprint, the Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court drew a line in the sand, likening a recent wage dispute to trying to fit a “square peg in a round hole.”
In a unanimous decision penned by Associate Justice Dalila Argaez Wendlandt, the court highlighted the complexities surrounding the Prevailing Wage Act and how it relates to contracts that prioritize qualifications over costs.
The Heart of the Matter: Roving Engineers vs. Prevailing Wage
Russell Metcalf and Steven Theurer, two civil engineers with the BSC Group Inc.
entrusted with surveying duties at public works projects, found themselves amidst a web of legal perplexity.
They believed they were entitled to prevailing wages as they worked directly under the wings of the Massachusetts Department of Transportation managers, bolstering the construction process.
To fuel the flames of this contention, field surveyors, treading the same professional paths, were reaping the rewards of the prevailing wage.
