The average rate of wages, that is, the rate of wages to be
determined, to the extent feasible, by adding the wage paid to workers
similarly employed in the area of intended employment and dividing the
total by the number of such workers.
Now if prevailing wage were an average wage, would they not have to ask about ALL wages in the area, not just the selected wages of a select group. That comes down to whos asking whoever. So if "who" wanted to make profit of a percentage above a wage, would he not go out if his way to make "whoevers" wage he is asking about seem higher. And only select the highest "whoevers" to ask. If he asked the lowest wage "whoever" his profit would be lower. Right? Thats hardly a level playing field, its market manipulation.
Prevailing wage in SF is $49, the (true) average electrician makes about $30+. Being an above (true) average guy it matters to me little. But being below the (artificial) average means nothing about the quality of my work. It means I get 40 hours a week, medical and retirement, and not laid off half the time. So I figure I make more....
And, all of the other conditions that are outside of prevailing wage, that determine weather or not a company can hold a goverment contract get really wierd. Like being a minority woman born under a certain phase of the moon and happen to be a former convict from a particular prison system between certain years, and appointed figurehead of a company you know little about, you have a better chance at getting a government contract???!!!?? And pay a skewed scale of prevailing wage by maniplulating the value of benifits. OK contracts yours??!!! Its a really big game.
