Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania Prevailing Wage Appeals Board in case of Re: Appeal of Jackard Construction Company, Inc. for Review of Final Determination of the Secretary of Labor and Industry, dated February 8, 1977.
John S. Davidson, with him Pannebaker, Yost & Davidson, for petitioner.
William G. Dade, Assistant Attorney General, with him Charles S. Solit, General Counsel, for respondent.
Judges Crumlish, Jr., Blatt and MacPhail, sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Crumlish, Jr.
[ 43 Pa. Commw. Page 566]
The Pennsylvania Prevailing Wage Appeals Board assessed liquidated damages against Jackard Construction Co., Inc., under Section 11 of the Pennsylvania Prevailing Wage Act (Act),*fn1 43 P.S. § 165-11, and determined that Jackard had intentionally violated the Act by paying wages below the prevailing wages predetermined by the Secretary of the Department of Labor and Industry. Jackard challenges the evidentiary support for the Board's determination.
Jackard argues: (1) certain Commonwealth exhibits, received into evidence, constituted inadmissible hearsay; (2) the Board's assessment of damages at $8,885.02 is not supported by substantial evidence; (3) the hearing examiner erroneously excluded evidence proffered to show that certain Commonwealth witnesses were biased; and (4) the Board's finding of an intentional violation by Jackard, resulting in the imposition of the penalty provided by Section 11, 43
[ 43 Pa. Commw. Page 567]
P.S. § 165-11(c),*fn2 lacks evidentiary support in the record.
These are the facts: The General State Authority (GSA) awarded Jackard a contract for the construction of a replacement refrigeration system at the South Mountain Restoration Center in Franklin County, a "public work" as defined in Section 2(5) of the Act, 43 P.S. § 165-2(5). The Act requires successful bidders on public works to pay prevailing minimum wages as predetermined by the Secretary.*fn3
Construction began in January, 1974, and a routine site visit by a Department field investigator in August, 1974, precipitated an investigation of Jackard's payment practices. Several of Jackard's employees were interviewed and its payroll records audited. The Secretary gave notice of a fair hearing to be held to take testimony relating to Jackard's failure to pay the predetermined prevailing minimum wage. At the hearing on October 28, 1975, Department investigators gave extensive testimony, as did several of Jackard's employees and two of its officers. The hearing examiner, in 69 findings of fact, determined that Jackard had intentionally violated the Act by underpaying its employees and by failing to keep payroll records required by Department regulations.
As explanation, Jackard's president testified that, because of the relatively small size of the project, he had hired several men to work in more than one classification. ...