October 22, 2019

October 21, 2019

Subscribe to Latest Legal News and Analysis

Ohio Supreme Court Enforces Prevailing-Wage Penalties

March 2 2010, in a 5-2 decision, the Ohio Supreme Court held that in a private action by employees, the penalties set forth in the prevailing-wage statute, R.C. 4115.10(A), are mandatory penalties that must be imposed against a party found to have violated the prevailing-wage law. The case is Bergman v. Monarch Constr. Co., 2010-Ohio-622.

Monarch Construction entered into a contract with Miami University to serve as the general contractor for the construction of student housing. Because the project was a public improvement, Monarch was required to pay its employees prevailing wages under R.C. 4115. The Department of Commerce conducted an investigation and issued an initial determination that a subcontractor of Monarch Construction had underpaid its employees, and that, as a result, both the subcontractor and Monarch were liable for back wages and penalties.

A number of underpaid employees opted not to assign their claims to the Department of Commerce, and filed suit against Monarch and its subcontractor under R.C. 4115.10(A). After a bench trial, the court found Monarch liable for back pay, but denied the plaintiffs’ request to penalize Monarch an additional 25% of the back wages it owed as provided in R.C. 4115.10(A). The court also refused to impose a penalty equal to 75% of the back wages to be paid to the Director of Commerce, reasoning that these penalties were discretionary and that the circumstances of the case did not warrant their imposition. The appellate court affirmed, and the Ohio Supreme Court accepted review.

In the majority opinion written by Justice Cupp, the Court rejected the appellate court’s rationale that the R.C. 4115.10(A) penalties are discretionary based upon its misinterpretation of the statute. Specifically, the Supreme Court held that the phrase “may recover” within R.C. 4115.10(A) refers only to the choice the underpaid employee has to enforce his or her right to recover the underpayment, not the penalty. If the employee chooses to enforce his or her statutory right to recover the unpaid wages, and proves the case, then the statutory penalties set forth in R.C. 4115.10(A) follow as a matter of course and are mandatory.

Based upon this holding, Ohio courts will strictly enforce the penalty provisions set forth in R.C. 4115.10(A) upon finding a prevailing-wage violation.

© 2019 Dinsmore & Shohl LLP. All rights reserved.


About this Author

Litigation is both complex and fluid.  Decisions made at the outset impact available options weeks, months and even years later.  However, the information necessary to choose the best path is oftentimes available only after extensive discovery and review.  Determining the extent of the exposure, potential impact to existing and future business operations and even the effect on the company’s image are all important points of consideration.

Our litigators are engaged in high-stakes matters and commercial disputes – trying cases, conducting...