HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso - CC - 097-2000RESOLUTION NO. - 97-2000
2000 SIDEWALK MAINTENANCE PROGRAM
CITY PROJECT NO. 8008
WHEREAS, the City Council has authorized an invitation for bids for the 2000 SIDEWALK
MAINTENANCE PROGRAM - CITY PROJECT NO. 8008; and
WHEREAS, on AUGUST 24, 2000, all bids were received and opened before the City Clerk
and representatives of the Public Works Department; and
WHEREAS, B-1 ENTERPRISE CORPORATION, submitted the lowest responsible bid for the
job in the amount of $487,351.73.
NOW, THEREFORE, be it RESOLVED, and it is hereby ORDERED, that the Plans and
Specifications, including all addenda, are approved and adopted; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the bid of B-1 ENTERPRISE CORPORATION for said
project in the amount of $487,351.73, and the same hereby is accepted; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THERETO that a contract be entered into between the successful
bidder hereinabove referred to and the City of Burlingame for the performance of said work, and that
the City Manager be, and he hereby is authorized for and on behalf of the City of Burlingame to execute
said contract and to approve the faithful performance bond and the labor and materials bond required
to be furnished by the contractor.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the award of this contract is conditioned on the following:
Before the Director of Public Works issues a Notice to Proceed on this project, the Director shall
confirm that B-1 Enterprise has paid the Division of Labor Standards Enforcement judgment in State
Case No. 40-04459, and if that judgment has not been satisfied by October 23, 2000, this award of
contract shall be of no further force and effect and the contract shall be terminated.
Mayor
I, Ann T. Musso, City Clerk of the City of Burlingame, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the 19th day of
September, 2000, and was adopted thereafter by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: COFFEY, GALLIGAN, JANNFY, SPINF.LLI,,
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: n70;gE O' MAHONY
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE
14idL J--%�
City Clerk
SAA Public Works Directory\PROJECTS\80080\ResolutuAwud.wpd
21i E^ J
m A
.a ...
A
I
W N+
000
Z a
AAAA
0 SA
2i22
Zy
g
mmmm
�
3 3
0 0
VOiNN40i
e$.
x
o
O N
3 F
A A
v
3
+O
m A
W —
W N+
O
Z a
"
0 SA
E 3
y 0
3
0
3 3
0 0
� s
x
O N
3 F
A A
M
P, =1
y O
p
e W_
2
A A
3 m_
m D
D O
2 n
A
-i
A AAA
A
w
d R
S
O
w
F
D
3°nm's?cNmb(Jri
3°�>aamm+Nm
+
3Onyny=��yKi
r
N
u
O
V V+
N
A
r
O
�mymrm
�O
m
OTC1
'OTT
V
D
A
m
N N$
A
N J
Z
H
000'
SoaoSo
o
J
+
ONI
N m
W
N H+
m J
S NW
W N
O
A
A
V
Ow
A
888$$$
a"
H
0
H+
N
N
m
o.
NHo�wN
om0
000000
Wm
m
m
�
O N
+maim
N J+
N
N
N
V
N W
O N
O O
O N
O m
S S
OO
N J
S N
IF
N
O
P.O
H
P.A
N M O
880
N O N
N N
H+
+ V
W 1HD
4w m
W
O J
O O
S m
O m
N W
N O
N N
S O
S 8
8 O
N
(W11�NNNN
oo�wmm
N
+
oo$000
Yq
N
�OpINW
A
N
N V
O O
O Y
O N
W A
N A
O
S D
S S
q
S O
+ N
N$04H1
$00000
N
IV
N
W0
O q
pANON10
NOON�DO
U
O
O O
0 0
O N
0 0
O p
0 0
m m
J m
N A
W N+
O
O 3
M
P, =1
2
A A
3 m_
m D
D O
2 n
A
XI S
A AAA
A
d R
S
F
w
F
3°nm's?cNmb(Jri
3°�>aamm+Nm
0>mssNWAmT
3Onyny=��yKi
a
i1
nnmm3N�
°3<maEamn�0WbNN
WO
-Sam
IF
-DrzoCTA�3mH1
Om
ffyDO"
Obm
O
1
m000,o,n
TTToOm0
_2___
Z:"71
_T
y
W
HH
O
C
o°iHH
H
N
HwN
z
r
W
S O
S
O O
H U
W H
J N
yy 'PRN
N m
N
p
N H
H
A m
i
O
$$$S$$882'.800$$$88a$
O O
W O
N m
N N
W O
O�
0 A
N J
J
mo.
m�
�m
N
N
ON
OOH+++NYON�NJAV10
W
m
N
{{qq++NANA
JfJJm
Dm
�j0�
W
00200$00+N(Ni100$$O00m
p T
O
Oq
$HSH
O$$
$ONS
$
0 0
0 0$
0
2
2
w
(
N
N
H
�
A
$$o
_
go�SooOuHi
H
N_
�i$SY�rouuwi�m
pgQQ
y
�'
n
$S0
o00oo0
0o
00000000
000....
0
000o
in
0
P
m y
mo
m
A'T
(yyqq
HN
mOO
Nx.!2p+Wyk
NtHO�V1i�N0(Vll
DDO
m m
so0'0
S OO
O
oo00>�nmi
OOOOJ1mp41OO
aa.'o
m�
v
O A
$ S
S S
S O
S O
S A
S S
pp.
888
S
P.
O O
S
H H
H
H
2
J PHH
H
H.'H�pp
--1
S S
N O
H O
N w
N H
O
O
N bI
N H
H
A
0
S S
00410+OOWO
S S
S S
S S
S S
r
S S$
OOANm
S
S S
S N
Oma
O
D
N
O Ll
FD
50
zm
yN
oO
Y
H
Jdy1
y1
HNH+
y1WN+WHV
H�(p��+NNN
A
NAP
y ti
OSOSOSO$VmA$$$$SINi�N
n+1
yA
A
S S
S S
S S
S S
S A
S 8
S 8
S S
S O
S
H F
H
2
00001H0oH
.1
im-Ni00oin
u
1H.lm�m
P
00oo
00000.00.000.0.o00o
0000000
o00000
oin
m y
za
�T
0
DO
yp�
MO
A
N
Ab O
m
H
(q
VOIJN<NT
+N BOO
JN �NyV
rD
O
VAA VAwA
OO
0oOO
ONOO
O
NN
pN
mm
N
N
00
0000
00W0
00O
AJ
0
00o0
0
OOS
00OOOOOoO
=
W0O
m
H+
A
(q
O O
O O
O O+
O O
O
O O
W+
N O
J N..
O O
O
J O
N O
N H
O .6..
N H
W
H
y
OOO0000.0�0�0(11�0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
0 0
m
0 0
O....
0
0.
IDA
0 0.
.NL
Z �
3 0
y0
H
N
Oy
S
N
{q
Y�
H
T
p
AH+N
H
H N
Y
O.
•p
H H
R H
N+
H
N N
+ANN
+
rD
J
8m
8S000OOONbf�ilON
pp
y
O O
0 0
O O
0 0
O O
0 0
O O
m m
O O
N O
O O
S$
S S
UPS
O O
O
54 N
F2�jC 1SCO
God
r 1 1 S B f
VICINITY
sl
- PROJECT LOCATION
--�' POSSIBLE ADDITION
13AY
CITY OF BURLINGAME
SAN MATEO COUNTY
CALIFORNIA
REVISED: 118 196�i
GRAPHIC SUI
SAN MATEO COUNTY
BUILDING & CONSTRUCTION TRADES COUNCIL
1153 CHESS DRIVE 1206, POSTER CITY, CA 94404(650) 358-9977 Fax: (650) 358.9979
Millwrights 102
Operating Engineers 3 Attachment I: Source Document Review from the City of Oxnard, done
Painters 913 by independent contractor Quality Consulting. The text of the report is five
pages, with attachments showing specifics of financial findings. The document
Pile Drivers, 34 is very important. It shows Equality Consulting found B-1 Enterprise guilty of
Plasterers, 66
Plumbers 8 Sfeamfittern 467 prevailing wage violations' specifically: "None of the B-1 Enterprise employees
working on this project were paid prevailing wages", and "records lack
Roofers 40 credibility and do not reflect a true picture of day and hours worked..."
Roofers 95
Service Employees 715 Attachment 2: Letter from Roger D. Miller, Senior Deputy, State of
Sheet Metal Workers, 104 California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards
Sprinkler Fitters 483 Enforcement, Bureau of Field Enforcement, Public Works. This letter states that
Sign BDisplay 510 there was a case brought against B-1 Enterprise by the State of California over
Teamsters 853 the project in Oxnard. Unfortunately, it is our understanding this case was filed
prior to the present administration at the State Labor Commissioner's office, and
this case was settled short of a hearing for a substantial amount of money paid
Affiliated with: by B-1 Enterprise to Oxnard without admitting guilt. It is my belief that if this
State Building i Cf Califotion
rnia
case were filed today, no such agreement would be reached.
Trades Council of Califomla
September 5, 2000
Williams A Nack
Business Manager
Executive officer
!'
The Honorable Rosalie O'Mahoney;j�",�F_,;, h t„
City of Burlingame
Michael G.Knab
President
501 Primrose Road
SEP 0 6 2000
Burlingame, CA 94010
Asbestos Workers 16
t)EI'T. Cr PL -Li;; V4U M3
Boilermakers 549
Dear Mayor O'Mahoney: CITY OF BURLINGAME
Brick 8 TBC Layers 3
Cabinetmakers 2236
In reviewing the agenda for the City Council Jnecting scheduled for tonight,
Carpenters 217
September 5, 2000, Item E on the Consent Calendar is a resolution awarding a
carpet-r3noleum rayers 12
contract to B-1 Enterprise Corporation for Sidewalk Maintenance.
Cement Masons 583
Drywall s rather, 9144
I have a number of documents that I believe will show B-1 Enterprise should not
Electrical Workers 617
be considered a "responsible bidder" for contracts awarded. Based on this
Elevator Constructors 8
information, I would like to request that this item be removed from the Calendar
Glaziers 718
until such time that you have had an opportunity to review these documents.
Hardwood Floor Layers 1861
Specifically, I am attaching:
Iron Workers, 377
Millwrights 102
Operating Engineers 3 Attachment I: Source Document Review from the City of Oxnard, done
Painters 913 by independent contractor Quality Consulting. The text of the report is five
pages, with attachments showing specifics of financial findings. The document
Pile Drivers, 34 is very important. It shows Equality Consulting found B-1 Enterprise guilty of
Plasterers, 66
Plumbers 8 Sfeamfittern 467 prevailing wage violations' specifically: "None of the B-1 Enterprise employees
working on this project were paid prevailing wages", and "records lack
Roofers 40 credibility and do not reflect a true picture of day and hours worked..."
Roofers 95
Service Employees 715 Attachment 2: Letter from Roger D. Miller, Senior Deputy, State of
Sheet Metal Workers, 104 California, Department of Industrial Relations, Division of Labor Standards
Sprinkler Fitters 483 Enforcement, Bureau of Field Enforcement, Public Works. This letter states that
Sign BDisplay 510 there was a case brought against B-1 Enterprise by the State of California over
Teamsters 853 the project in Oxnard. Unfortunately, it is our understanding this case was filed
prior to the present administration at the State Labor Commissioner's office, and
this case was settled short of a hearing for a substantial amount of money paid
Affiliated with: by B-1 Enterprise to Oxnard without admitting guilt. It is my belief that if this
State Building i Cf Califotion
rnia
case were filed today, no such agreement would be reached.
Trades Council of Califomla
September 5, 2000
Page 2
Attachment 3: Letter from Juan Garza, Deputy Labor Commissioner,
State of California, stating that a child labor citation against B-1 Enterprise was
assessed on a job they were doing in the City of Sunnyvale. B-1 Enterprise
appealed this citation to the Labor Commissioner and was heard on July 19,
1999. The Labor Commissioner's Office ruled B-1 Enterprise was guilty of two
separate counts of Labor Code Violations and was fined $15,000. I have
attached the decision for your review.
Attachment 4: California Public Contract Code defining "responsible
bidder", and the legislation that changed the Public Contract Code to enable
awarding agencies to consider the "attribute of trustworthiness" in considering
whether or not the bidders on a project are "responsible".
The Building Trades Council believes B-1 Enterprise is not a responsible bidder,
and should not be allowed to work on publicly funded projects in the State of
California. I hope that I have provided you with sufficient cause to withdraw
the resolution awarding a contract to B-1 Enterprise from your Consent
Calendar agenda for the meeting on September 5, 2000.
Sincerely,
William A. Nack
Business Manager
WAN:ajg
Enc.
I'MNBAIION FOR FAN CUMAC7M6 '
- Fy,.�r�' J—'"
CERTIFIED MAIL— RETURN RECEIPT
August 22, 2000
e.... ._
SEP 1 6 2000
DEPT. OF PULL; : L. 3;,K3
CITY OF BURLINGAME
! E`'l i
Staci Pugh — Judgment Unit
Contractors State License Board
P.O. Box 269117
Sacramento, CA 95826.9117
RE: B-1 Enterprises Corporation and Neil George DiLello, as an individual
Dear Ms. Pugh:
B-1 Enterprises Corporation was issued Citation Nos. 020066 and 016606 for violation
of Labor Code Section 1294(e) by Deputy Labor Commissioner Juan Garza. A hearing
affirmed the civil penalty assessments of $5,000 and $10,000, respectively (enclosed).
Please suspend/revoke the contractors state license of B-1 Enterprises Corp., and any
and all contractors state licenses that list Neil George DiLello as an individual until this
judgment is satisfied.
Thank you for assistance. Please notify our office on the status of the revocation. If you
should need any additional information, do not hesitate to contact me.
Enclosures
Case: 078BB
3807 Pas:ulena Avenue, Sulle 150
Saaunento, CA 95821
(916) 487-7871
F• (916) 487-0306
JOAVrf.4RORMAN.ICFIfENrFJFORT .sc
Zoo -d H89:60 00/90/60
r0UN0ATION FOR FAIR CONTRACTING; 925 252 0334;
/V/Z.. --, S?
Sep -4-00 3:15PM; Page 6/6
ATTAtNr OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
aVISION OF APPRENTICESHIP STANDARDS AUG O � LdOO
.'
455 Golden Gate Avenue, Sth Floor
San Francisca CA 94102 1-
(415) 703-4920 F h L ADQV=Rv6v m:
o -O. Box 420603
San hUtlYD G 94142
NOTICE OF COMPLAINT OF NONCOMPLIANCE
Date: August 3, 2000 Complaint No.: 1999-7093
Respondent: B-1 Enterprise Corporation
P.O. Box 6130
Corona, CA 91718
Complainant: Foundation for Fair Contracting
3807 Pasadena Avenue, Suite 150
Sacramento, CA 95821
Project Site: 1997-1998 Sidewalk Repair
project No. 20011
Awarding Agency: City of Menlo Park / Engineering Department Menlo Park, CA - Varlos Locations
701 Laurel Street San Mateo County
Menlo Park, CA 94025 6 - � %,
The Division of Apprenticeship Standards (DAS) has received a complaint alleging that you are not in compliance
with Labor Code Section 1777.5 and the California Code of Regulations. The alleged violation (s) of Title 8 CCR
Sectlone 230, 230. 1, and 230.2 Ware:
® Failed to provide the applicable Apprenticeship Committee with notice of contract award per
Title 6 CCR Section 230.
177-1
Ljj Failed to comply with the required apprentice to journeyman ratio per Title 8 CCR Section 230.1 (a).
® Failed to property employ apprentice(s) by'assigning apprentic4(s) to perform work outside
the craft or trade of the apprenticeable occupation per Title 8 CCR Section 230.1(c).
® Failed to make required contributions to a registered apprenticeship program or to the California
Appenticeship Council (CAC) per Title 6 CCR Section 230.2.
If you disagree with these aliegation(a), please submit evidence, postmarked by August 10, 2000, to show
you compiled with Labor Code Section 1777.5 and Title 8 CCR Sections 230, 230.1 and 230.2. Should you fail to
comply with the requirement of this Notice, procedures for determination of 'willful noncompliance" may be initiated
pursuant to Labor Code Section 1777.7.
Willful noncompliance may result In civil penalties and you may be denied the right to bid on or receive public
works contracts for a period up to three (3) years per tabor Code Section 1777.7.
Enclosed are DAS documents to assist you in complying with Public Works requirements (Excerpts of Sections 1777.5
and 1777.7 from the California Code Relating to Apprentices on Public Works, DAS P.W. 1/00 and Excerpts from
rite 8 of the California Code of Regulations). Please note that the California Labor Code Sections referenced above
have recently been amended. The amendments took effect January 1, 2000. Shduld you have any questions,
please call me at (415) 7034934 -
Since*
Enclosures
cc: Awarding Body
Complainant
Rio
Rev. 1/00
consultant
Attachment 1
February 17, 1998
TO: Daniel Martinez, City Clerk
FROM: Paula Kimbrell, Assistant City Attorney
SUBJECT: Request for Public Records (Hack)
Enclosed is the document requested by William A. Nack in a fax that you received on February
13, 1998.
Please advise Mr. Nack as follows, or send a copy of this memorandum to Mr. Nack
Certain material has been deleted from the document on the grounds that disclosure of that
information would constitute an unwarranted invasion of personal privacy within the meaning of
subsection (c) of Government Code section 6254. In addition, employees' names taken from
certified payrolls were deleted as required by subsection (e) of the Labor Code section 1776.
100
cam. � N� Ifo U
'too 65.. y 20 5S
SOURCE DOCUMENT REVIEW
W
CONTRACTOR: B - 1 ENTERPRISE CORP.
CONTRACT: SIDEWALK CURB & GUTTER PROJECT m IU96-04
REVIEW DATE: JUNE 25, 1997
REVIEWERS: MARTHA & GEORGE ZOLOTH, EQUALITY CONSULTING
REASON FOR REVIEW
A. Employees documented as working (including employees interviewed) on the project on
specific days were not shown on the contractor's certified payrolls for those dates.
B. Hours worked per day per the contractor's certified payrolls did not match the inspector's
records.
C. Employees' interviews contain the following complaints.
1. We were not allowed to take a lunch break, we would sneak our lunch when Neil Dilello,
Project Superintendent, was out of sight.
2. Original weekly pay check in the amount of approx. $900 is given back to employer for
cash exchange of $250.00 per week for 10 to 16 hours of work, 5 days a week.
J. Please don't identify me to the contractor or other employees due to fear of getting hurt.
4. Neil Dilello told me to say $26 per hour when inspector asks or I will get in trouble.
5. We sleep and cook inside storage container -real ugly- one portable toilet. We use near-
by fire hydrant to cleanup but will not shower, too cold to use this facility all week while
staying in Oxnard.
6. Up at 4:00 to 5:00 AM to fuel, oil equipment and started work on the project as early as
5:30 AM.
CONTRACTOR'S RECORDS
- .A. TLvtE CARDS: .
1. The time cards matched the contractor's certified payrolls and contained the employees
signatures. Mr. Dilello stated that the employees signed the time cards each week when paid.
B. CERTIFIED PAYROLLS:
1. When asked about employees shown on the inspector's daily reports and not appearing on his
certified payrolls, Mr. Dilello stated that his records were correct and that the inspector was
not on the job often enough to know what was going on. We then pointed out that employees
were interviewed working at the jobsite on dates that they were not shown on his certified
payrolls. iVlr. Dilello asked to see the interviews but we explained that they were confidential.
2. We pointed out that his certified payrolls indicated that several of his employees worked nine
and half hours per day, five days a week earning S 1,3 19.20, yet others seemed to be grouped
into patterns earning 5482.30 per week, 5800 to $1000 per week, 5625 per week or S225.84
per week. We asked Mr. Dilello to explain how this was possible if his employees were driven
in company trucks from Rancho Cucamonga to Oxnard on Monday, lived together in the
company yard's "storage container", all started work at the same time each day and stopped
at approximately the same time each day.
3. Mr. Dilello insisted that the employees did not work the same hours each day and that his
records were correct. We pointed out that it was very unusual construction practice for an
employee to stop work each week so that his check would be exactly $482.30 or $225.84.
Mr. Dilello did not comment.
4. Just prior to the source document review we requested and received certified payrotls for the
week ending June 14. By this time Mr. Dilello was aware that we had found discrepancies
between days and hours worked on his project and we found a note at the bottom of the
payroll stating "correction to hours for last week' that listed four employees that had been
shorted hours from week ending June 7. June 7 most other employees worked four days,
June 3 thorough June 6, eight and a half hours to ten hours per day per the contractor's
certified payrolls. Listed below are the revisions added to the June 14 certified payrolls
NAME— JUNE 7 HRS. ADDED PAY ADDED
5482.30 8 $208.56
$625.68 8 $208.56
$505.23 16 5417.12
$685.99 8.5 5225.84
5. We pointed out to Mr. Dilello that had worked on the project for four weeks
and for three of those weeks worked exactly eighteen and one half hours earning $482.30 and
was it not possible that mistakes had been made on the other payrolls also. Mr. Dilello had
no comment.
C. FEDERAL. AND STATE TAX DEDUCTIOtiS:
1. On the contractor's cerrin"ed payrolls for week ending March 3, 1997;
all earned St.,301.93 and fzderal ar,d
state w-ithholdtng taxes were 5200.00 and 550.00 respectively for each of them. However,
the number of withholding exemptions for each employee was Single -1 Married -2,
Tamed -5 and Married -2.
D. CANCELED CHECKS
1. The signatures (signed or printed) on employee's check_, did not in many cases match
those of previous weeks, or the signature on the weekly time cards.
2. For the most part no identification (drivers licenses etc.) was found under the endorsement
of the checks when cashed at banks, liquor stores, markets and check cashing
establishments.
TINDINGS
A. DOCUD iENTATIO�i OF EMPLOYEES WORKING ON THE PROJECT
1. The City inspector's daily reports are clear and concise. At the start of the contract a
complete list of workers' names was included with the dates worked. The daily reports
contained names of the employees and reference to the type of work being performed. In
the March 11, 1997 daily report a conversation with Vir. Dilello was documented.
'TIF—ADVISED OF 8 LABORERSIWORKERS AND I COL;LITED 11 (ALFREDO,
LOUIS, GENARO, PAULINO, MARIO, TOZMAS, JOSE, JOE, RATA,- GEORGE
AGIANI O, SYLVIAN )". The certified payroll for March 11 only contained
8 of the workers listed.
2. Throughout the daily reports are instances where employees are named and the work they
performed is described, but they do not appear on the contractor's certified payrolls.
March 20, `BACKFILL OPERATION (R.AUL, JORGE) CON'TUNFUTVG ON SAN'
JUANL." Not on contractor's certified payroll.
3. Vir. Dilello had working on the project for several days but he
did not appear on certified payrolls. ivir. Dilello was informed of this at the source
document review and told that every individual working on the project must appear on his
certified payrolls, but continued to work on the job for 3 more weeks. Again he did
not appear on the contractor's certified payrolls.
B. N-CFIMBER OF HOURS WORKED PER DAY
1. At the source documem .review we reviewed and obtained copies of several time cards. '
Although Mr. Dileilo stated that the employees signed the time cards each week we found
that many of the signatures were far too exact in placement on the cards not to have been
copied from card to card.
2. Employee interviews have indicated that the entire crew was confined to living at the
contractor's yard and awakened at between 4:00 and 5:00 A -M to fuel and o4 equipmcm.
When we pointed this out to Mr. Mello he denied that and said that he had his own mechanic
to work on the equipmem. When we said that was covered work under the Labor Code and
asked why this person did not appear on hu certified payrolls he did not answer"
3. Employee and inspector observations indicate that the crew had no private transportation and
arrived and departed the jobsite in contractor provided trucks or equipment. The crew all
started at the same time in the morning and finished at approximately the same time each day.
The inspector noted that when Mr. Dilello left early he told the crew not to leave until they
completed a designated amount of work.
4. Daily reports nae complaints from private citizens stating that the contractor was working as
early as 5:30 ALAS. Other entries state instances of the contractor's workers starting prior to
7:00 Alf. June 6, "05:52 EQUIPMENT PULLING ONTO JOBSITE WITH 3 BACKHOES,
I SKIPLOADER, 1 TEN -WHEEL MIND TRUCK .... .EQUIPMENT TURNED OFF AS I
WALK UP TO DUMP TRUCK AT BROOKSIDE AND A.t,.MROSE WORKERS
ADVISED THAT THEY WERE ADVISED BY CONTRACTOR TO SHUT DOWN
EQUIPMENT AND BEGIN bfANUAL WORK ...I6:00 CREW TOOK OFF FOR THE
WEEKEND" This is a 12 hour day but certified payrolls show 8, 8.5, 9.5 and 10 hrs. In
addition 3 employees listed as working on the inspector's report were not shown on the
certified payrolls.
5. The City Inspector verified the employees' complaint that they were not allowed a lunch hour.
6. Only four employees, .
were bhown on certified payrolls as working 9.5 hours per day each and every working day
(see Exhibit 3). Two employed worked an average of about 29 hours straight time per
week, 3 employees worked 20 hours and 3 worked an average of 8.5 hours per week. See
Section D. CANCELED CHECKS and note that the
only full time workers earning an average of 31,200.00 plus or minus, all had their checks
deposited in the same bank, under the same name and under the same
account member.
7. Certified payrolls compiled on or after week ending June 14, when the contractor was aware
that the inspector was keeping close records of personal on the job, reported all employees
(exp for • missing one day and not reported)
working 8 or more hours per day, five days per week. AU employees were now earning
51,033 to $1,252 per week.
C. FEDERAL Ati"D STATE TA}C DEDL'CTION
1. As voted above some of the employees' tax deductions did not conform to the federal and
state tax tables.
2. married with 5 dependents, had a total of 51,620.00 (see Exhibit No. 1) in -
federal tax withheld when the tax table indicated S1,181.00 should have taken.
........................................................................................... This raises the question of
whether or not the 5250.00 per week taken out of " " 's check for federal and
state taxes was paid to the proper agencies.
D. CANCELED CHECKS
1. The first week's paychecks (week ending February 15) for three employers
were cashed by at an O ward Bank.
This was the only time that checks were cashed at or near the job site.
2. All of the remainder of the paychecks for as well as all
paychecks for were deposited (stamped for deposit only, not cashed) in the
California State Bank rn the Covina Branch under the name of account
number
3. The four employees noted above live in Corona, Corona, Riverside and Compton and it would
be extremely unlikely that they would drive out of their way to Covina to deposit their
paychecks in the same account and not receive any cash. It would be even more unlikely that
they all write checks on the same account.
4. Many of the paychecks were cashed at the Ontario Liquor Store. In a visit to the store we
spoke to a person who said he was the manager but would not give his name. We showed
him copies of checks cashed at this location and asked if they were cashed there: He
confirmed that the checks were cashed there but would not ensurer any questions such as:
Why was no identification required? Would you cash a check for me if I printed m3' name
and had no ID? Do you know a Mr. Mello? He did say that be knew the people cashing the
checks but could not explain why the signatures on checks from the same person did not
match. Employees indicated in interviews that Mr. Mello would go with them to cash the
checks and then take all but 5250 for himself.
5. Please see Exhibit No. 2, WEEKLY PAY CHECKS.
E. EILPLOYEE EN-FERVIEWS
.. ................................................................................................................................................
.......................................:........................................................................................................
CONCLUSIONS
The B - 1 Enterprises Inc. certified payrolls do not correctly reflect the actual number of
employees working at the construction site.
As documented above Nir. Mello's records lack credibility and do not reflect a true picture of
days or hours worked on this project.
�, None of the B - 1 Enterprise employees working on this project were paid prevailing wages.
according to the
contractor's certified payrolls worked an average of 9.5 hours per day, 5 days per week. Their
paychecks were all deposited in the same bank, the same account, and to the
sameaccount no. ..................................................................................................
With all of the wages .being deposited in the same account it appears that none of the four
employees had access to money deposited...................................................................................
Calculation ofwages acbmlly paid for the hours worked came to 55.26 per hour.
A wage violation case has been prepared based upon all of the above information. The total
amount of wages owed to employees has been calculated to be 588,873.48. The total penalties
accessed are 539,300.00.
The total amount owed by B - l Enterprises due to wage violations and penalties equals
S128,173.48.
It is recommended that in accordance with Labor Code Sections 1727, 1775 and 1813 , ,an
amount equal to the total of S 128,173.48 for wage violations and penalties be withheld from B - I
Enterprises final payment until this case is resolved.
-LYuALITY CONSULTING
AMOUNT DUE EACH ElWLOYEE FOR WAGE VIOLATIONS BY
-B-1 ENTERPRISE CORP.
rctstcuARY L -_[AY:
NLkRCH ',APa--,%
. m
�7 S 1. I23.99 $1,12399
wy-IMINITIM
5
i 54.629.69 i $938.00 i:���1.671.96 $10.432.10
12�.99982 52.999.82 i
L2.226.1-5- I $1.106.72
53.332.87
I
�S2 751.79 S1.106.72 E 35-22561
. m
�7 S 1. I23.99 $1,12399
wy-IMINITIM
F-
-g a S.Ujl:M
t--
-;g
.
la s
s
si.q igj-
i
1 :Q*;". . : I i•
El a -. - -. -.. - 8 8 s
'4
, I I
•
:8 2 -. -. 5:
C; W?.
�i ci d -i i �l
:.,i c; -i -i 14 C� i
lj.
..E -
cn
2:
F-
0
t--
.
T
i
8 S C FS 8 S � S 9
El a -. - -. -.. - 8 8 s
'4
a 2 -;
•
:8 2 -. -. 5:
C; W?.
�i ci d -i i �l
:.,i c; -i -i 14 C� i
lj.
..E -
cn
8 E,Z 2 a a 2
RR
7
d cs P. 6 �:-g i .6
r
I
C� 14
n n -I!
c-;
U3
qNa -2 Y.
"I
z
4,d .4 -W .4 z
:C! I rz C�
C;
M
6'�
2 7A PZPX
C; CR
-R n
CR C! q
q"
7- lk EO;, 78.72;
LU
� R Cl. n
1a oqy.
�i C;
LU
-i � Id d li,Vc;
-%d .4 16 19 a j Id 16
cwl
t.;
C�d
L 4Ri Ri
C;-
�slr
F-
0
t--
.
T
i
8 S C FS 8 S � S 9
El a -. - -. -.. - 8 8 s
'4
a 2 -;
•
:8 2 -. -. 5:
�i ci d -i i �l
:.,i c; -i -i 14 C� i
lj.
..E -
cn
RR
7
r
I
c-;
qNa -2 Y.
C;:
C;
C; CR
-R n
CR C! q
q"
LU
� R Cl. n
1a oqy.
�i C;
LU
cwl
t.;
C�d
L 4Ri Ri
C;-
�slr
p, n� oi; 5
cs
e
Rm
n -R n
C;
IR
q oR
tz
cn
8.81S,SI8.8 $ S,S:S:S:S;S o
'8;8 S:S:B 8 S s S:SE
psi
is
_
qq.
7
w s.
1 ;N �i• � j
i N
Fs. F5. �'y
a�s_n8a�:yS i
«P n««�' � I
Io..d S
^
M.N N.
N P
� My'� 1
.KS
�.
N�
I y N'
FG
IAr I
1
LTJ
r :oh �:
I�',N,I tl:n. s. $. �' .pr HSN•
•N�VI�N
I:r „
}
,� ��
Fpri8 tl�
„= S a�a•n. H' <'�' k
r: n Y; j
kry H ''tl ^
I
pp
P�H;NI
«'
i
!
C`..
I:IEp'• �
4„.N 'H.N N� 1
IN N - � Ti � M, N�
'H'N'N•
i
ItFF
f{�]
h
iQ"� �
�No.r Ntl'! [
�O Y1 V �• Ni� P ry •G•N O f
. N
I O N Zi V: (!V V ry O• '•
IriV•'J'
�M yi N.N M N N N:N N N Y
N N N N M N N NI
C
,o -a
bail
is IIv
I !k
1 Or
'll `��: -!u'O. VI�•I. C'P �O�
IQ N�i��'^�O�r P�A�
E•1�
i
W`�q`�'''
�
,o tNi N: MNN :� i I
N Nr :N• y'
F--•
��'• I h
FC vl tl'.C•V tl •p P
i�
<
F�
G G
� I
;.tl.13':_,:1�—... ... '"�—o
M N'N,NrN NNNMMN N'H• �
•cl ryryc
IN L.INM NMNNH h
z9J,
c.
O
r —�
�
, 1
/ter.
O /cc)
p]
4 `+
�• _
S1 O Y a 8 O S FJ E S. O Of
V.O
I
aC f1^y Mtl� NPI
I
I
�F.NRSl�1rlCOI
i
•�
,o
'o.
ofo.
o. r. r.•
F•”
G �^t 4p
1 0 •O� VI:
•O' O. N:
IC O. .0 C N y
.�
tz
w F-.�
w
cs
i.
o o r. N
Vj
I
Cil. r.
a
I-,
W
i-••1
rryr F,
I
F�
I
LZI
•o,N
N26
. I N,
Wi
I
k Y""i 1'
F
1 I I 1 N fC:C"es
4 1
o: r N
.: o.
f•p = .. u
C
f vi
I.O.c. O O
o
c—
'c+.or
—_
_
•^. c r. c o e N
l o c o o r
V
i.
i
Ip
C
I�.� i
'v 1`.•'O Y v C,:J� G
v y
Y
z
FN� iT P r Z.
Y
�<.
5 Z
Y
O
S
5 Z I=
w Z
Ir
2i, Z:
EA! IS 9
P:
ZR
is Z!
zi
V zz
5 5.
13
If
IR, o ;L -ll
z 7;SIS 8
C4
:%, C4
-Ti I
TT7
Ln —L -i Ima is
:D 4; n 'i C'I r
11, .4 . .
CS:
WZ 'Wm if I-- n r�-- �- I - —
I_ Z—
W. 'I"I.
i n 55 51 cl q W.
en 'zis C;
C; I.CRr.
_aero IS
Tc—i 77
-i C!
O
.2
C
C--; �-i
C.!
cw;,
.�-s
-I.
•
�n- F
LO
E5
55
ct
C
C--; �-i
C.!
.�-s
-I.
c.
0
U r-
Wl rn
U
ri
i
khE98al '8.8 E88
j i 88 88
:c�.«x.82.88_ � 8.a:•w�=9m- p ..
- M I � Vi I �-•OV
5
.
K
i
1
•
ZZ�
OL} 1 i� � ��Z !
�1?•. a.i 0 �
moi=9g�
a
.
5
.
K
i
R
5 R
l.•sa:i '
i F.^
ts.�••aa-
w.�t.�Yr r
i8�88.€£88S
s. a a:84s s
-
77--,i
R.
- --
Y
!
5
3
.g$
cs
sat
k
t
trI gas
�€
e;: 4 e
,U'
� r
?
>oa.!
r:
AT
I �'a.tl
-'
, _
i i -i.���•" 1y.i
j `r✓•3S,oars,`et7
I 0-
t'.
a
K}+
o»^
rkEri
? �t
I
3
€x888
Ig�tl.e_
k€£888
g'gnee
j
Z
j
<
=-I 'r
i
OGO
t
!Z
3
v
c
I
i r
}
'
i 1 i
R
5 R
l.•sa:i '
i F.^
ts.�••aa-
w.�t.�Yr r
i8�88.€£88S
s. a a:84s s
-
77--,i
R.
- --
LI
.g$
sat
k
t
trI gas
�€
e;: 4 e
fo
r:
AT
I �'a.tl
-'
, _
i i -i.���•" 1y.i
j `r✓•3S,oars,`et7
I 0-
K}+
o»^
rkEri
? �t
I
3
€x888
Ig�tl.e_
k€£888
g'gnee
j
2 �-:, = '
-
77--,i
R.
- --
c n----��• Y
t
-'
, _
i i -i.���•" 1y.i
j `r✓•3S,oars,`et7
I 0-
K}+
3
I
�
Z
j
RU
a 2 R �RIWQ-8'8.8. .21 1
s
ME 9 �22 9;
1
Z., !- i g- -�nzza
iZ.gqI ! ��g
. , A
-f :. "
j^ N! No
Fic a-�, i
L• to 5-� 4 j fatd
12:
N
G:n!s. $
rl a 2 2
-, 19 o
=fin` Irtl+-s
6 P,
FIV
L I
P;E 1,
L4 C4 -1,.q;
b—d wit
55 -ii
.1
-z-2
In W);
ap -6 7
3 I
i5
Si:StiSS5t�5t:S SS
i E
F•.4.1
" L—ag
Iql
g: 4,.q: gf g! 51
g;:z g=888.88'8
9 9,9
cL
tog
r
f
14
!a H;
gla 5c's g:, g.
a
mi z
I jN. 1
g g
S.d.d.d..;
c; Sd
F.4A6�4446d.d,dc; .4
ZD
0
C,O
z
m4
ZD
EZ)
01:
wn
W ve.
z z
Lq
�j FIS,
aaaa:aa•$ a:a a aa:a s E;a.a a:a:a( s;s.a.
►�. �:R�R�3 �»'S�»•R x,8 ! !I!
F[.jo:�a:i»V883D=2;_'� .=xF._....
I: R
Z j�c{[ r :^•^�$88'Ba R� r ^a:8 �;�5 € e_$ fS 3Z�
qa, R«.SM3-9.9„8 1 4gro
N F
P INN I =
� �,
• j\
'99
� I`''• c N� N w N M w M M w« •'• C M:N N N �' I II F • a M 1 w� N
l �-•� • n! ^j a ' �I s! Ei Si SEES
aRi R=! Sc
q,. ! -..�'.iI I ;•«I�'I �o:ns
ZS
!'�
-
'aw-.. o Y^.:3:!v'3f:=.`e•3:'.P C•3: 8 I ^ai^":�'�
ox r
� :!: �: .o'<F.� �<.: �� c � 3 =» F 'c'1`.si w': -.i .�. $' o�."n'.•°. .•O. $. o•."•. .. `n S
I = �.'1'�; IN NN.MiNMNNNNMM I M'M. "M•N "1 �NN � NM"
_` G ,yjr�[S-.'`L•IjF' ir{ I - I j i I r F N N rt ! !
`z zd i8s's8ss898aa22 ss
;s.88.s88!8„ sg
(�-.,.e.Cc o e c e A i -i n :v- «C.e .;r �; :acs g'g
Aa f4
00
i
Z cl !
a
—
�%P _ _
t .gam ,r
° ��5z S''�. '✓r.��`c� '� o
L iZ j.��rtdS I_''1•ee}µ_
LZ«Z 2- Z
•�•z__�__�
• 'yl � 3 � 3 � � is � � °�
{o o.o o p o o e.0
}a. a.a.alo•o;a.a.a a 8'8
—
:
•—
_ , »
•
Z
.,.8ry5�'�i
�d:n'ni.-:S-•.gn�$$88R
}
i - .^.. o.v'v- =,� � .rI � n -
� }.,.». re ye. �
.e3
N_r'-:»aa„a3
r;
to
`
�m8n.e.88.'.,e8
I�.�.,e�l„188.--C8S8aw�8,
I
�CL
»i
�aiLi
r arrtsielo,8
1
.L
f'�'M1 A � �"�:� �.•G
—•MI”
I .0 ^ M 1��Ii. . ItiIM fi fr ry
N N•N:�f;M:NIM
�..I. �.M y' t
M
1 1 I t
M N V1 N,M M N•y M 1
IMM ��
3
i
y
Uld
LL
e
a •moi.'
Z
c
12 K'
d
I I w
Z
`
E
—
f
t
{o o.o o p o o e.0
}a. a.a.alo•o;a.a.a a 8'8
—
l i r i i
•—
_ , »
e
.,.8ry5�'�i
�d:n'ni.-:S-•.gn�$$88R
ti'S rryC�NCC �P�.•vC� s(Vjp'.vc oo O'v.QCC add Z, al i�Y.abY
� p, 1 �1 T — - 1 W' O 0• G R. �: C G O � � IV n1 C
—
•—
_ , »
e
.,.8ry5�'�i
�d:n'ni.-:S-•.gn�$$88R
o,v. o v .�,_ - � o•
i - .^.. o.v'v- =,� � .rI � n -
� }.,.». re ye. �
.e3
N_r'-:»aa„a3
to
�m8n.e.88.'.,e8
I�.�.,e�l„188.--C8S8aw�8,
i3 ^r;g
�CL
»i
�aiLi
r arrtsielo,8
1
.L
f'�'M1 A � �"�:� �.•G
—•MI”
I .0 ^ M 1��Ii. . ItiIM fi fr ry
N N•N:�f;M:NIM
�..I. �.M y' t
M
1 1 I t
M N V1 N,M M N•y M 1
IMM ��
3
i
ti'S rryC�NCC �P�.•vC� s(Vjp'.vc oo O'v.QCC add Z, al i�Y.abY
� p, 1 �1 T — - 1 W' O 0• G R. �: C G O � � IV n1 C
—
•—
_ , »
e
�aiLi
LZ��Z L='
.L
= Zz
3
i
y
LL
:
a •moi.'
I
� w i 1
c
12 K'
d
I I w
r
8:21
�11!
gist li
51 Is sal 182.
;wl a 1:2 .1113 &1
I
z
'MA
I
F 25 ZS
LBO:,
0,
'[I
r
IS EV~ C a P r.
g
pi
'04;
zj g
Eiji
�-;5 5s.
Vito
a
8a
10
04
J1
:E
jS E 8 -c! 8,9 8 8 E 8'8 9
r
8:21
�11!
gist li
51 Is sal 182.
;wl a 1:2 .1113 &1
I
'MA
I
F 25 ZS
LBO:,
0,
'[I
r
IS EV~ C a P r.
g
pi
'04;
zj g
Eiji
�-;5 5s.
Vito
a
04
J1
:E
jS E 8 -c! 8,9 8 8 E 8'8 9
Ehi
L
r
r
0,
:E
e;
k3.5t'8:8'S;xF
his:
tbh �S;or':St .n7
NA
>
b$.q 9_:
L8
'88a3 o bE88-E888888:
Iia
yy
9 xr .J YI
�a r'i
,&g•n
i
le o7•
x:9.0 �E�E99 Ira 899
�:5pi' i.^S: on. �..`.nS..nrS^
s^�.';" �
$•'. .R .'. �.�.5 «.01 .4� f
�
kCa.�:G�a :$9.
F I
1
<
0. 1: �.n•.' e v rte"= a= a
i = n a �: o'
1� �'t v o o r' ."e, f r r., c i
a
I
I.V'a»»3n 1
w'a�
r I b
fYiawaw ;
.
t
!
•:„.o
'�9C�8'
e900s '88889: 8:8889
I f
�$•;,::8:�80�8
g ..a.„o
imno_
.::e:o I«g aooi
M N.«�
f
I
=
E»I
^ a:
"�
!MIM:
:„. I i :a«I
E» j
1•i j
l i' i i
•9
LE�C�^+•-_.Ipp�'
.$.i �.� w oo. i
o;"n „..9•..9i
tal.•ni: 9 ;e';;g $� 0
•
M E'»NMM
« � r. a
NMN�L
{.e:� a e' �»�< i w�$• t
r
i
_
'4
•: S.88 R•C 8.on 8.oi•�
': 8.x
.'.-�
Z
..a,�-:ZS; I
.rr'C9-4:
o.4 -S6 . . .n.=oo .
! '
1
•t
f =
t
iz
ch
b
,Lj•LV'
t` i O
TE
'•••
o.
1 'O'o� �t64.
!�r�^ice
ki ��n�n• �M1
I•----��”
w ,
j-
-_
ia,3`'So`a•a`>>=� I
5`3S'''a !
°:6�5�� �a`.sSo�' ;5�5�"c i
• ��2L Z LL !
`t iz=
•tom zzz Betz= '• �Zi z{-. '
3
Attachment 2
STATE OF CALIFORNIA PETE WILSON Governor
DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL RELATIONS
DIVISION OF LABOR STANDARDS ENFORCEMENT
BUREAU OF FIELD ENFORCEMENT - PUBLIC WORKS
Roger Miller, Senior Deputy
107 South Broadway, Suite 5043
Los Angeles, CA 90012
(213) 897-6595
February 11, 1998
William Nack
Santa Clara Building Trades
2102 Almaden Road, Ste. 101
San Jose, CA 95125
Dear Mr. Nack:
This letter is being sent to confirm our telephone conversatiun this date. Our records show that
the public. works unit has a case docketed against B1. The case number is 40-03682/032. It is an
active case under investigation.
In addition, the division's legal staff is assisting the City of Oxnard in defending the city's
action of withholding funds for alleged under payment of the state prevailing wage by B1 to their
employees.
If you have any questions. please call me at the above number.
Sinc
grel ,
D. Mille
�Z
e or Deputy
cc: Jose Millan, Labor Commissioner