Proposed Collection; Comment Request

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Proposed Collection; Comment Request

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Department of Labor, as part of its continuing effort to

reduce paperwork and respondent burden, conducts a preclearance

consultation program to provide the general public and Federal agencies

with an opportunity to comment on proposed and/or continuing

collections of information in accordance with the Paperwork Reduction

Act of 1995 (PRA95) [44 U.S.C. 3506(c)(2)(A)]. This program helps to

ensure that requested

[[Page 31158]]

data can be provided in the desired format, reporting burden (time and

financial resources) is minimized, collection instruments are clearly

understood, and the impact of collection requirements on respondents

can be properly assessed. Currently, the Bureau of Labor Statistics

(BLS) is soliciting comments concerning the proposed new ``Research on

the Feasibility of Collecting Occupational Wage Data by Union Status.''

A copy of the proposed information collection request (ICR) can be

obtained by contacting the individual listed below in the addressee

section of this notice.

DATES: Written comments must be submitted to the office listed in the

addressee section below on or before August 5, 1997.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics is particularly interested in

comments which:

Evaluate whether the proposed collection of information is

necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the BLS,

including whether the information will have practical utility;

Evaluate the accuracy of the agency's estimate of the

burden of the proposed collection of information, including the

validity of the methodology and assumptions used;

Enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of the

information to be collected; and

Minimize the burden of the collection of information on

those who are to respond, including through the use of appropriate

automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological collection

techniques or other forms of information technology, e.g., permitting

electronic submissions of responses.

ADDRESSEE: Send comments to Karin G. Kurz, BLS Clearance Officer,

Division of Management Systems, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Room 3255,

2 Massachusetts Avenue, N.E., Washington D.C. 20212. Ms. Kurz can be

reached on 202-606-7628 (this is not a toll free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

The Employment Standards Administration (ESA) has determined that

research should be conducted into alternative ways of collecting

information for Davis-Bacon Act purposes. As a result, ESA's Wage and

Hour Division (WHD) wishes to evaluate the usefulness of BLS data in

the Davis-Bacon wage determination process.

The Davis-Bacon Act

The Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 276a) requires that workers employed

on Federal construction contracts valued in excess of $2,000 be paid

wages and fringe benefits that, at a minimum, have been determined by

the Secretary of Labor to be prevailing for corresponding classes of

workers employed on projects similar in character to the contract work

in the area where the construction takes place. The prevailing wage is

defined by Department of Labor regulations as the wage paid to more

than 50 percent of the workers in the job classification on similar

projects in the area during the period in question. If the majority of

those employed in the classification are not paid the same wage, the

prevailing wage is determined by calculating the average of the wages

paid. In cases where the majority of workers in a classification are

represented by a union and are paid the same rate, the union rate is

the prevailing rate.

Summary

Current Actions

BLS plans to determine the feasibility of using the Occupational

Employment Statistics (OES) survey to gather the union/nonunion status

of employees in construction industries by detail occupation; the

results will be evaluated by ESA to assess their usefulness for Davis-

Bacon Act prevailing wage determinations. Specifically the goal is to

determine whether, in a mail survey where occupational employment and

wage level information is being collected on every employee in an

establishment, the respondent also has information on employees' union/

nonunion status and would be willing to provide it. The process would

consist of three components: a telephone ``case study''; a survey form

test; and a follow-up Response Analysis Survey (RAS).

The case study would be implemented in early Fiscal Year (FY) 1998

as part of the routine follow-up efforts after the most recent OES data

collection cycle. After the initial mail-out of survey forms, OES staff

in four states would contact firms by telephone in the construction

industries (Standard Industrial Classifications 15, 16, and 17) that

did not respond by mail to collect the OES data. After collecting the

OES data, the questioner would ask if any of the workers in the

establishment belonged to a union. If the response was ``yes,'' the OES

staff would proceed through the list of occupations reported by the

employer to determine for each occupation whether workers belonged to a

union.

The intent of this case study would be to gauge the operational

feasibility of soliciting information from respondents on the union/

nonunion status of their employees by occupation as part of the regular

OES wage survey. This would allow BLS to ascertain whether employers

can or will readily provide the union status data, what the relative

proportion of respondents that have union workers might be, how

soliciting this information would affect employer burden, and how

disruptive this collection effort would be to the current OES

collection process. This case study would not result in the production

of estimates regarding the union/nonunion question.

The survey form test following the case study would take place in

FY 1999 and would involve mailing questionnaires similar to the current

OES survey form (instead of the regular form) to establishments in the

construction industry. BLS would test alternative forms to determine

which is able to gather the most accurate information while causing the

least additional burden to respondents and having the least negative

impact on response rates. The purpose of the survey form test would be

to determine, first, whether respondents would be willing to provide

information on union/nonunion status by occupation through a mail

survey. The test also would determine, through the use of different

formats, the one format that obtains the most accurate information with

least added burden to respondents. Finally, the test would show what

impact, if any, requesting this information on the OES survey form

would have on OES response rates.

Depending upon response levels in the survey form test, it is

possible that estimates of varying occupational detail could be

produced.

The follow-up Response Analysis Survey (RAS) would consist of

questions asked over the telephone of 2500 respondents, drawn from

construction and non-construction industries. The questioner would ask

respondents about the data they reported, what records were used to

report the data, how long it took them to complete the survey, etc. One

purpose of the RAS would be to gather, from respondents, an idea of the

difference in burden placed on respondents between completing the

regular OES wage survey form and the survey form containing the union/

nonunion questions. The expected time needed to complete each RAS is 30

minutes.

The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) will use the information

provided for

[[Page 31159]]

statistical purposes only. To the full extent permitted by law, BLS

will hold the information in confidence and will not disclose it

without the written consent of respondents.

Type of Review: New Collection.

Agency: Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Title: Research on the Feasibility of Collecting Occupational Wage

Data by Union Status.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Total Est. total

Activity form(s) number of Affected public Frequency annual Average time per burden

respondents response response hours

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Case Study.......................... 2,500 Business and other for Once FY98............... 1,725 10 minutes.............. 288

profit.

Survey Form Test BLS-2877 715-EZ; 9,000 Business and other for Once FY99............... 7,000 1 hour.................. 7,000

BLS-2877 715 Test1; BLS-2877 715 profit.

Test2.

RAS BLS-2877 715-RAS................ 2,500 Business and other for Once FY98/FY99.......... 2,250 30 minutes.............. 1,125

profit; Not for profit

inst.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Totals........................ 14,000 ....................... ........................ 10,975 ........................ 8,413

Two year average.................... 7,000 ....................... ........................ 5,488 ........................ 4,207

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Total Burden Cost (capital/startup): $0.

Total Burden Cost (operating/maintenance): $0.

Comments submitted in response to this notice will be summarized

and/or included in the request for Office of Management and Budget

approval of the ICR; they also will become a matter of public record.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 3rd day of June, 1997.

W. Stuart Rust, Jr.,

Acting Chief, Division of Management Systems, Bureau of Labor

Statistics.

[FR Doc. 97-14816 Filed 6-5-97; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-24-M