Phila. City Council passes hire-in-Philly rule
For "first-time entry-level workers" at firms that work for the city, rent city property or accept city financing.
Phila. City Council passes hire-in-Philly rule
Joseph N. DiStefano
Private firms and contractors that do at least $25,000 in City of Philadelphia-funded business or receive city financial assistance will have to agree to try to hire "first-time entry-level workers" from a list of city residents, to do city-funded work, instead of using out-of-town or suburban employees, under legislation passed unanimously in City Council today.
Firms are free to hire off the city list if they can't find city workers within 10 days of starting their search. The bill also requires contractors to list "job requirements" so the city can collect data on the kind of jobs employers want to fill.
The bill looks like a compromise between an early Bill Green (D-At Large)-backed bill that would require at least half of tradespeople and non-professional workers hired by city contractors to be city residents, and objections by critics, including Jim Kenney (D-At Large), who said it was unfair to apply such a blanket law to blue-collar workers but not to college-educated professional employees.
Green was lead sponsor of the revised bill, which awaits action by Mayor Nutter.
Comments (60)
This is how we will continue to lose a valuable, efficient, and qualified work force within the city.— amd804- But thy weren't from the city to start with — jonline
- Yet another effort by City Council to make Philadelphia unfriendly to businesses.— Joschmo
- This doesn't sound Legal or constitutional.— realtime
Politicians with feel good laws, with no enforcement. Hey why not raise the minimum wage to $20.00/hr next?- Dumb and Dumber, lending their Big Gubmint expertise to private business. What could possibly go wrong?— bill a,tkins
- Just in time for Xmas- more business will leave the city behind.— Taxpaying Voter
- So who creates the list, and who's on it? Politically connected Democrats?— LouDiamondPhillipsheadScrewdriver
- So, while these City Council numbskulls are patting themselves on the back, how many white collar businesses are already looking at thier options to get out of the City and back to the suburbs where this clueless City government can't tell them who they have to hire? What a sad city! These guys have no idea of the mess thier stupid laws are making. You can't make chicken salad out of a chicken s**t workforce.— martycon
- Hmm, so they no longer require their own employees to maintain city residency, but they want private employers to effectively do the same? Unless there is some resources put into compliance assurance, this will become a fraud-filled escapade, just like their minority-and female-owned contracting programs.— bobcitydoc
- And which employees would that be, pray tell? Besides the almighty teachers and (some of) the police? — Genghis
- I do not see anything wrong with this. There is nothing unconstitutional about it!
If you are going to do business with the municipality or take financial assistance, that means take Philly taxpayers (our money) money then you should have some employees from Philly or at least try to hire people from Philly!
If you do not like the rule, then don't do business or take financial assistance from Philly!— EIK - "If you do not like the rule, then don't do business [in] Philly!"
Really? So that is how you grow an economy, by shunning potential business? Absolutely insane. Why should I live in a city that has a poor school system and a corrupt police force just to have a job? Explain that one. If you want to make government workers do it, fine, but don't force the private sector into your archaic view of 'fairness'. - Spoken like a true democrat. I don't want to take "our money" so long as you don't take any of "my money" — jerryk2b
- If only there cared as much about educating current Philadelphia school children.........— Earl J
- Another law that sounds good on paper, but will likely create unintended consequences.— everydayguy
- All this will do is create a department filled with either partronage cronies or DC33/DC47 drones (all receiving DROP benefits) to "manage" the lists, issue toothless reports determining that this inane requirement is not being complied with to leverage kickbacks from persons desiring to be included on these lists, or from businesses wanting to be listed as compliant to be considered for a contract.
This is just a means of creating another another version of the corrupt entity created to "enforce" MBE/WBE participation.— Lancer248 - Hmm.... they better only hire people who are current in paying their taxes, which eliminates about 50% of the city's citizens— main liner
- This law wont work; people need to be hired based on merit. what will happen is there will be a constant eddy of unskilled entry level workers who are token hires and will recycle back to the bottom while the existing status quo of supposedly skilled journeymen, often drawn from non inclusive ranks, will have their positions preserved. Contrary to this law, the idea is to build up a well trained, sex/race/creed/color inclusive (organic) work force who, through merit based on attained skills, can earn a living, pay taxes, be happy and raise a family over a working life time. This bill merely preserves the status quo, the unskilled likely stay unskilled and the ostensibly skilled are protected. It will be interesting to see how it holds up when legally challenged.— oneadaysfine
- Suppose you're doing half a million dollars of business outside of Philly and you win a $25,000 city contract through competitive bidding. Does this mean all your new hires have to be Philadelphia residents just for the sake of a contract that's worth 5% of your overall business? I'm not sure that's what's intended, and it may be that this reporter hasn't explained things properly. Or it may be that Philly's coming up with a crazy proposal. If a company has to give preference to hiring Philly workers all for the sake of 5% of its business, then that company is NOT going to bid on Philly contracts and the City's going to pay a lot more in procurement because of the reduced competitiveness of the bidding. But maybe something's missing in this story.— CurrerBell
- @CurrerBell; I believe you are correct and that is one of the things that the law is designed to do, i.e. drive away more firms who are not in the correct political loop. Winners are certain politicians, union managers and some rank and file, and certain firms and losers are the most trade unions members, the other politicians, most taxpayers, minority workers trapped at the bottom of a given skill offering and excluded able firms. At the end of the day, the law will have to be changed. The undesirable risk for a firm is if the law is left as-is and selectively enforced like the prevailing rate law. That's protection for union management with teeth!— oneadaysfine
- This is a tragically stupid idea. What needs to happen is for the public transportation system to be improved such that city residents can more easily get to the suburbs, and suburbanites can easily get into the city. Right now, if you live in the western suburbs, there is no realistic way to get into Philly except to drive. And city residents who want to work in the burbs must count on sporadic trains with rare connections to office complexes, or the dreaded SEPTA suburban routes. Improve the transportation to and from the city, and stop limiting the intellectual capital (and tax dollars) available to Philadelphia!— Steffi1
Their vision stems from looking through the wrong end of a municipal drain pipe.- awful lot of union members live in the suburbs.— tony bell
- Scargosun:
I live in Philly and pay taxes in Philly, my son goes to a public school. I want some people in Philly to benefit from those taxes.
I still say if you don't like it, don't do business in Philly!— EIK - City employees can't live outside of the city, except for the police force; so, now, the city will hold hostage private contractors by forcing them to hire Philadelphia employees - is it fair? Maybe not. If Philly were a different kind of town it wouldn't be necessary, but it is troubled and so only the police can escape!!!!— Yob
- This may come as a great shock to some of you, but some of us live in Philly by choice!— EIK
- Philly is no more troubled than any other large city in the US and offers a better life than a number of them. Each urban area has some problems, they are not unique to Philly.— EIK
- This is simple. If you do not want to hire city residents, do not seek city contracts.— Philly Born
- How do I get on "the list?"— Pugh
- And the machine rolls on ....— UncleJoe
- Minority hiring requirements on top of residency requirements on top of union monopolies, and now this. Good grief, this is ridiculous and backward thinking.
Will Council ever come to their senses and legislate that we hire the best person for these jobs so that taxpayers get their money's worth?
Why make so many absurd rules that make it more expensive to use taxpayers money? And then council raises taxes because they waste so much of it?
Absurd, ridiculous and really stupid and supported by two council members who are reputed to actually think occasionally. There is no hope.— GAC - This ridiculous bill creates more pigs at the already shrinking trough.— Just_Recently_Banned
- Did you guys read the whole article? The rule specifically has to do with "private firms and contractors that do at least $25,000 in City of Philadelphia-funded business or receive city financial assistance." This has no effect on any private business that choose to do city work. Granted, there are tons of reasons why it's relatively harder to open and run a business in Philadelphia than it is to do so outside of Philadelphia. And to the Nutter administration's credit, many of those obstacles have been made smaller or removed. But this policy is basically the equivalent of a large customer flexing its purchasing power when dealing with its vendors... basically how capitalism works.— Dixon
- * should say "This has no effect on any private businesses that choose NOT to do city work." — Dixon
- Jerryk2b:
Wrong! I am actually an Independent who used to be a Republican. I cannot accept what the Republican part has become, I will actually vote for a Democrat as a president for the first time in my life!
If you do not live in Philly, then nobody takes your money in Philly. If you want to live in Philly, then you pay for the privilege like the rest of us!— EIK - What gives Philly government the authority to interfere in the way private contractors conduct their businesses? That is not the business of any government.— Falls Ed
There is undoubtedly more here than meets the eye...Some departments employ "consultants" for years. The are de facto city employees, but often cost the city more and duplicate the job of a city employee. Why hire a contractor when you have an entire experienced staff to do the work? No, not because the staff is incompetent. These are companies with PACs that donate to local pols. Some city workers have grumbled about contract employees stealing their work, doing a poor job that has to be remedied by a city worker, and forcing city workers WHO WANT TO WORK to sit on the sidelines.
This legislation may just be throwing a bone to union employees. It might be something more insidious. It's a strange law and $25,000 is peanuts where city contracts are concerned.
The HR office is also part of the problem -- corrupt, full of cronyism, and completely incapable of understanding the jobs they are supposed to filling.
phunnyphilly.wordpress.com/2011/03/13/philly%E2%80%99s-population-has-increased-but-now-we-need-to-find-jobs-for-everybody/— InNane- If firms are getting paid by the city it is not a stretch to hire city residents for entry level work. Just typical fat lazy suburban thinking, come here to exploit the city but they don't want to help at all.— Capsulef
- Way to go City, you just increased the cost of the contract by the cost of the new employee. Now the taxpayers get to pay more for essentially less.— killjoy
- The price of doing city business will now just go up due to Govt interference again. The contractors will have to charge more to pay for the city 'residents' who are given a job with no requirements only for them to sit around. Equal Opportunity at its worst. Continuing to enable really only keeps people down.— keapitreal
- Okay, calm down, all you Teanderthals. This is going to have minimal effect on any business.
First off, they only have to TRY to hire these people.
Secondly, it's only for "first-time entry-level workers".
Thirdly, they can hire anyone they want if they can't find anyone after only 10 days--a week and a half.
I really dislike protectionist bills (i.e.: forcing companies to hire ONLY people who live in the city). That kind of law can bite you in the backside when everyone else starts doing it and suddenly Philly people can't be hired to work in, say, Camden or West Chester.
But this is none of that. It's a gentle nudge, nothing more.— Tatt2 - Here is a question? does this " list of city residents" include those city residents with criminal records co-mingled in with those with no criminal record? and does it also include the "ban the box" rule (the rule making it illegal for employers to have box to check indicating that an applicant has a criminal record)? They make potential employers twist themselves into prezels, bend over backward, hop on one foot, stand on their heads, and then empty their pockets before they can do business in the city or with the city and they wonder why the only businesses which do business in the city are the ones who must be in the city. And we have not even discussed the crime situation yet. Democrats only know how to detroy business activity and are clueless on how to create a business friendly environment which would actually generate tax revenue to support their stupid programs they are always advocating for.— Speak-truth-2-power
- Having a criminal record never stopped me from putting in a good day's work. What I do on my days off is my business. "So when they continued asking him, he lifted up himself, and said unto them, He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone at her." - John 8:7
— bad joe s - another way for council to get there "friends jobs in the patronage business much city council you already have your monkeys all over traffic court and city hall why DUMACRAP everything else up. Bad for business not gone to work people get jobs so they can LEAVE the city— pa2nz
- As an Independent, AND City resident, show me the money and I'll show you what hard work looks like. I can out work ANY (4) out-of-town whiners, so I'll be looking for work as a Foreman. Have clip board & Daily News, will travel [within city limits.]— bad joe s
- Some of the suburbanites should remember one reality that you seem to forget when you try very hard to put Philly down:
There is no "suburban" without "urban", there is no large suburban counties (metropolitan area) without Philly. Whether you admit it or not, you need Philly.
Philly needs to take care of its residents even the ones with criminal records (it's good policy for the city).— EIK - I'm having a really hard time understanding what's wrong with this. City Council isn't saying ALL businesses need to hire City residents, they are saying businesses that are being rewarded contracts FROM THE CITY ITSELF hire residents. I thought the Paid Sick Bill was overreaching, but with 12% unemployment in the City itself I don't see anything wrong with making sure City residents get maximum benefit from City-funded projects rather than suburbanites. And if businesses don't like that, no problem, just don't bid on public projects. Plenty of others will.— Whatjugot
- Don't hire the best people for the job, that would make to much sense .
(MORONS).. Now government wants to tell you who to hire and where you can hire them from. (MORONS)— winter 
How does this new rule make one whit of common sense when Council voted to let city workers live outside of our Faier Countrie Towne? What fools! What tools!— The Monk- Monk-again, let me ask, besides SOME police officers (I believe they have to have 5 years on the job first, I could be wrong), no other city worker is permitted to live outside the city limits legally. Except teachers, God forbid anyone messes with the teachers. Who else do you mean? As a Firefighter, I know I have to live in Philly-I condition of my employment that I happily accepted 0ver 28 years ago, when, admittedly, things were different-I digress. That stated, I know at least one who DOES reside in NJ, but she has that "special" designation, and no one will confront her because of it. Fairness is in the eye of the people who are in charge, I guess... — Genghis
- Only in Taxadelphia can Council write a rule for businesses that they refuse to follow themselves. WHY are any city workers allowed to live outside of Our Faire Countrie Towne when they expect private businesses to hire inner city workers? Stupid is as stupid does.— The Monk
- InNane is right on the money. We know of one "consultant" who is technically under the health department's contractor and called a deputy commissioner by another department who makes $250,000 a year and lives in NJ. To make matters more interesting, he also has an expense account clause that includes car usage, lunches, and additional staff, among other perks. A typical example of who your are related to and politics at its worse.— gb
- Does the city of Philadelphia have problems with corruption and nepotism?
Of course, it does, most cities do (I hope the FBI, the voters and others will get rid of some of it). However, that does not automatically make every rule passed by the City Council stupid/nonworkable/not good for the city.
As for the "merit" selection of people, "merit" is in the eye of the beholder. Nepotism/discrimination/preferences exist even in the private companies. I know because I have gone to some of the top schools in this country (on "merit" scholarships). I have seen a lot of people with questionable "merit" but with the right "pedigree" get a lot of high paying jobs in private businesses.
I have also gained a very good "good old boys network" who are the alumni of the schools that I have gone to who are willing to put their own alumni at the head of the line!
That's part of the "merit" in the private businesses as well: who you know sometimes trumps what you know in public and private!
— EIK - .."to hire "first-time entry-level workers" from a list of city residents, to do city-funded work"...
Question: Who is going to have the responsibility to compile the list, and where is the names of residents going to come from ??? Please tell me, not City Council!!!— Dadair1 
I think the city should just pay people from outside the city to do the work for its residents, outside of the city, by taking the poorest drug addicts and homeless and parking them Longwood Gardens.
What a crock. Why hire inept city folk when you can get more qualified sububan people who really WANT to work?— Ben Fan- haha this is hilarious! way to go philly! keep losing all the talent to other areas. Business privelage tax, high payroll tax, parking, crime infested, property value sky rocketing past the median household. Who is going want to invest there? Oh thats right the criminal defense attorneys,Eagles,Sixers,Flyers,Phillies and Comcast. Maybe they can make the high rises into state of the art correctional facilities once they force all the business out. It will be like the "Escape from Philly" one big jail..haha— Ameriett
- No, dum-dum, this is how you keep tax expenditures within the city.— 1972bline
-
the city is unsafe. Crime is everywhere. Taxes are ridiculous. And now, this?— Joe Nickels
1
Popular Posts
About this blog
Joseph N. DiStefano blogs about the latest news in the Philadelphia business community and elsewhere. Contact him at 215-854-5194.
Reach Joseph N. at JoeD@phillynews.com.
Joseph N. DiStefano
Classifieds:
Site Services:
Partners: