Pilot-Credits IPpc90: Social equity within the operations and maintenance staff 1 point

Submittals

General

• Participate in the LEEDuser pilot credit forum
• Complete the feedback survey:

Documentation/Submittals:

Option 1:

• a. Provide a signed statement from the General Contractor / Construction Manager (as applicable) certifying that 60% or more of the construction value was performed by contractors paying worker wages and benefits that meet or exceed the prevailing wage determined by the Federal Davis-Bacon Act, or applicable State prevailing wage statutes.
• b- 1.) Provide a signed statement and calculations from the General Contractor/ Construction Manager (as applicable) demonstrating that 15% or more of total project construction hours were performed by participants enrolled in registered apprenticeship programs.
• b-2. Provide a signed statement and narrative from the General Contractor / Construction Manager (as applicable) describing the on-site training program. Include the contact information for the training provider including contact name, organization, email, phone, and website, number of sessions provided, and total attendance. Submit course schedule demonstrating one course per month for the duration of construction, at minimum.
• b-3.) Provide copies of company policy/agreements demonstrating the dollar value and nature of the assistance available to employees, with a signed statement and calculations from the General Contractor / Construction Manager (as applicable) certifying that 60% or more of the construction value was performed by contractors providing financial assistance to employees to attend off-site training programs.

Option 2:

• Provide a spreadsheet for the ownership or design or construction team structure listing all equity shareholders or design or construction contract holders and the percent of equity shares or total contract value held by each participant, including subconsultants and subcontractors down to 5% of contract or equity value. Identify the participants counting towards the 50% or 20% threshold, and provide a copy of the relevant certificate or report meeting the listed standards. See the example below for reporting the ownership structure and means of meeting credit requirements; similar tables can be used for the design or construction team.
• Provide a signed letter from the CEO or organization official confirming all Human Rights and Community/Society impacts listed in this credit have been addressed. See template under Resources. Include a link to the publicly-viewable report/documentation.
• If using JUST or B Corp., submit confirmation that the label or certification has been achieved.
• For all other certifications, complete the Checklist located in the Resources section of this pilot credit.

Option 3 (Alternative Compliance Path):

1. Intent of the proposed strategy
   • How does it meet the intent and goals of this pilot credit? How does it address the social responsibility elements listed above?
2. Requirements for compliance
   • What metric(s) are used to measure success? How is the level of effort or rigor equivalent to the existing options?
3. Submittals – Documentation to demonstrate compliance
   • Alternative Compliance Path #1 for Option 1: State or local programs may be accepted that demonstrate compliance with the requirements of this option. In order to follow this compliance path, project teams must submit confirmation of their participation or the relevant certification from the program. Projects may only pursue state or local programs if they are located within the geographic region served by the program.
   • Projects located in the State of Texas (United States) may achieve certification through the Better Builder® Program (BBP), which establishes a set of standards to ensure good and safe working conditions and safeguard the livelihood of the local construction workforce. In the case of the BBP, project teams must submit the final certification confirmation letter received from the program.
   OR
   • Alternative Compliance Path #2 for Option 1: An additional alternative compliance path for projects within the United States is to submit documentation showing that employees are paid a living wage using the Glasmeier MIT Living Wage Calculator. Outside the U.S., applicants can show they are paying a living wage instead of prevailing wage:
   • For countries where it’s available, the Living Wage should be the one published by the Global Living Wage Coalition (GLWC). If no Living Wage is published, applicants could estimate their own living wage per the GLWC methodology; also see the sample calculation and the technical users guide from the MIT Living Wage Calculator. The resulting living wage should reference the World Bank poverty threshold (i.e. 305% of the World Bank poverty line in the country).
   • If housing is provided as part of employment, it should be included per GLWC methodology, including meeting standards of decency for housing, being counted at cost with no profit, and capped at 30% of total compensation. Even when housing is included, workers should be paid enough to live freely in the area with their families. If incentive pay or overtime are included in wages, their inclusion should follow GLWC methodology.
   • Applicants should describe their methods for assurance that actual wages paid match the stated pay. For instance, describe the auditing processes for wages (ideally meeting SA-8000), or a collective bargaining agreement (if one is in place).
OR
4. Alternative Compliance Path for Option 2: An organization may achieve certification or develop a social responsibility report based on a CSR framework not yet listed in the pilot credit. Project teams must submit a completed Checklist and Signed Letter, verifying that all criteria are met and providing the name and website for the framework.
5. Design approach or strategies - Provide a narrative description if not sufficiently addressed in the information listed above.

Survey Questions for Project Team:

1. Where is your project located? Did location make a difference in compliance with the credit requirements?
2. Did pursuing this credit generate debate, discussion or adoption of new practices intended to benefit social equity, or did standard practice (e.g. for government projects) allow your team to meet the requirements? Please provide detail.
3. Did pursuing this credit influence selection of project team members? If so, how?
4. Are there other issues related to social equity within the project team -- but not covered by the certifications listed -- that you think should be given credit in addition to the pathways included in this pilot version?
5. Are the metrics and thresholds for achievement appropriate for the path pursued? If no, what would be a better metric, or threshold and why?
6. Are the option paths equivalent? If no, please explain.
7. Does this one credit adequately address issues of compensation and social equity in the project team? If no, please explain.
8. Should the Option Paths remain in one credit, or split into multiple credits? If multiple credits are necessary, please explain.