An Act Concerning A Contractor's Responsibility For Unpaid Wages On A Construction Contract.
Summary
HB 5275 would make contractors jointly and severally liable for unpaid wages owed to employees of subcontractors on covered construction contracts entered into on or after October 1, 2026. The bill defines “construction contract” broadly for private construction, renovation, and rehabilitation work in Connecticut, while excluding public works contracts and most owner-occupied home improvement projects, with an exception for larger developments involving more than fifteen one- or two-family dwelling units at one site.
The bill also amends the state wage-collection statute, Section 31-72, to allow an employee or labor organization to sue the subcontractor, the contractor, or both when a subcontractor fails to pay wages for work within the scope of a covered construction contract. Before suing a contractor, the employee must generally give the contractor at least 30 days’ notice of the alleged subcontractor wage violation. The bill preserves existing wage remedies, including double damages, costs, attorney’s fees, and Labor Commissioner enforcement authority, and it bars contract clauses that would waive or release a contractor’s statutory liability.
Impact
The bill would expand Connecticut wage-payment enforcement in the construction industry by extending liability beyond the direct employer to upstream contractors on private projects. It would create a new statutory duty and exposure for contractors on covered construction contracts, while leaving public works and most small residential projects outside the new rule. It would also revise Section 31-72 to expressly authorize civil actions against contractors in subcontractor wage cases and to preserve the employee’s right to recover statutory wage remedies.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill had generally favorable support in the Labor and Public Employees Committee, passing on a 9-4 joint favorable vote. No committee transcript is provided, so there is no recorded floor or hearing debate to indicate broader public reaction. The vote pattern suggests the proposal was viewed positively by a majority of committee members, likely reflecting support for stronger wage protections in construction.
Contention
The main point of contention is likely the shift of wage liability to contractors who may not be the direct employer of the affected workers. Supporters would view this as a way to deter wage theft and ensure workers are paid when subcontractors fail to do so, while opponents may argue it imposes additional legal and financial risk on contractors for conduct they do not directly control. The notice requirement before suing a contractor appears designed to address some of that concern by giving contractors an opportunity to respond, but the bill also makes clear that liability cannot be waived by contract.
An Act Concerning The Assignment Of Post-loss Homeowners And Commercial Property Insurance Benefits And Revising Disclosure Requirements For Home Improvement Contractors And Salespersons.
An Act Concerning The Development Of A Pilot Program For The Collection Of Unpaid Taxes From State Contractors And The Department Of Revenue Services' Recommendations For Revisions To The Tax And Related Statutes.
An Act Redefining "state Contractor", "prospective State Contractor" And "subcontractor" To Exclude Statutorily Recognized Indian Tribes Of This State For Purposes Of Campaign Finance Laws.