While most states offer clear prevailing wage guidance for broadband builds, Pennsylvania’s BEAD program has come under fire for confusing classifications, missing job roles, and audit risks that contractors say could burn unsuspecting bidders.
Pennsylvania’s project-specific prevailing wage system is under increased scrutiny as broadband providers, contractors, and lawmakers raise concerns that the state’s complex wage determination process makes it harder to expand broadband efficiently in rural areas. Unlike most states that establish geographic prevailing wage rates, Pennsylvania’s Department of Labor and Industry (L&I) determines wage classifications on a per-project basis—often after the project has begun or even been completed. This leaves contractors vulnerable to cost overruns and wage reclassification, with little recourse for reimbursement.
On March 26, 2025, State Representative Tina Pickett issued a press release stating she had introduced legislation to reclassify broadband infrastructure workers from “electric linemen” to “teledata employees” under the state’s prevailing wage law. The goal is to reduce labor costs on rural broadband expansion projects so federal BEAD (Broadband Equity, Access, and Deployment) funds can go further.
However, there is no bill text yet, and as of this writing, nothing has been officially introduced in the House. What exists is a press release and a call for co-sponsors. This lack of substance has not stopped some media outlets from inaccurately reporting that the bill has been introduced.
Even if Pickett’s measure moves forward, it faces significant hurdles. L&I has repeatedly declined to create a separate classification for teledata workers. Pickett proposes to make the change via publicity—a symbolic gesture that may bring attention to the issue but carries no legal weight to alter current classifications.
That’s only the beginning of the challenge
Unlike most states, which use standardized, geographically based prevailing wage rates, Pennsylvania sets them on a project-by-project basis for their BEAD projects. This system creates tremendous uncertainty for contractors attempting to bid on broadband projects, including installing cell towers. Even when prevailing wage rates are available in advance through the Pennsylvania Broadband Development Authority, L&I reserves the right to review each project individually. That review can come after a project is completed.
Contractors who bid and pay workers based on the expected classification might later find that L&I reclassifies the job as a higher-paid position, such as electric lineman or ironworker. If that happens, contractors must pay the difference retroactively—and they will likely be unable to recover those costs from their clients.
For example, a fiber-optic technician might be paid around $55/hour in the private sector, while electric linemen under prevailing wage rules can earn more than $90/hour. Similarly, a tower technician might perform work that overlaps with ironworking duties, for which the prevailing rate in Pennsylvania is $37.26/hour—lower than union ironworker wages but still far higher than typical broadband labor costs.
In neighboring New Jersey, prevailing wages are set by county, allowing contractors to plan more accurately. For steel erection in New Jersey, workers can earn $61/hour with an additional $40/hour in fringe benefits.
During a recent budget hearing, L&I Secretary Nancy Walker reiterated that the department bases its decisions on data from collective bargaining agreements, job duties, and wage surveys. She acknowledged that new data is being submitted and a wage classification appeal in Warren County is being reviewed. However, these processes take time, and the lack of clarity will likely affect the rollout of Pennsylvania’s $1.16 billion in BEAD funding.
Industry voices, including the Broadband Communications Association of Pennsylvania, have pushed for reclassification for over a year. Still, contractors will remain precarious until the L&I takes formal action or legislation is passed with apparent authority.
While Pickett’s proposal highlights a real problem, it offers no immediate solution. Without structural reform to Pennsylvania’s prevailing wage process, broadband expansion projects will continue to be burdened by unpredictability, cost overruns, and delayed delivery—and the workers caught in the middle will keep getting paid too much or too little, with contractors stuck holding the bag, according to three wireless infrastructure contractors – all of them hesistant to provide project bids.
