A RepoRt on the ImpAct of the SeptembeR 11 bIddeRS RegIStRy And the AppARel WoRkeRS fAIR lAboR condItIonS And pRocuRement Act on StAte pRocuRement A Report on the Impact of the Septembe by ncs14743


More Info
									A RepoRt on the
ImpAct of the
SeptembeR 11
bIddeRS RegIStRy
the AppARel WoRkeRS
fAIR lAboR condItIonS
And pRocuRement Act
on StAte pRocuRement
      A Report on the Impact of the September Eleventh Bidders Registry
       and the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement
                          Act on State Procurement

I. Background
Since 1986, Article 12A of the New York State Labor Law requires all Apparel Industry Manufacturers and
Contractors to register each year if they produce garments or accessories for garments in New York State. In 2003,
the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act was signed into law to:

    (1) Establish a September Eleventh Bidders Registry (hereafter “Registry”) to assist eligible apparel
        manufacturers with recovery from the adverse business effects of the 2001 World Trade Center attacks
        by allowing them to register with the New York State Department of Labor (hereafter “NYSDOL”) and
        receive preferential treatment in connection with public procurements of apparel and textile goods
        manufactured by the registrants; and

    (2) Ensure that various public entities purchasing apparel and textiles shall not purchase from any vendor
        unable or unwilling to certify that such apparel was manufactured in compliance with all applicable
        labor and occupational safety laws, including but not limited to, child labor laws, wage and hour laws,
        and workplace safety laws.

The Registry and the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act sunset on September 1, 2008.
Legislation making these provisions permanent was vetoed in 2007 by Governor Spitzer, who asked that an
analysis be done to determine the effectiveness of these laws. (See attached veto message). This Report evalu-
ates how these provisions have been implemented and makes recommendations in light of the sunset date.

Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act:

The Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act amended Article 11 Section 162 of the New
York State Finance Law by adding a new subdivision 4-a requiring that bidders for apparel or textile competitive
contracts: 1) attest that such apparel was manufactured in compliance with all applicable labor and occupational
safety laws, including, but not limited to, child labor laws, wage and hour laws, and workplace safety laws; 2)
state, if known, the name and address of each subcontractor to be utilized; 3) state, if known, all manufacturing
plants utilized by the bidder or subcontractor; and 4) provide documentation of the above.

Labor Department Responsibility for the September Eleventh Bidders Registry:

The Registry established by the NYSDOL was created as a preferred source for purposes of competitive bids and
contract awards for apparel or textile procurements. The law provides participating qualified registrant bidders
up to a 15% preference over an otherwise responsive and responsible bidder.

Manufacturers and contractors who meet the requirements of the law must register with the NYSDOL. Registered
bidders must meet certain requirements and be free of violations of New York State Workers’ Compensation Law,
or any state or federal labor law, rule or regulation for the previous five years. The Registry is maintained by the
NYSDOL and was made available to all state agencies via the NYSDOL website in late 2003.

Following the creation of the Registry, the NYSDOL issued regulations setting forth the procedures for approving
September Eleventh Registered Bidders (hereafter “9/11 Bidders”) and twice solicited every apparel manufactur-
er or contractor registered pursuant to Labor Law, Section 341 to encourage them to apply to be placed on the
Registry if it was impacted by the September 11th attacks. (See attached regulations.) Approximately 130 applica-
tions from contractors and manufacturers were received as a result of these solicitations. After review, only 70
firms met all of the standards required for placement on the Registry.

    II. Summary of Findings and Recommendations
    Information obtained through surveys of 9/11 Bidders and discussion with the New York State Office of Gen-
    eral Services (hereafter “NYSOGS”) indicate that very few manufacturers approved to be on the Registry have
    benefited by the procurement preference. Furthermore, although NYSOGS sought to have bidders certify their
    compliance with the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act, this aspect of the law has been
    difficult to monitor and enforce.

    Information obtained through surveys of 9/11 Bidders and discussions with NYSOGS indicate that the Registry,
    while well intentioned, realized limited success. In addition, while 9/11 Bidders were required to comply with
    the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act, aggressive monitoring and enforcement pres-
    ent numerous challenges. NYSDOL’s findings were based on implementation and procurement practices of the
    Pataki administration.

    While these provisions are laudable, the NYSDOL finds that they fell short of their original intent, and, therefore,
    the NYSDOL recommends that New York State develop improved policies and mechanisms to ensure that ap-
    parel and textiles purchased by state entities are manufactured under sweatfree conditions.1 New York State
    could consider more effective and proactive approaches to achieve this goal. Two options would be to establish
    a New York State “sweatfree” procurement policy and code of conduct, and to join with a growing number of
    like-minded state and local governments to form a Consortium to maximize and better focus resources on this

    III. Factors Supporting the Findings and Recommendations

    The following factors support the findings and recommendations of the NYSDOL with regard to the
    sunset of the Registry and the establishment of a sweatfree procurement policy and code of conduct, set
    forth above.

        A. Survey of September Eleventh Bidders:

    Since 2003 the number of apparel manufacturers and contractors in New York State has decreased, mainly due to
    foreign competition. Currently the Registry contains only 39 firms. To determine what impact, if any, inclusion on
    the Registry had on these firms, a telephone poll of 9/11 Bidders was conducted in January, 2008 by the Division
    of Labor Standards. The questions asked of the poll participants and the results of the poll were as follows:

        1)   What type of production are you engaged in?

             11                Components of garments (not finished garments)
             7                 Uniforms
             7                 Women’s apparel
             2                 Ladies intimates
             2                 Ladies Sportswear
             1                 Each Belts, ties, computerized patterns, wedding gowns, custom shirts, T-
                               shirts(supplied and silkscreened), leather sportswear, high visibility safety clothing and

        2)   Were you solicited to bid on state and local government apparel contracts?
             Yes – 8 No – 31

        3)   Did you bid on any of these contracts?
             Yes – 6 No – 2

        (Respondents mentioned contract bids for the Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, NYPD, and NYFD.)

        4)   Were you awarded any of these contracts?
             Yes – 5 No – 1

        (Respondents mentioned Triborough Bridge and Tunnel Authority, NYPD, and NYFD.)

    1          In addition to being of limited effectiveness, the law may also have constrained local initiatives aimed at
    sweatshop purchases. See Mayor of the City of New York v. Council of the City of New York, 789 N.Y.S.2d 860 (Sup.
    Ct. N.Y. Cty. 2004)
     5)   Did inclusion on the Registry help your business?
          Yes – 4 No – 35

     6)   Would you bid on contracts if solicited in the future?
          Yes – 21 No – 14 Not Sure – 4
(Nineteen of the 21 firms that responded “Yes” qualified their answer by limiting their willingness to bid to items
which their companies produce.)

B. New York State Office of General Services Contract Experience

The NYSDOL contacted NYSOGS and requested information on the effect of the Registry on the procurement

NYSOGS offers competitive bidding opportunities on various products and services including, apparel and tex-
tiles. These bids use the state’s buying power to seek volume discounts resulting from its vast market potential.
These discounted prices are enforced by contract and state agencies are authorized to purchase products at a
pre-negotiated price rather than pursuing individual agency procurements. However, New York State Finance
Law provides flexibility to its agencies, and it is not uncommon for individual agencies to seek alternative prod-
ucts based on its specific form, function or utility.

NYSOGS negotiates several statewide contracts for apparel and textiles based on an estimate of the amount of
potential purchases for the product, which will be made in the future by state agencies. State agencies then may
receive the NYSOGS-negotiated purchase price for these items approved under the Procurement Services Group
(hereafter “PSG”) contracts. State agencies are not required to use these contracts for their own buying; further-
more, NYSOGS purchase contracts do not cover every type of apparel or textile contract so some state agencies
must let such contracts out to bid and must do so in compliance with state procurement law.

On December 2, 2003, after the NYSDOL issued rules and regulations regarding the Registry, NYSOGS issued a
purchasing memorandum to all state agencies, which outlined the procedures and policies for the Registry. (See
attached.) The purchasing memo informed state agencies that bidders were also required to meet the require-
ments of the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act. The notice provided sample language
that state agencies could use in all solicitations for apparel and textiles.

NYSOGS included information about the Registry preference in all of its procurement contract bids. It also at-
tached a “Certificate of Manufacture” that all 9/11 Bidders were required to complete that would indicate the
bidder’s compliance with the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act. NYSOGS encouraged
state agencies to do the same.

According to NYSOGS’ records, very few of its contracts were impacted by the Registry preference. Only one of
its PSG contract bids for apparel and textiles was awarded under the conditions extended to a registered 9/11
Bidder. Either the contracts awarded by NYSOGS had no bidders from the Registry or the bids by the 9/11 Bidders
were 15% or higher than the lowest bidder. (A list of the bid results and effect of the Registry can be seen in the
Appendix at the end of this document.)

Bidders for NYSOGS contracts were also required to complete the Certificate of Manufacture, and certify under
penalty of perjury that they were in compliance with the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procure-
ment Act. NYSOGS does not have a mechanism to enforce the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Pro-
curement Act or to monitor the suppliers. NYSOGS recently reviewed the bid application from a bidder that was
awarded an NYSOGS contract, and found that although the bidder attested that its product was manufactured in
compliance with all applicable labor and occupational safety laws, the United States Department of Labor’s Occu-
pational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) had issued over a dozen OSHA violations against the bidder’s
plants that were handling the NYSOGS contract.

Monitoring of suppliers by state governments is difficult for many reasons. Some state government procurement
entities are exploring the use of a third party organization for monitoring and enforcement. This strategy has
been used effectively by universities and colleges to ensure that their collegiate sports apparel is not manufac-
tured under sweatshop conditions.

In March 2008, NYSOGS sent letters to the 70 companies on the Registry notifying them of an upcoming bid for
State Police hats and advising them to register on its automated notification system. Correspondence to 26 of
these companies was returned as undeliverable.

    C. Other State Agency Experience

    Each state agency is responsible for following the New York State Finance Law governing procurement, including
    the 9/11 Bidders preference. State agencies are not required to report their purchases; as a result, a performance
    measurement associated with the program is incomplete.

    The NYSDOL has no reason to believe, however, that other state agencies would have a different experience than
    NYSOGS in regard to the 9/11 Bidders preference. For its own part, the NYSDOL traditionally strives to purchase
    apparel and textiles that are “Made in the USA.” Since 2003, however, the NYSDOL has no record of having bid
    any apparel items, so it has not had to systematically apply the 9/11 Bidders’ preference or the requirements of
    the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act to its procurement procedures.

    D. Garment Industry in New York State

    Article 12A of the New York State Labor Law requires all Apparel Industry Manufacturers and Contractors to reg-
    ister each year with the NYSDOL, on or before January 15th, if they produce garments or accessories for garments
    in New York State. Registration ensures that apparel firms meet basic standards such as maintaining Workers’
    Compensation/Disability Insurance, providing Unemployment Insurance coverage, and paying outstanding civil
    penalties. The Garment Industry Registration Database is posted on NYSDOL’s website so that garment business-
    es can find out immediately whether their current and potential contractors are registered.
    The law requires that apparel firms do business only with registered apparel contractors and manufacturers.
    When a retailer works directly with a contractor to produce garments, the retailer is considered a manufacturer
    and must register. A garment contractor that fails to register is breaking state law. Although such illegal contrac-
    tors routinely can produce garments at lower cost than shops that comply with legal requirements, a company
    that enters into a contract with an illegal contractor faces the possibility of civil penalties, criminal fines, and the
    loss of goods that are illegally produced. Doing business with an illegal operation also means a company runs the
    risk of having its public reputation damaged.

    Despite these regulations, illegal contractors, also known as sweatshops, continue to operate in New York State
    illegally as part of the underground economy. They typically are fly-by-night operations that can pack and
    move quickly from one place to another, sometimes across state lines. Sweatshops flourish because of the huge
    competitive advantage they hold over legitimate businesses that pay fair wages, provide safe working condi-
    tions, pay taxes and contribute to the economic and social health of New York State and the nation. Sweatshop
    employment may involve fire hazards, electrical hazards, safety hazards, health hazards, structural dangers, wage
    violations, child labor, industrial homework, registration violations and tax irregularities.

    NYSDOL’s Apparel Industry Task Force members investigate New York State’s garment shops, where they inspect
    working conditions, review employee records and examine registration certificates. To meet registration require-
    ments, contractors must provide workers’ compensation insurance as well as comply with other state laws that
    govern the production of apparel and accessories to apparel. The Task Force issues violation notices to busi-
    nesses that break state laws covering registration, child labor, wages and benefits, working hours and industrial
    homework. In addition, when Task Force investigators find sweatshop conditions that seem to violate state or
    federal safety and health laws, or local building and fire codes, the Task Force will alert the appropriate regulatory

    State entities that contract with New York State registered apparel contractors and manufacturers have reason-
    able assurance that the apparel was made in compliance with New York State laws. Most other states do not
    regulate their apparel manufacturing industries as closely as New York State. Moreover, apparel is increasingly
    being produced outside of the United States in countries with substandard working conditions. Out-of-state
    bidders must simply attest that their apparel was made in compliance with the law, and New York State has no
    way to verify that the bidders’ attestations are true. In contrast, bidders who are contractors and manufacturers
    from New York State must register and follow the law or face tough consequences. Currently, New York State
    registered contractors and manufacturers are placed at a disadvantage when they are forced to compete with
    out-of-state businesses that do not comply with labor laws.

E. Workers’ Rights Conditions Related to Existing New York State Apparel Contracts:

While state contracts are regularly awarded to suppliers, little is known about the manufacturers of the textiles
and apparel that they use. State agency application of the provisions of the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Condi-
tions and Procurement Act is unknown, but it is believed to be rather limited. Under current mechanisms, state
agencies do not have the tools to ensure compliance with this Act.

Workers’ rights advocates have alleged to the NYSDOL that some of the suppliers that contract with New York
State have records on workers’ rights which, if proven, would violate the Fair Labor Conditions and Procure-
ment Act. Sweatfree Communities, a national network of anti-sweatshop campaigns, released a report on July
1, 2008 entitled Subsidizing Sweatshops: How Our Tax Dollars Fund the Race to the Bottom, and What Cities and
States Can Do, which revealed severe labor and human rights violations in factories that make public employee
uniforms for the federal, state, and local government. Violations included use of child labor; illegally low pov-
erty wages; forced and unpaid overtime; verbal, physical, and sexual abuse; pregnancy testing, excessively long
work hours causing physical ailments; disregard for freedom of speech or association; and elaborate schemes to
deceive corporate auditors.

The Subsidizing Sweatshops Report showed how government purchasing and tax dollars can inadvertently in-
crease the downward pressure on labor rights, wages, and working conditions, and undermine U.S. manufactur-
ing and service jobs. The report also pointed to the need for governments to require disclosure of vendors’ sup-
plier factory locations and to create a process for independent investigation of those sites. The report suggested
that a collaborative sweatfree effort among state and local governments would be most effective.

F. Other Considerations:

Increasingly, apparel and textiles are being manufactured outside of New York State and the United States. Few
New York State public agencies receive adequate and reliable information from vendors confirming that their
manufacturers are complying with basic labor laws. Even when vendors certify that their manufacturers are in
compliance, public entities have no way of monitoring these workplaces to confirm the truth of these statements.

Similarly, states, cities, counties, local government agencies and school districts – like private consumers and
businesses – are increasingly concerned with purchasing goods that have been made in workplaces free of
sweatshop conditions. Many have developed and adopted a sweatfree purchasing policy, but it is difficult to
implement and enforce these policies. Resources for, and expertise in, factory monitoring and remediation pro-
grams are required. If a sweatfree policy is adopted but not enforced, taxpayers’ commitment to ethical purchas-
ing is thwarted. However, a consortium of states, local governments and school districts could have a greater
chance for success by pooling resources and expertise.

Enforcement has been the single greatest challenge for all public entities that have adopted a sweatfree procure-
ment policy. No single state, local government, or school district has adequate resources to monitor and verify
working conditions and enforce sweatfree standards at supplier factories beyond their immediate jurisdiction.
Public entities committed to sweatfree procurement are now pooling resources to conduct factory monitoring
and inspections and coordinating policy enforcement to ensure code of conduct compliance.

IV. Sweatfree Consortium Approach:
A growing number of states and local governments have joined in a collaborative effort for sweatfree purchas-
ing, called the State and Local Government Sweatfree Consortium. The purpose of the Sweatfree Consortium is
to develop:

    •	   Best practices and procurement policies to end taxpayer support for sweatshop abuse, including bind-
         ing codes of conduct, disclosure of supplier factories, independent investigations of factories and reme-
         diation of worker rights violations;
    •	   Cost-effective and reliable independent monitoring mechanisms and inspections of contractor and
         subcontractor places of manufacturing; and
    •	   A purchasing consortium to facilitate procurement from sweatfree supplier factories.

While the goal of the Consortium is sweatfree public procurement, it is up to each public entity to determine
the best way of implementing sweatfree procurement goals, because the intent was not to adopt a one-size-
fits-all model. The Consortium is developing a governance structure that encourages active participation by the
signatory public entities, a budget and funding mechanisms. Member public entities will contribute toward the
operational budget of the Consortium.
    The State and Local Government Sweatfree Consortium is modeled on the Worker Rights Consortium, a coalition
    of universities that have joined together to enact and enforce sweatfree procurement policies for university ap-
    parel. The Consortium approach strives to yield:

              •	   Benefits to governments and taxpayers: Joint monitoring through the consortium seeks
                   to avoid duplication of government budgets and staff efforts in conducting investigations of
                   contractors and subcontractors, and foster more efficient and cost-effective purchasing through
                   cooperative sweatfree contracting.
              •	   Benefits to manufacturers and vendors: Uniform sweatfree procurement rules across jurisdic-
                   tions, and consistent application and enforcement of those rules would simplify compliance and
                   ensure a fair and level playing field.
              •	   Benefits to factories: Fair purchasing practices, fair prices that enable the manufacturer to oper-
                   ate in compliance with applicable laws, and consolidation of orders would enable factories meet-
                   ing basic standards to compete fairly for government contracts.
              •	   Benefits to workers: Enforcement of sweatfree procurement policies means that workers pro-
                   ducing goods for public purchasing work under decent and humane conditions.

    V. Findings and Recommendations
    The NYSDOL concludes that while both the Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act and the
    Registry reflect a significant public interest and serve a laudable purpose, neither has proven to be an effective
    vehicle for achieving this purpose. Without provisions requiring that New York State apparel be produced in a
    sweatfree manner and a system for monitoring compliance with sweatshop-free specifications, vendors and their
    suppliers operate below the radar, resulting in abuse and exploitation.

    New York State should consider sound public policies that meet the goals of strengthening labor law enforce-
    ment, fiscal accountability and transparency, and ethical contracting. Independent monitoring and reporting of
    suppliers’ manufacturing are critical to enforcement of a sweatfree code of conduct by vendors.

    No single state has adequate resources to monitor working conditions and hold suppliers accountable to sweat-
    free principles. The Consortium approach could enable New York State to consolidate purchasing with other
    public entities and coordinate fair purchasing policies to the benefit of both the buyers and the producers.

    In conclusion, it is recommended that New York State determine whether joining the State and Local Govern-
    ment Sweatfree Consortium White Paper would be in the best interest of New York State, or alternatively,
    whether there are other approaches that would be better suited to the goal of ensuring that state procurement
    is conducted in a manner that would not support sweatshops or other enterprises that do not comply with New
    York State legal standards.


1. Governor’s Veto Message No. 64, 2007

2. New York State Department of Labor Regulations for the Special September Eleventh
   Bidders Registry

3. New York State Office of General Services Purchasing Memorandum on
   September Eleventh Bidders Registry

4. New York State Office of General Services Survey of its Contracts and the Effect of the
   September Eleventh Bidders Preference, 2003-2007

                                                 VETO MESSAGE - No. 64

    I am returning herewith, without my approval, the following bill:

    Senate Bill Number 4472, entitled:

      “AN ACT to amend the labor law and the state finance law, in
       relation to September eleventh bidders registry and to amend chap-
       ter 350 of the laws of 2002, enacting the New York state apparel
       workers fair labor conditions and procurement act, in relation to
       the effectiveness thereof”


     This bill seeks to make permanent those portions of the New York State
    Apparel Workers Fair Labor Conditions and Procurement Act (“Act”) which
    created the Special September Eleventh Bidders Registry (“Registry”),
    and to impose additional administrative responsibilities on the New York
    State Department of Labor (“DOL”) with respect to the Registry.

     The Registry, which was authorized in 2002, gives preferred status on
    competitive bids let by State agencies and public authorities to apparel
    and textile manufacturers and contractors who were adversely impacted by
    the events of September 11, 2001. There currently are approximately 70
    companies on the Registry, and if any of these companies bids on a
    competitive State or public authority contract, and its bid is no more
    than 15% greater than the lowest bid, that the company will be awarded
    the contract. Those provisions of the Act were intended to be temporary
    and to expire on September 1, 2005, but since have been extended twice
    until September 1, 2008.

     The Registry has served a very laudable and necessary purpose -- on
    providing assistance to those companies that were seriously harmed by
    the events of September 11th. The attacks on the World Trade Center
    placed a large number of apparel companies at a significant disadvan-
    tage, and the Registry sought to “level the playing field” with their
    competitors. During the past six years, the Registry has helped to
    achieve that goal.

     These temporary benefits should not be continued in perpetuity, howev-
    er, because the preference given to these 70 companies makes it harder
    for other apparel companies to compete, and increases costs to the
    State’s taxpayers. Moreover, the adverse impacts of the World Trade
    Center attacks have diminished over time, thereby reducing the need for
    continuing these preferences. Thus, I cannot support the portion of this
    bill that makes those provisions permanent. Moreover, the additional
    administrative responsibilities that the bill places on DOL relating to
    the Registry are duplicative and unnecessary.

 Fortunately, more than a year remains before any of these provisions
expire. During that time period, I am asking DOL and the Empire State
Development Corporation to undertake a review of the impact of the
Registry on the apparel industry in New York State, and to report back
to me and to the State Legislature as to whether the bidding preferences
and other provisions in the 2002 law should be continued beyond the
scheduled September 2008 sunset date.

 The bill is disapproved.         (signed) ELIOT SPITZER




New York State Office of General Services Survey of its Contracts and
the Effect of the September Eleventh Bidders Preference

The list of New York State Office of General Services Procurement Services Group contracts and the effect of the
9/11 Bidders preference from 2003 to the present include:

1. The September Eleventh Bidders Registry (hereafter “Registry”) language was listed in the bid for Uniform Hats
   for statewide use by law enforcement agencies. The contract was awarded 4/15/2004 and expires 5/31/2008.
   The award was made to the only bid received, Stratton Hats, Inc.; therefore, this award was not impacted by
   the Registry preference.

Vendor Information: Stratton Hats, Inc.
                     3200 Randolph Street
                     Bellwood, IL 60104
                     Contract Value: $445,600.00


2. The Registry language was in the contract for Men’s Dress Shirts, from 3/29/05- 4/30/2008 for use by only
   the Department of Correctional Services. It was awarded based on the September Eleventh preference to
   Standard Manufacturing Co., Inc. The contract value is based on the estimated value for the contract term of
   approximately 3 years and will not be renewed based on small dollar value and single agency usage.

Vendor Information: Standard Manufacturing Co., Inc.
                    750 Second Ave.
                    Troy, NY 12182
                    Contract Value: $117,000


3. The Registry language was in the bid for Protective Outerwear for Firefighting, Safety, Industrial and Hazard-
   ous Control Usage on 9/8/05. The contract is still in effect through December 31, 2010. Awards were not im-
   pacted by the Registry preference. These are statewide contracts based on estimated values for the contract
   term of approximately 5 years for both state and non-state users.

Vendor Information:    Fire-Dex, Inc.
                       780 S. Progress Drive
                       Medina, OH 44256
                       Contract Value: $400,000.00

                       Globe Manufacturing Co., LLC
                       37 Loudon Road
                       Pittsfield, NH 03263
                       Contract Value: $210,000.00

                       Lion Apparel Inc.
                       6450 Poe Avenue
                       Dayton, OH 45413
                       Contract Value: $577,000.00

                       Quaker Safety Products Corp.
                       103 S. Main Street
                       Quakertown, PA 18951
                       Contract Value: $400,000.00

                       Saf-Gard Safety Shoe Co.
                       1285 Manheim Pike
                       Lancaster, PA 17601
                       Contract Value: $400,000.00                                                                  17
                            Sam’s Shoe Service
                            20 E. Genesee Street
                            Auburn, NY 13021
                            Contract Value: $968,000.00

                            Total Fire Group
                            Morning Pride Mfg., LLC
                            1 Innovation Court
                            Dayton, OH 45414
                            Contract Value: $15,529,000.00 (NOTE: state agency expenditures show
                            much less volume of usage)

                            Lehigh Safety Shoe Co., LLC (PC62469)
                            39 East Canal Street
                            Nelsonville, OH 45764
                            Contract Value: $584,000.00

                            Red Wing Brands of America (PC62470)
                            314 Main Street
                            Red Wing, MN 55066
                            Contract Value: $500,000.00


     4. NYSOGS awarded a multiple award/multiple source contract for Body Armor (Soft, Hard, Ballistic, Puncture, &
        Riot) for Law Enforcement. Contract Period: March 18, 2004 to January 14, 2009. Continuous advancements in
        the technology of body armor make it necessary to create a contract award allowing for various manufactur-
        ers and their full product line of equipment pertaining to body armor. Therefore, this award provides for the
        entire manufacturer’s product line for statewide usage. Although the bid included the Textile Certification
        Registry, no bidders indicated that the law would apply to them.

     The contract values entered below are for statewide purchases for the full 5 year term:

                            AMERICAN BODY ARMOR
                            13386 International Parkway
                            Jacksonville, FL 32218
                            Contract value $8.7 million

                            FIRST CHOICE ARMOR & EQUIPMENT, INC.
                            800-88-ARMOR; 508-559-0777
                            50 Braintree Hill Office Park
                            Ms. Kimberly Sawyer
                            Suite 103
                            Braintree, MA 02184
                            Contract value $4.8 million

                            GATOR HAWK ARMOR, INC.
                            866-GTR-HAWK; 904-273-9781
                            1806 Goodyear Avenue
                            Ventura, CA 93003
                            Contract value $200,000

                            NEW YORK POLICE SUPPLY, INC.
                            800-262-2832; 585-467-1370
                            SB 1460 RIDGE ROAD EAST
                            ROCHESTER, NY 14621 Mr. Michael Cohn
                            Contract value $1.2 million
                      800-722-7667; 423-562-1115
                      179 Mine Lane Ms. Dori Dagley
                      Jacksboro, TN 37757
                      Contract value $6.17 million

                      PROMARK INTERNATIONAL, INC.
                      800-645-4443; 631-226-1541
                      SB 720 Montauk Highway
                      Copiague, NY 11726 Mr. Kenneth Battcher
                      Contract value $800,000

                      PROTECH ARMORED PRODUCTS
                      1595 East Street    Ms. Patty Coppedge
                      Pittsfield, MA 01201 Fax: 904-741-4792
                      Contract value $3.7 million

                      530 Sawgrass Corporate Parkway Mr. Cory Provenzano
                      Sunrise, FL 33325
                      Contract value $200,000

                      SAFARILAND LTD. CO.
                      3120 E. Mission Blvd. Ms. Patty Coppedge
                      Ontario, CA 91761
                      Contract value $800,000

                      SUPER SEER CORPORATION
                      PO Box 700 303-674-6663
                      Evergreen, CO 80437-0700 Mr. Robert Smith
                      Contract value $400,000

                      U.S. ARMOR CORPORATION
                      800-443-9798, ext. 314
                      11843 E. Smith Avenue 562-949-1733, ext. 314
                      Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670 Mr. Georg Olsen
                      Contract value $1.6 million

Other textile commodities in team:
Preferred Source -- Industries for the Blind (IBNYS) was awarded a contract for High Visibility Mesh DOT Highway
Safety Vests.

5. NYSOGS also issued a statewide multiple award contract for Hazardous Incident Response Equipment HIRE
   (Award 19745) September 2, 2005 - May 31, 2010 for clothing classified as protective clothing. No September
   Eleventh preference was applied as these are discount from pricelist/catalog contracts and in each case cloth-
   ing/apparel is a relatively small portion of the company’s overall offering.

 Protect all Workers
 Assist the Unemployed
 connect Employers and Workers
The New York State Department of Labor is an Equal Opportunity Employer/Program.
Auxiliary aids and services are available upon request to individuals with disabilities.


To top