500 James Hance Court v. Pennsylvania Prevailing Wage Appeals Board

I commend the Majority Opinion for its thorough recitation of the history of this case, especially considering the confusing state of the record and the admittedly “questionable aspects of the lease transaction.” Maj. Op. at 274, 33 A.3d at 577. Respectfully, however, I must dissent from its determination that the Prevailing Wage Act does not apply to the construc*275tion of the shell of the charter school building, given the well-established remedial purpose of the Prevailing Wage Act, Act of August 15, 1961, P.L. 987 (as amended 43 P.S. §§ 165-1 to 165-17). See Pennsylvania Nat. Mut. Cas. Ins.…