(a) The secretary–treasurer may not certify that the Commission complied with the requirements of this subtitle unless the Commission: (1) has taken steps to consider alternatives to the service contract, including reorganization, reevaluation of service, and reevaluation of performance; (2) has consulted with the certified representative of all employees of the Commission who will be adversely affected if the Commission enters into the service contract; and (3) has demonstrated, based on a cost comparison analysis and good faith estimates, that by entering into the service contract the Commission will save at least an amount equal to the lesser of $200,000 or 20% of the estimated net present value of the cost of the service contract. (b) The Commission shall estimate and compare at least the following in the cost comparison analysis: (1) direct costs, including fringe benefits and the assumption that the contractor will pay employees who perform work under the service contract at the lesser of the labor rate established as the county living wage rate for Montgomery County or Prince George’s County; (2) indirect overhead costs properly allocable to the bargaining unit work or the lesser of the labor rate established as the county living wage rate for Montgomery County or Prince George’s County; (2) indirect overhead costs properly allocable to the bargaining unit work or service contract according to generally accepted accounting principles; and (3) costs associated with unemployment compensation or outplacement assistance for displaced employees.
Maryland Legal Code