President Bush’s decision to prohibit union-only Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on federally-funded construction projects continues to create a rift among the industry.
Union-only PLAs are nothing more than a market-recovery initiative from unions that seek to secure politically motivated protection from free-market competition,” said Scott Brown, director of communications of Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC). “These costly and exclusionary deals discriminate against four out of five U.S. construction workers who reject union membership and instead choose to work in an open-shop setting.”
The executive order drew immediate criticism from the AFL-CIO shortly after it was issued on Feb. 17, 2001. In fact, the AFL-CIO Building and Construction Trades Department (BCTD) filed suit two months later in an attempt to prevent the Bush administration from enforcing its PLA ban during the reconstruction of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge near Washington, D.C.
The BCTD had already negotiated a PLA for much of the work on the Maryland portion of the span, which carries traffic from Interstate 95 and the 495 Capital Beltway over the Potomac River between Maryland and Virginia. BCTD President Edward Sullivan called the executive order “a direct attack on all building trades members.”
In an effort to prevent work disruptions in the industry, Bush amended the ban to exempt any project where at least one contract had been awarded with a PLA as of the date the order went into effect. Brown said ABC officials are disappointed that upwards of $2.7 billion in federal funds could be spent completing projects started under a PLA.
A federal judge in the District of Columbia sided with the AFL-CIO in August by issuing a preliminary injunction to block Bush’s ban on PLAs. Judge Emmet G. Sullivan said the executive order “unquestionably conflicts” with the National Labor Relations Act.
However, the U.S. Justice Department appealed the judge’s decision in November. Oral arguments will be presented before the U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia in May.
A joint amicus brief urging the appellate court to overturn the district judge’s opinion was filed on Feb. 6 by ABC, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation Inc. and the Maryland Chamber of Commerce. The organizations stated in their brief that the president’s executive order was carefully crafted to avoid interfering with the rights of any private employer in the construction industry under the National Labor Relations Act.
“Eighty percent of America’s construction workers do not belong to unions, yet under the judge’s ruling, work on any federally-funded construction project would be restricted to union-only labor through PLAs,” said Maryland Chamber of Commerce President Kathleen T. Snyder. “It is our strong belief that taxpayer dollars for federally- funded projects should be spent on open competition for all firms and workers.”
Snyder said government-mandated union-only PLAs adversely impact competition for government procurements and, therefore, reduce efficiency and increase costs.
National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation Vice President Stefan Gleason described a PLA as a scheme that requires all contractors, whether they are unionized or not, to subject themselves and their employees to unionization in order to work on government-funded construction projects.
He said PLAs usually require contractors to grant union officials monopoly bargaining privileges over all workers, use exclusive union hiring halls, force workers to pay dues as a condition of employment and pay above-market prices resulting from wasteful work rules and featherbedding.
“It is wrong for the federal government to support a scheme that bilks taxpayers out of millions of dollars and deprives employees of their basic right to choose whether or not to affiliate with a union,” said Gleason. PLAs are nothing more than a shakedown. Union officials use them to demand taxpayer handouts and government-granted special privileges in exchange for not ordering strikes or causing other disruptions.”
The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, based in Springfield, VA, is a nonprofit, charitable organization providing free legal aid to employees whose human or civil rights have been violated by compulsory unionism abuses.
President Bush states in Executive Order 13202 that the PLA ban is necessary in order to:
• Promote and ensure open competition on federally-funded or assisted construction projects;
• Maintain government neutrality toward government contractors’ labor relations;
• Reduce construction costs to the federal government and taxpayers;
• Expand job opportunities, especially for small and disadvantaged businesses;
• Prevent discrimination against government contractors or their employees based upon labor affiliation or lack thereof.
Meanwhile, AFL-CIO leaders say President Bush’s order is “nothing short of a declaration of war on construction workers.” They say prohibiting PLAs could result in cost increases, scheduling delays and low-quality work.
“I am appalled and outraged at President Bush’s decision to issue four mean-spirited, anti-worker executive orders sought by his corporate contributors and by right-wing ideologues,” said AFL-CIO President John Sweeney. “These orders undermine worker rights and dismantle thoughtfully constructed and effective working relationships between labor and management.”
Sweeney said Bush’s action violates his own public pledges to consult widely, promote civility and change the tone in Washington. He called the president’s action “pure retribution for the growing voice of working men and women in our nation’s political life.”
The AFL-CIO maintains the executive order essentially does the following:
• Bars PLAs on all federally-funded construction projects, even in situations where they have been regularly used since the 1940s.
• Allows service contractors in federal buildings to lay off low-wage workers, who are mostly women, whenever there is a turnover of government contractors — which erodes job security.
• Abolishes labor-management cooperation systems that serve the federal government and hundreds of thousands of federal workers and result in productivity gains and cost-saving measures that benefit taxpayers.
• Requires government contractors to post notices concerning workers’ rights within their unions to object to dues and agency fee payments, while posting nothing at all about their fundamental labor rights to organize or join unions.
However, Brown pointed out that union-only agreements are responsible for inflating the cost of construction projects, limiting competition and mandating the use of outdated and inefficient union work rules and job-site practices that lower productivity and drive up costs.
“Everyone benefits from free-market competition because firms are considered based on their ability to complete the work on time and on budget in a safe, professional manner,” said Brown. “Union-only projects are simply a way for politicians to garner favor with organized labor and more states should follow the example of Ohio and ban union-only PLAs.”
Brown said those who oppose the executive order know it means that all firms, regardless of labor affiliation, will compete openly and fairly for federally-funded work. He stressed that the opponents want to be able to persuade political entities to reserve taxpayer-funded work exclusively for themselves.
ABC President and Chief Executive Officer Kirk Pickerel said the lawsuit filed by the AFL-CIO is without merit and he is confident the appellate court will rule in favor of the Bush administration after hearing the arguments in May. He said the order in no way intrudes on the provisions of the National Labor Relations Act.
“We are confident that this appeal will succeed and that the president’s common sense executive order will remain the standard for federal and federally-assisted construction contracting,” said Pickerel. “This executive order ensures a nondiscriminatory and cost-effective approach to federal construction.”
A nationwide poll conducted in 1998 by Public Opinion Strategies of Alexandria, VA, showed that the majority of Americans oppose government favoritism toward unions. The poll found that 72 percent of those surveyed oppose union-only PLAs on federal construction projects and 64 percent would likely vote against any Congressional candidate who supports union-only contracts.
The most surprising results showed that 64 percent of the union members who participated in the poll also oppose union-only PLAs. In addition, 70 percent of Americans from the Northeastern United States, typically recognized as the country’s strongest union region, oppose union-only PLAs.
Today's top stories
