Perspective: Prop 2's Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) raise costs, disadvantage non-union workers
Gustave Caillebotte: The House Painters, 1877
Howard Jarvis Taxpayers Association's Susan Shelley, in the OC Register, analyzes the State's $10 bn Proposition 2 for school building repairs. Sneakily in its ballot language lies the promise to use a “Project Labor Agreement,” a.k.a., collective bargaining contract that's widely known to increase wage expenses and privilege union companies.
What is a project labor agreement, and why are public officials in California so fond of them?
For example, take Proposition 2. This statewide measure is a $10 billion bond for construction and modernization of school facilities. This week, the executive director of the California Teachers Association said this spending is needed “remove or replace asbestos, mold, lead paint and lead pipes” from school buildings.
You might expect that Proposition 2 would contain language that specifically directs the bond funds to these high-priority needs.
You’d be wrong.
Instead, Proposition 2 awards “points” to “a school district project that includes the use of a project labor agreement.”
A project labor agreement is a “prehire” collective bargaining agreement for a construction project. It’s binding on all the subcontractors brought in to work on that project as well as the general contractor. As explained in a 1998 report on PLAs by the U.S. government’s General Accounting Office, “The National Labor Relations Act generally prohibits prehire agreements, but an exception in the act allows the agreements only in the construction industry.”
According to the GAO report, proponents of project labor agreements say there are economic advantages to a PLA, such as preventing labor unrest and work stoppages, uniform rules for different craft unions, and access to a skilled workforce “through the union referral systems.”
But opponents say PLAs, particularly in the public sector, “discourage competition by favoring union companies” and “result in higher costs due to the restricted number of bidders, higher union wages, and the imposition of union work rules.”
In California today, roughly 83 percent of the labor force in the construction industry is non-union, according to the U.S. government’s Bureau of Labor Statistics. These workers are unlikely to get jobs through the “union referral systems.” And by limiting subcontractors on a project to those who have signed onto a project labor agreement, countless small businesses in the construction sector are excluded from the opportunity to bid for that work and provide jobs to those non-union workers.
For taxpayers, it typically means government projects cost more, and the public gets less than promised. Since 1998, California voters have approved $54 billion in bonds for K-12 school buildings. Yet advocates for Proposition 2, the $10 billion bond for school buildings, are still claiming they need the money to remove asbestos and lead from the walls and pipes.
Read the whole thing here.
Follow Opportunity Now on Twitter @svopportunity
Related:
Opp Now enthusiastically welcomes smart, thoughtful, fair-minded, well-written comments from our readers. But be advised: we have zero interest in posting rants, ad hominems, poorly-argued screeds, transparently partisan yack, or the hateful name-calling often seen on other local websites. So if you've got a great idea that will add to the conversation, please send it in. If you're trolling or shilling for a candidate or initiative, forget it.