Op-Ed: Favoring Unions Hurts Taxpayers
In an op-ed titled, “Favoring Unions Hurts Taxpayers,” in the November 5 edition of the Tampa Bay Tribune, ABC Gulf Coast Chapter President Steve Cona, Jr. notes that President Obama’s Executive Order 13502 could keep 97 percent of Florida’s private construction workforce from building projects paid for with their own tax dollars. Executive Order 13502 encourages federal agencies to utilize wasteful and discriminatory project labor agreements (PLAs) projects that cost over $25 million.
The op-ed also notes both the U.S. Department of Labor’s recent decision to go ahead with a PLA on the upcoming Manchester, N.H. Job Corps Center project despite the lack of federal regulations on how to implement Executive Order 13502 and a bid protest filed by New Hampshire based North Branch Construction with the General Accountability Office. If executed, this would be the first federal government-mandated PLA since President Obama issued Executive Order 13502.
Here is an excerpt:
PLAs restrict nonunion contractors from competing because their employees are forced to pay union dues and obey Big Labor’s inefficient union work rules while on a PLA job site. Nonunion contractors would have to pay benefits twice – once to their own company’s plan and once to the local union – just to be able to work on these federal construction projects, created with their own tax dollars. And employees will never see any of those benefit contributions made by their employer unless they decide to leave their nonunion employer and remain with the union until vested.
But according to a recently released study by the Beacon Hill Institute, taxpayers ultimately foot the bill. If Obama’s order had been in effect in 2008, the cost to federal taxpayers would have increased by $1.6 to $2.6 billion.
PLAs do nothing to ensure a construction project’s quality, cost, timeliness or results. Just look at the “Big Dig” in Boston, which became a federally funded boondoggle plagued with multibillion-dollar cost overruns, shoddy workmanship and safety problems.
Regulations implementing Obama’s executive order are currently under review by the federal government, and a final rule is expected any time.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Department of Labor went ahead and issued a PLA requirement on its forthcoming Job Corps Center in Manchester, N.H., and a bid protest filed with the General Accountability Office by a New Hampshire contractor may determine the legality of government-mandated PLAs on federal construction projects.
At a time when businesses are already fighting to stay afloat, PLAs drive up costs for contractors, workers and taxpayers.
Anti-competitive PLAs reek of corruption and only punish taxpayers who deserve accountability from their government. PLAs serve as a barrier to jobs for hardworking nonunion construction employees in our community who deserve the same opportunity to compete for work as union members. Taxpayer-funded federal government construction contracts should be about the best work at the best price. Favoring one group over another restricts competition and will cause costs to increase.
Read the full op-ed after the jump.
Favoring unions hurts taxpayers
By STEVE P. CONA JR.
Special To The Tampa Tribune
With all the talk about the stimulus creating jobs, one might be tempted to think things are getting better.
The reality, especially in the Florida construction industry, isn’t so rosy. Florida lost 78,900 construction jobs in one year (July 2008-July 2009). And new data shows that 49 out of the 50 states have lost jobs overall, despite the “successful” stimulus.
Soon, a little-known executive order issued by President Obama will cause more job losses – unless workers are already in a union or are willing to pay union dues. In a clear payback to Big Labor, Obama’s Executive Order 13502 encourages federal construction projects exceeding $25 million to use union labor through project labor agreements (PLAs), which discriminate against 85.6 percent of U.S. construction workers who are not in a union. In Florida, only 3.7 percent of the private construction workforce is represented by a union.
PLAs restrict nonunion contractors from competing because their employees are forced to pay union dues and obey Big Labor’s inefficient union work rules while on a PLA job site. Nonunion contractors would have to pay benefits twice – once to their own company’s plan and once to the local union – just to be able to work on these federal construction projects, created with their own tax dollars. And employees will never see any of those benefit contributions made by their employer unless they decide to leave their nonunion employer and remain with the union until vested.
But according to a recently released study by the Beacon Hill Institute, taxpayers ultimately foot the bill. If Obama’s order had been in effect in 2008, the cost to federal taxpayers would have increased by $1.6 to $2.6 billion.
PLAs do nothing to ensure a construction project’s quality, cost, timeliness or results. Just look at the “Big Dig” in Boston, which became a federally funded boondoggle plagued with multibillion-dollar cost overruns, shoddy workmanship and safety problems.
Regulations implementing Obama’s executive order are currently under review by the federal government, and a final rule is expected any time.
Unfortunately, the U.S. Department of Labor went ahead and issued a PLA requirement on its forthcoming Job Corps Center in Manchester, N.H., and a bid protest filed with the General Accountability Office by a New Hampshire contractor may determine the legality of government-mandated PLAs on federal construction projects.
At a time when businesses are already fighting to stay afloat, PLAs drive up costs for contractors, workers and taxpayers.
Anti-competitive PLAs reek of corruption and only punish taxpayers who deserve accountability from their government. PLAs serve as a barrier to jobs for hardworking nonunion construction employees in our community who deserve the same opportunity to compete for work as union members. Taxpayer-funded federal government construction contracts should be about the best work at the best price. Favoring one group over another restricts competition and will cause costs to increase.