If I wanted to increase the cost of a project, government or private, I would use a PLA—Project Labor Agreement. If I only wanted to hire those that paid bribes to get a job—I would use a PLA. Were I not to care about the quality of the work, I would use ONLY union members, with a PLA.
“Several studies, including one by the General Accounting Office (GAO) stated the success of non-union contracts or PLA’s “could be attributable to other factors.” They concluded “Drawing definite conclusions would be difficult.”
The benefit of avoiding PLA’s is rarely a subject of meaningful discussion in City Councils of Blue States such as California.
Related to passing such exclusionary contracts, we must ask how do the majority of workers learn their trade when unions comprise such a small part of the workforce? Doesn’t the implementation of PLA’s amount to reverse discrimination against the most job seekers?
How valuable is a non-strike pledge worth under PLA’s? Actually, not much, as non-union workers are not known to walk off jobs in protest”.
You read that right—86% of American workers are discriminated against because they do not pay a bribe to a union. What about their rights?
The Truth About Project Labor Agreements by Richard Eber
Richard Eber, Exclusive to the California Political News and Views, 8/23/23 www.capoliticalreview.com
No one in their right mind thinks Subway Sandwiches taste better because basketball star Steph Curry endorses them in T.V. commercials. Similarly, logic dictates the ability to jump higher isn’t easier if we wear Lebron James sneakers from Nike.
Madison Avenue advertising tactics should be properly scrutinized prior to being relegated to Point of Information status of Roberts Rules of Order.
With California politics, one area that has been canonized to Sainthood, is the necessity for Project Labor Agreements (PLA’s) to be imposed on all large construction jobs involving State and local governments. This means, only union labor is allowed to participate in such contracts. .
Today, this is especially relevant on bond issues for building affordable housing. PLA’s will be found in every ballot cast next year. As a result, an estimated 20% is added to construction expenses.
This outcome inevitably results in taxpayers receiving less bang for their buck.
Such a lapse in arithmetic does not matter to politicians in our state. They are wedded to labor unions, who coincidently are a major contributor to their campaign treasuries. Despite this obvious conflict of interest, PLA’s are routinely imposed without a direct vote of the people.
Elected officials prefer to justify these PLA’s on the grounds:
- Union labor is far superior to nonunion type.
- Only Unions train workers through apprentice programs.
- Veterans are given special consideration in hiring decisions that non-union contractors allegedly ignore.
- Unions agree not to strike work sites where PLA’s are in effect.
- The quality of work performed is supposed to be superior to non-union contractors.
Even though PLA’s are virtual gospel within the Democratic Party, actual statistics don’t jive with reality.
Union Labor provides approximately 13.6% of workers in the United States today. Are we to believe the craftmanship of this larger group is inferior, even when inspectors oversee the quality of every job?
Several studies, including one by the General Accounting Office (GAO) stated the success of non-union contracts or PLA’s “could be attributable to other factors.” They concluded “Drawing definite conclusions would be difficult.”
The benefit of avoiding PLA’s is rarely a subject of meaningful discussion in City Councils of Blue States such as California.
Related to passing such exclusionary contracts, we must ask how do the majority of workers learn their trade when unions comprise such a small part of the workforce? Doesn’t the implementation of PLA’s amount to reverse discrimination against the most job seekers?
How valuable is a non-strike pledge worth under PLA’s? Actually, not much, as non-union workers are not known to walk off jobs in protest.
If the truth be known, organized labor by definition is nepotistic for whom they allow to join their ranks. Unions limit the number of members belonging to their rosters to keep per hour wages at the highest level possible. Much like the Longshoreman’s Union (ILWU), Craft unions like to hire first from within.
PLA’s are the lifeblood of union labor’s monopoly in California work sites today. Their roots are found in Federal Law that dictating so-called living “prevailing wages” be paid whenever government funding is involved.
This mandate goes back to the days of Franklin Roosevelt when The Davis-Bacon Act was passed in 1931 to protect workers during the depression. Union membership was never mentioned in this legislation.
Suppose workers don’t care to join a labor union to participate in a PLA contract? Some, prefer to be free from representation as they often don’t see their paychecks getting larger when deductions are taken out.
A major factor in the added expense of mandatory PLA’s, is that they reduce competition of contractors bidding on construction projects. If only a small number of bidders are involved with being awarded contracts, price fixing ( intentional or unintentional), often ensues.
In civilian terms; this is called Crony Capitalism. More often than not, the fix is on. Inevitably taxpayers end up holding the bag.
With PLA’s in place, no wonder that in large cities such as Los Angeles, San Diego, San Francisco, and San Jose, it costs over 1.2 million dollars to construct a subsidized unaffordable 2 bedroom apartment in high rise developments.
While PLA’s are not solely responsible for these absurd expenses, they play an important role in California’s continuing inflation plagued housing market.
The Sacramento political elite are oblivious for the reasons most developers have thrown in the towel in their State. Instead of reducing often repetitive CEQA reviews, bloated land costs, taxation, PLA’s, and other expenses dealing with over regulation, they choose to cast blame elsewhere.
It is no coincidence, State Senator Scott Wiener (D-S.F.), and his Progressive cohorts in the legislature, desire the State take over authority for making zoning decisions from local communities.
They don’t give a damn about the effect of building largely stack and pack dwellings might be for existing residents. The need to provide additional schools, water, recreational facilities, and law enforcement does not matter to them.
Collateral damage, such as traffic and parking woes, is of no consequence to Big Brother in Sacramento.
Unfortunately, PLA’s are just part of the equation. They have been a major contributor to the mass exodus of high paying jobs along with their families to States where affordable single family homes can still be found.
What to do?
A good place to start is for voters to say “no” to housing bonds in 2024 that requires a PLA to be put in place. Doing this would deliver a strong message to politicians in Sacramento who continue to believe throwing money at problems is synonymous with positive change.
It will take a lot more than that to make a Subway sandwich edible or give superior jumping abilities to those who have a Nike swoosh on their sneakers.
The question is where do we start?
