The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
Print Email
Text Size

The Spectacle Blog

Labor bosses who have failed to secure pension obligations for their membership have successfully schemed with the Obama White House to coerce non-union workers into underfunded plans.

On May 13, an unheralded executive order that would pressure federal agencies into accepting Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) on construction projects that exceed $25 million officially went into effect at the expense of private industry and U.S. taxpayers.

PLAs stipulate that projects be awarded to contractors and subcontractors who agree to recognize unions as representing their employees during that particular job. Although nonunion contractors are permitted to bid on PLA projects, the reality is that the projects are awarded almost exclusively to unionized contractors, critics point out.

Only 15.6 percent of the nation’s private construction work force is unionized, Labor Department statistics show. This means PLAs could be used to discriminate against the more than eight out of 10 construction workers who are not part of a union. Moreover, PLAs put non-union contractors a great disadvantage where pension requirements are concerned because they are forced to pay twice.

Under PLA agreements, private shops must pay into union pension plans and existing 401 (k) company plans. Moreover, as a general rule non-union contractors cannot typically suspend and restart contributions to individual 401 (k) accounts meaning they must take double payments into account on their contract bid.

The PLA hex is also put onto individual workers since the employer contributions that are sent to union pension plans will not materialize as benefits unless they agree to leave their non-union company and join with the union until they are vested.

This unappetizing arrangement raises important questions about motivations. After posturing as strong advocates for retirements benefits, why would labor bosses insist on a provision precludes workers from receiving benefits unless they join with the union?

Even as unions continue to market themselves to new members on the basis of generous pension programs, government figures show these plans are performing poorly in comparison with retirement packages that operate beyond the orbit of organized labor.

The average union pension has resources to cover only 62 percent of what is owed to participants, according to the Pension Benefit Guarantee Corp. Pensions with less than 80 percent of the assets needed to cover present and projected liabilities are considered “endangered,” while those that fall below a 65 percent threshold are classified as “critical” under the Pension Protection Act of 2006.

PLAs are best understood within the context of other paybacks to labor bosses that were organized after President Obama and top congressional Democrats failed to advance the Employee Free Choice Act (EFCA), which included the anti-democratic card check provision and binding arbitration.

In the 2008 election cycle, labor union political action committees contributed more than $66 million to congressional candidates with 92 percent of those contributions going to Democrats, according to OpenSecrets.org. Labor PACs also contributed $531,711 to Mr. Obama’s campaign that year.

“This is incredible when you think about it, after all the promises that were made, 2009 comes off a pretty unsuccessful year for organized labor,”  said Ben Brubeck, director of labor and federal procurement for the Associated Builders and Contractors (ABC), a trade organization for private companies. “You would think they would have to get something.”

That something comes in the form of PLAs, which are now in motion.

Obama’s executive order 13502 claims that PLAs would heighten efficiency and alleviate labor disputes that prevent projects from being completed on time. The order reads in part as follows:

” The use of a project labor agreement may prevent these problems from developing by providing structure and stability to large-scale construction projects, thereby promoting the efficient and expeditious completion of federal construction contracts, the order says. “Accordingly, it is the policy of the federal government to encourage executive agencies to consider requiring the use of project labor agreements in connection with large-scale construction projects in order to promote economy and efficiency in federal procurement.”

But the ABC takes issue with the idea that PLA’s are necessary to ensure labor cooperation to keep projects running on time.

“This is a particularly disingenuous argument that flirts with blackmail, because unions cause many project delays through illegal organizing and jurisdictional disputes on jobsites,” according to an analysis posted on the ABC website. “Merit shop workers do not strike, yet they are excluded from working on PLA projects.

Moreover, there are a number of studies that show PLAs will increase the cost of construction projects, Brett McMahon, an ABC representative explained in an interview.

Decades of studies have shown that PLAs increase the cost of construction,” said McMahon, who is also vice-president of Miller and Long, a Maryland-based concrete construction company. That’s a bad idea during good economic times, but it’s utterly foolish when we are already financially upside-down as a nation. We are financing these projects with debt that is underwritten by taxpayers — many of whom are not going to be able to work on these projects without paying union dues.”

View all comments (8) |

David| 6.2.10 @ 4:39PM

Isn't this the very thing Obama campaigned against - raising "taxes" of any kind against those making under $250,000? Since non-union members will be forced to pay double for their pensions and any "contributions" made to a union pension will effectively disappear (since we know all of that money is used to pay for lobbying and limos for union execs) it will become a tax on non-union members working on large projects. Way to sneak those extra "fees" onto the backs of hard working non-union employees.

Tom T.| 6.3.10 @ 7:05AM

I'm not an attorney, but isn't this somehow in violation of fair trade rules, say like RICO statutes? Isn't the funneling of Federal monies, our monies by the way, to a specific group based on their membership to a specific organization a violation of RICO?

Ted B| 6.3.10 @ 10:45AM

It should be a violation of RICO, but Big Labor gets around it by saying that "anyone is welcome to bid on PLA projects" whether they are union or not. That is actually true. Such discrimination would be illegal.

But the terms and conditions of PLAs are loaded to favor union contractors and discourage nonunion competitors, so the practical effect of PLAs is that it cuts nonunion competition. The pension issue highlighted in this article is one of many objections to PLAs by nonunion employees and employers.

Some nonunion contractors that don't self-perform work have worked on PLA projects before, but they are few and far between, despite the bogus claims of Big Labor that nonunion contractors work on PLA projects all of the time.

Tom Owens| 6.3.10 @ 2:36PM

Morals, values, decency – all are essential in a civil society. Strong families, a prosperous Middle Class, and healthy communities – all of them are essential if we, as Americans, are to enjoy the fruits of our success. All of them are essential to the American Dream. PLAs were and are created to support and protect those values we hold dear. Unfortunately, we are allowing them to be dismissed and diminished through the acceptance of a “race to the bottom” business model in the construction industry that relies heavily upon a low-wage, low-skill, easily exploitable workforce (aka illegal and undocumented workers). I would like to think that in America today, GOODNESS STILL MATTERS! After all, what good is a stronger economy at home if it is built upon cheap labor and exploitation? PLAs simply ensure that Government does not allow its contractors to erode our moral fabric. What's also interesting is the fact that PLAs are used extensively in the PRIVATE sector by corporations that are extremely sensitive to bottom line concerns about costs and on-time delivery of a project. That begs the question as to why Mr. Mooney and his cohorts in the conservative community are silent about PLAs in the private sector. I would fathom that they don't say anything because PLAs WORK!

Rick| 6.4.10 @ 11:52AM

Hey Tom, PLA's work in the private sector because union threats to disrupt construction (blackmail) works. Merit shop workers don't threaten strikes or disrupt construction. Prevailing wage laws level the playing field between union and non union contractors on these jobs and can be used by both private and government owners. Explain to me again the need to be union...

Joe LoRe | 6.4.10 @ 12:03PM

Non union subs and GC's bid and win PLA's all the time. PLA's only require the payment of prevailing wage laws as directed by each individual states DOL. The whole line about double payment of pensions in the article is a straight up LIE. Private & Union companies have to abide by Prevailing Wage Law and have to submit Certified Payrolls to the public body governing the project. Unions collect the Fringe payment and put it towards benefits & pensions. Private/Non-union companies pay the fringe in cash, there is never a double payment at any time. Additionally any double payment would have to be represented on a certified payroll form and would count against the fringe and would negate any excess cash payments.

Really if you are going to write a propaganda piece about PLA's, at least learn the payroll laws regarding prevailing wage & certified payrolls.

More Blog Posts by Kevin Mooney

http://spectator.org/blog/2010/06/02/employers-and-workers-lose-out

ADVERTISEMENT

SPONSORED LINKS

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

My Generation’s Disease

Benjamin Brophy | 5.17.13

The Liberal Union Behind the IRS

Jeffrey Lord | 5.16.13

Not Ready for Primetime Players

Daniel J. Flynn | 5.17.13

Assessing a Week of Scandal

Matt Purple | 5.17.13

Oops, Maybe Government is Tyrannical

Marta H. Mossburg | 5.17.13

The View From the Other Side

George H. Wittman | 5.17.13

From Bimbos to Benghazi

Jeffrey Lord | 5.9.13

ADVERTISEMENT