IN 2006, Deval Patrick campaigned for governor by running against "the Big Dig culture on Beacon Hill." Three years later, he wants to build construction projects paid for with federal stimulus money exactly the way the Big Dig was built - using union-only project labor agreements.
Under PLAs, owners agree to use exclusively union labor in return for the unions' pledge not to strike. The Big Dig is the best evidence that the result is hardly on-time, on-budget construction, as the unions claim.
Earlier this month, a task force assembled to ensure that the state is positioned to efficiently put the federal stimulus money to work recommended that "the Commonwealth require or encourage (depending on legality) the use of PLAs on large construction projects."
The recommendation is misguided. First, PLAs would prohibit the majority of the Commonwealth's battered construction industry from benefiting from the funds. According to Unionstats.com, only 16 percent of Massachusetts construction workers belong to unions.
That finding was reinforced by the Patrick administration itself. According to a Department of Labor and Workforce Development official, "the percentage of construction industry union members . . . might fall in the 15-17 percent range."
A central argument for PLAs - that they provide construction workers with a middle-class living - is moot in this case. Under both state and federal law, all publicly funded construction projects are subject to union-scale wages no matter who performs the work.
If the recommendation becomes policy, it would also increase taxpayers' burden just when they can least afford it. With such a small minority of the construction industry being union, PLAs hike costs by limiting competition.
In 2006, the City of Fall River decided to build several new schools using a PLA. After bidding and re-bidding the projects, prices were so far above budget that then-Mayor Edward Lambert decided to re-bid the projects without a PLA, with dramatically different results.
Despite rampant oil price-driven construction inflation during the months between the first round of bids under a PLA and commencement of the open bidding process, subcontractor bids fell by 13 percent on one project and 15 percent on another. On one of the projects, the number of subcontractor bids rose from 34 to 60.
Nationally, the stimulus bill contains an estimated $150 billion for infrastructure construction. Building the projects under union-only PLAs would increase taxpayer costs by at least $20 billion.
It's telling that the state task force report called for using PLAs on large construction projects "depending on legality." In 1999, the Commonwealth's highest court ruled that they are allowed only on projects "of sufficient size, duration, timing and complexity" to merit an exemption from state bidding laws." A consultant to the City of Springfield recently told city officials that even the new $125 million Roger L. Putnam Vocational-Technical High School was unlikely to meet the criteria for using a PLA.
PLAs exclude the open-shop contractors and workers who make up the vast majority of the construction industry. In contrast, union contractors are free to bid and participate under open bidding. Unlike construction unions, the open shop seeks only a level playing field.
When Jeffrey Simon was named the Patrick administration's stimulus czar, he said, "We are going to put people back to work building worthwhile projects that benefit us all. We will do this with openness, honesty, and professionalism." If the governor implements his task force's PLA recommendation, the policy would fail to live up to both that pledge and the one made by then-candidate Patrick to fight Beacon Hill's Big Dig culture.
Greg Beeman is president of Associated Builders and Contractors of Massachusetts.
FURTHER CLICKING: For more information opposing PLAs, go to The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation at www.nrtw.org. To see studies supporting PLAs, check out massbuildingtrades.org.
