|
New
Study Reveals That President Obamas Executive Order for Project
Labor Agreements Will Harm Federal Taxpayers
Embargoed until:
Wednesday, September 23, 2009
1:30 p.m. (ET)
Contact:
Frank Conte, Communications
617-573-8050; 8750
fconte@beaconhill.org
BOSTON,
MA A new study released today by the Beacon Hill Institute
(BHI) finds that Project Labor Agreements (PLAs), which will be
permitted under an executive order from President Obama, will significantly
increase construction costs on federal projects while doing nothing
to protect the interests of federal taxpayers. The executive order
reverses a prohibition on PLAs that was in effect during the Bush
Administration.
The
purpose of the BHI study, which is entitled Project Labor Agreements
on Federal Construction Projects: A Costly Solution in Search of
a Problem, was to determine whether the reversal of this prohibition
is in the interest of federal taxpayers.
PLAs
are agreements with contractors that establish the rules to be followed
by firms that bid on construction projects. PLAs typically require
a contractor to hire workers though union hiring halls, require
non-union workers to pay dues for the length of the project and
force contractors to abide by union rules on pensions, work conditions
and dispute resolution.
In
February, President Obama issued Executive Order 13502, which allows
executive agencies to require contractors to use PLAs on federal
construction projects costing $25 million or more. The federal governments
deadline for accepting comments on the order is September 23, 2009.The
purpose of a PLA is to assure labor peace during construction
projects.
But
a review by BHI of federal construction projects during the Bush
Administration found no instances of labor disputes that resulted
in significant project delays or increased costs.Our examination
of the record produces no evidence of any systematic connection
between the absence of a PLA, on the one hand, and cost overruns
or delays caused by labor disputes, on the other, said David
G. Tuerck, one of the authors of the study and Executive Director
of the Beacon Hill Institute. Therefore, the justifications offered
by the Obama Administration for reinstating PLAs are not supported
by the evidence.
BHI examined federal projects with a price tag of $25 million or
more that were initiated between 2001 and 2008 to determine whether
they were beset by labor disputes of the kind that PLAs are intended
to preclude. Information collected from a variety of federal agencies,
including the Office of Management and Budget (which has responsibility
for oversight of U.S. government procurement), did not reveal any
evidence that federal projects built during the Bush Administration
without a PLA suffered significant delays or cost-overruns due to
labor issues.If President Obama, who used the labor peace
argument in justifying PLAs, is to be believed on this matter, it
should be possible to find dozens of examples of slowdowns and significant
cost overruns that occurred during the Bush Administration,
said Tuerck. Yet, we found no such examples.PLAs do
add to construction costs.
By
their nature, PLAs are anti-competitive since they discourage open
shop firms from bidding in the first place. Previous research from
the Institute has shown that PLAs add 12-18% to construction costs.
Over the course of the Bush Administration, the federal government
spent $147.1 billion on federal construction projects. Of that $147.1
billion, approximately $60 billion would have been subjected to
President Obamas Executive Order encouraging the use of PLAs.
Moreover,
had President Obamas Executive Order 13502 been in effect
in 2008, and all federal construction projects worth $25 million
or more been subject to PLAs, the cost to federal taxpayers would
have increased by $1.6 to $2.6 billion.
Our
report shows that there is no reason to implement a PLA on a federal
construction project, except perhaps for political payback to union
leaders. PLAs are anti-competitive by nature and add costs to the
taxpayers. The federal government should consider this research
when making its final decision about implementing the Presidents
order, said Tuerck. The BHI report can be found at here.
-30-
|
|
|
|