Pros And Cons Of Project Labor Agreements

Why Project Labor Agreements Are Not in the Public Interest According to Tuerck
Gerardo Haro
ENGU 103 - Writhing and Rhetoric
Professor Margy Calil Ameritas College of Brandman University

Abstract
On this document we are going to see the pros and cons, about the Project Laborer Agreement (PLA). WE are going to explore the point of view of David G. Tuerck. On how are Unions in Decline, The History of PLAs, The Strikes that did not Happen, The Nexus between PLAs and the prevailing wage law, the Union Arguments for PLAs, How Real are the treads for labor peace, and Effect and cost David G. Tuerck is Chairman and Professor of Economies and Executive Director of the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, Boston.
Why Project Labor Agreements Are Not in the Public Interest This paper is my personal points of view, about how David G. Tuerk is providing his arguments to how good or bad are the project labor agreements (PLA) to the construction industry, and all the persons involved on this industry like workers, and public and private contractor, unions and nonunion. The writer sets out the reasons why project labor agreements (PLAs) between owners of construction projects and construction unions cannot be rationalized as beneficial to the average construction worker. Tuerck wants the reader to believe the PLAs are not right distributed equally for private contractor and unionized contractor or union. The way PLA affects the private contractor on the convenience of using a PLA. The PLA increases profitability, other than reduces it. Assuming the choice is freely made without the threat of union retaliation should the decision go against PLA? Tuerk expresses that the private owner do not have the capacity or the incentive, to subordinate the interests of their shareholders in similar manner. The writer describes the PLA as a contract between owner of construction project and construction Unions, where contractors have to get in a collective negotiation to get that specific project between unions and contractor. They have to hire workers through union hiring halls. It does not matter they are union or not. The worker has to pay union dues whether they belong to a union or not. PLA are use on public and private project. Disney World and the Trans-Alaska Pipeline, both private projects, were conducted under PLAs. The writer is focused on private project. Any ways, both are under pressure, politically to enter into PLAs, to agree to terms Favorable to the Unions (Tuerck, 2009). The group of reader the writer is addressing. Are the general public event that he thinks the general public is not interesting on the Project Labor Agreement PLA. However, this paper is directed to union and not union workers, public and private constructor as well: school boards, transportation authorities, governmental entities, and public and private project owners. The writer wants to persuade the audience how uneven the PLA’s are for the private contractor. The writer is showing the PLA is only good for union and is putting private contract in disadvantage in from of the union. He says PLA are incrementing the cost of the project. By one estimate, PLAs add 12-18 percent to the cost of public project. PLAs were banned from federally funded construction project throughout the administration of President George Bush. Had they not been banned and had they been applied to major federal construction project conducted in the final year of the Bush administration, they would, by the same estimate have increased construction cost by 1.6 to $2.6 billion in that year (Tuerck et al, 2009) The types of appeals the writer use on this paper are logos and ethos. The way the writer introduce his self-showing his title, the preparation he has, and the people he used to support the realization of this project made it more relevant for the audience. David G. Tuerck is Chairman and Professor of Economies and Executive Director of the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, Boston. He thanks Krum Dukin, Frank Conte, and Nicolas Cachanosky for their help (Tuerck, 2010). This citation gives his paper more credibility, making the reader more confident and comfortable, with that content of the work he did on this paper. The ethos and logos the writer uses in his paper give more relevance to his work. Some examples are: “ Despite the clout they continue to exercise in the political arena, the power of unions to set wages and to control work rules is declining. Over the period 1983–2008 (the period over which comparable data are available), there was a decline in the percentage of workers who belonged to unions and a decline in the wage “premium” earned by union members. The fraction of all U.S. workers who belonged to unions fell from 20.1 percent in 1983 to 12.4 percent in 2008 (U.S. BLS 2009a). In 1983, union workers earned 38.2 percent more than nonunion workers. By 2008, this wage premium had shrunk to 28.2 percent” (Tuerck 2009b) “ The construction industry is far too fractionalized for even the biggest construction firms to be able to suppress wages or impose onerous work rules” (Tuerck et al, 2009). According to the U.S. Census Bureau (2007). The problem is illustrated by a lawsuit (Electrical Contractors 2009) that was brought by an electrical contractor against the State of Connecticut after the contractor, which was the lowest bidder, was denied a school building project for refusing to operate under a PLA. In an affidavit filed in connection with the suit, an officer of the firm pointed out how the PLA at issue undermined his firm 's ability to compete for the project (Tuerck, 2009). Such are the motives that underlie the unions ' support for PLAs.
The arguments used to pitch PLAs to voters and politicians are quite another matter. Once we leave the world of motives and enter the world of politics and public relations, the picture changes dramatically. Tuerck’s counter-argument is: there is a public-relations campaign by the unions to make their case before water authorities, school committees, government agencies, the courts, and the public. The task of the unions, in conducting this campaign, is to show that PLAs serve the public interest rather than merely the interests of their members and officials (Tuerck,
2009). The unions ' approach to this task is to argue that PLAs are necessary for projects that are particularly “complex.” It is necessary, so the unions argue, for construction owners contemplating such projects to enter into pre-hire arrangements with the unions before they put the project out to bid. Failing to understand this principle, so they warn, will create the prospect of disruptions, delays, and cost overruns once these particularly complex projects have gotten under way. PLAs, we are told, are necessary to assure “labor peace” over the life of a project (Tuerck, 2009).

On this paper Tuerck objects to the opposing side’s argument where the PLA are obsolete.
PLAs start at some time on 1938, when, work began on the Shasta dam in California. A contractor taking a project this size would see PLAs as a method of maintaining labor peace. Another objection the writer has is the union worker makes more money than nonunion. He states that in 1983, union construction workers earned 74 percent more per week than non union construction workers. In 2008, they earned 51.8 percent more (Tuerck 2009d) One more point Tuerck has is the prevailing wage laws, imposed by federal government and by most states, the purpose of which is to put a floor on wages paid construction workers on public projects. He also says that nowadays there are no strikes and no-lockouts, because nonunion worker do not
strike. In any way that this is the opinion of the writer and was focused in a point of view is not supporter of unions. It is intended to persuade public opinion and workers in the construction industry to be against unionized labor.

References
Tuerck, D.; Glassman, S.; and Bachman, P. (2009) ”Project Labor Agreements on Federal Construction Projects: A Costly Solution in Search of a Problem.“ Boston: The Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University. Available at www.beaconhill.org/BHIStudies/PLA2009/PLAFÍnal090923.pdf.
U.S. Census Bureau (2007) “conomic Fact Sheet. Selected Statistics from the 2007 Economic Census, 2007 Economic Sectors.