The Columbus Dispatch, June 19, 2010, Saturday

Copyright 2010 The Columbus Dispatch
All Rights Reserved

The Columbus Dispatch (Ohio)

June 19, 2010, Saturday

Project-labor agreements prevent costly construction delays

Having recently been "quoted" by your newspaper concerning several issues that now appear as editorials, I feel compelled to respond to numerous misstatements.

With regard to Franklin County's quality-contracting standards ("Enough already," editorial, Monday), The Dis-patch asserts that recent decisions to disqualify low bidders "were made by two different sets of Democratic county commissioners," implying that the standards were put in place as a payoff to organized labor.

This statement still ignores a fact I have pointed out to the editorial staff: that the county's policy was put in place unanimously by a Republican-majority Board of Commissioners that included Dewey Stokes and Arlene Shoemaker.

Moreover, the policy, which helps screen out serial lawbreakers, was not designed to steer contracts to union con-tractors but rather to ensure that the county deals only with reputable contractors. Jess Howard Electric Co., a nonunion contractor, was awarded the disputed contract for the new animal shelter after the county rejected the apparent low bidder because of its multiple violations of the law.

The Dispatch also takes the Ohio School Facilities Commission and Richard Murray, its executive director, to task for adopting a project-labor agreement for the Ohio School for the Deaf and the Ohio State School for the Blind ("Your tax dollars at work," editorial, Tuesday). The Dispatch ridiculed Murray for his concern for the well-being of students, a concern Murray consistently has expressed for all students, not just the students facing unique challenges at these schools.

In doing so, the editorial staff sidesteps the primary thrust of Murray's reasoning: The project-labor agreement should prevent costly delays by allowing the commission to effectively coordinate the numerous contractors on the site, standardizing working conditions, guaranteeing no strikes and no lockouts, providing a streamlined dispute-resolution procedure and giving contractors ready access to a pool of well-trained and highly skilled workers who have undergone the thorough background checks negotiated as part of the agreement.

Both the U.S. and Ohio Supreme Courts -- neither a bastion of Democrat nor union power -- have approved the use of such agreements on a wide variety of public projects.

Finally, The Dispatch has asserted that the project-labor agreement and the use of organized labor on the project will increase its cost by 10 percent to 15 percent. This assertion has no merit. The project was always subject to the prevailing-wage law, and because all bidders, union and nonunion alike, must pay the same rate of wages, it cannot legitimately be argued that project-labor agreements increase labor costs and inflate the cost of public construction.

Indeed, numerous academic studies have concluded that "there is no evidence to support claims that project labor agreements either limit the pool of bidders or drive up actual construction costs." See Fred B. Kotler's March 2009 report "Project Labor Agreements in New York State: In the Public Interest," from the Cornell University School of Industrial and Labor Relations. See also Dale Belman, Matthew Bodah and Peter Philips' report from January 2007, "Project Labor Agreements," for ELECTRI International: "The presence of a PLA does not have a statistically signifi-cant effect on the final cost of a project." From Belman, Russell Ormiston, William Schriver and Richard Kelso's paper "The Effect of Project Labor Agreements on the Cost of School Construction," in the upcoming Journal of Industrial Relations: "There is no evidence that PLAs increase the costs of school construction."

The commission and Murray should not be attacked for their decision to use a project-labor agreement at the Deaf and Blind schools. This is an innovative project using some construction technology not commonly used in this area.

Obstructing the project with a political argument can add cost and delay with no benefit to the students.
PASQUALE MANZI \ Executive secretary-treasurer \ Columbus/Central Ohio Building and Construction Trades Council

LOAD-DATE: June 19, 2010