Apparently the folks at the Mackinac Center in Midland have just realized that there is a small group on Capitol Hill known as pro-labor Republicans.
U.S. Reps. Candy Miller and Thad McCotter (who represents parts of western Oakland and Wayne counties) are routinely included in that bloc. So, of course, the Mackinac Center has pilloried them.
The anti-labor think tank is aghast that the two Michigan Republicans voted against legislation that requires prevailing wages – union-level wages – to be paid on federal government construction projects.
The vote occurred on Feb. 19 but the center apparently just discovered this bit of GOP treason. The House vote was 210-210, so Miller and McCotter are blamed for the legislation failing to secure majority approval.
Because of that vote and two others, Miller and McCotter each received a grade of “F” from another anti-union group, the Competitive Enterprise Institute.
At issue in the February vote was the pre-construction pacts known as Project Labor Agreements, which are required by the Obama administration. PLAs typically require that the construction contractor hire all workers through union halls and follow union rules on wages and workplace safety.
Critics complain that this gives the Building Trades unions a monopoly on federal projects. The non-union contractors also don’t want to pay union wages or require their workers to pay union dues over the course of the project. On the other side of the ledger, PLAs demand labor harmony, usually by banning strikes or walkouts.
According to the anti-union groups, voting to eliminate PLAs is a “pro-worker” stance. Our resident tax fighter, Leon Drolet, takes a much tougher angle, subtly comparing the killing of the bill to the crucifixion of Jesus Christ.
“I hope they got their 30 pieces of silver,” Drolet, chairman of the Michigan Taxpayers Alliance, said.
An occasional critic of moderate Republicans, Drolet later added: “I am pissed. Really pissed.”
Non-union contractors claim they can do these jobs cheaper than the Building Trades, while union officials say that they provide highly skilled workers who earn decent wages and benefits.
Non-union contractors claim they can do these jobs cheaper than the Building Trades, while union officials say that they provide highly skilled workers who earn decent wages and benefits.
A union official in New Hampshire, in the home district of the congressman who proposed the legislation, immodestly claimed that non-union contractors – and contractors around the world — can’t match the quality of U.S. Building Trades workers.
“It is a business model that offers increased job-site efficiencies through a steady, local supply of the safest, most highly trained and productive skilled craft workforce known to mankind — a workforce developed through almost a billion dollars a year in private investments in apprenticeship training programs nationwide that, in turn, develops a workforce that commands pay and benefits that are reflective of their skill and productivity levels (which numerous and rigorous academic studies have shown actually reduces costs for public agencies),” said Joe Casey, president of the New Hampshire Building Trades Council. “And, let’s not forget, those higher pay rates contribute to a more sound local tax base — not to mention the health of local small businesses like car dealerships, restaurants and retail stores.”
Chad, PLAs have nothing to do with federal prevailing wage and benefit rates. They are already law on federal and federally-assisted construction projects because of the Davis-Bacon Act and apply regardless of whether a PLA is used or not. So arguments about wage and benefit rates don't apply to this issue. The Guinta amendment would prohibit the funding of projects subject to government-mandated PLAs. These special interest PLA schemes discourage competition from qualified nonunion contractors and force contractors to hire union workers. Imagine if the Lions were forced to use the offensive line of the Vikings or Coke was forced to use Pepsi employees? The government should stay out of that decision making process but the unions need them to intervene because they can't compete in the free market without their help. Besides, contractors could still voluntarily enter into PLAs under the amendment without disturbing the competitive market. This isn't a states rights issue, this is all about putting an end to special interest favoritism ushered in by the Obama Administration with their kickbacks to unions.
Chad, I think you may have missed the point… It isnt' about being pro or anti-union. It's about treatimng all workers equally, union and non-union alike. A Project Labor Agreement stipulates that only workers who abide by a union collective bargaining agreement can perform work on a public project. This is discrimination based upon labor affiliation. Just as it is wrong for government to mandade a "non-union-only" project, it is wrong to likewise mandate a "union-only project." Both extremes are despicable and this vote was about providing equal opportunbity to all workers, union and non-union alike.
Chad, We suggest that you do your own in-depth research and not reprint from the union's playbook. Shame on you!
PLA’s discriminate against 86% of the construction craft professionals that choose not to be represented by a collective bargaining agreement. They are a sweetheart deal designed to benefit a special interest group who cannot otherwise compete in a Free Market.
Representatives Miller and McCotter know these facts and they chose to bury Free Enterprise. Next time you hear either one of them talk about Open or Free Markets, remember how they voted in February.