Northern Virginia business leaders are calling on the authority overseeing the 23-mile Metrorail extension to Loudoun County to scrap plans for a deal with organized labor that they say will drive up costs and dampen competition for non-union contractors.
Virginia Attorney General Ken Cuccinelli II (R) has threatened to sue the authority, saying a mandatory pro-union agreement is at odds with the state’s right-to-work law.
And a group of Republican state delegates from Virginia’s Washington suburbs is demanding an investigation of the decision by the Metropolitan Washington Airports Authority board to seek a labor agreement, because one of the board’s members is a top union official whose workers stand to benefit from such a deal.
“Should MWAA move forward with this ill-advised measure, it will discriminate against non-union construction firms . . . discourage competition and ultimately greatly increase the overall cost,” Dels. Timothy D. Hugo (R-Fairfax), Barbara J. Comstock (R-Fairfax) and Thomas A. Greason (R-Loudoun) wrote in a letter to Cuccinelli, requesting an investigation of the board’s decision.
The embattled airports board is already under scrutiny for its oversight of the multibillion-dollar rail line and the rising cost of the second leg of the project. Debate over the labor agreement has been overshadowed by protests from elected officials over the board’s vote in favor of building an underground Metro station at Dulles International Airport, which is more expensive than an aboveground option.
At issue now is the board’s decision this spring that would require the lead contractor on the job to sign a labor agreement setting wages, benefits, work schedules and other conditions. Board Chairman Charles D. Snelling, who backed the 11 to 2 decision, said the criticism is premature because the authority has not yet drafted the labor provisions.
Board member Dennis L. Martire, the labor leader who pushed for the agreement, said his participation was appropriate. The opposition, he said, is based on ideology — not experience.
“The fight here is more political than it is about building a project on time and on budget. That’s the problem,” said Martire, a vice president of the Laborers’ International Union of North America.
Project labor agreements
There is broad debate and competing research about the benefits and drawbacks of project labor agreements.
Fred B. Kotler of Cornell University’s school of Industrial and Labor Relations said labor agreements are essentially “job site constitutions” that provide cost savings by establishing predictable schedules and minimal work disruptions. Many factors, such as market conditions, affect the number of bidders, and Kotler said there is no evidence that such agreements translate into fewer bids or higher costs.
Opponents, including the Associated Builders and Contractors, point to studies that show labor agreements can drive up the cost of construction between 12 percent and 18 percent. The trade association, which represents merit-shop firms, says making such an agreement mandatory would ensure that most of the rail line jobs go to out-of-state union members.
The Post MostMost-viewed stories, videos, and galleries in the past two hours
Live Q&A, Friday 11 a.m. ET
The 2012 Post Hunt -- a wild contest of brainteasing puzzles -- kicks off on Sunday, June 3 in downtown Washington, D.C.
| 11:00 AM | Real Wheels Live |
|---|---|
| 11:00 AM | The Fix Live |
| 11:00 AM | 2012 Post Hunt: Are you ready? |
| 12:00 PM | Carolyn Hax Live: Advice columnist tackles your problems (Friday, June 1) |
Loading...
Comments