My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2019/10/16 Council Agenda Packet
>
Council Agenda Packets
>
2019
>
2019/10/16 Council Agenda Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
10/22/2019 10:19:56 AM
Creation date
10/22/2019 10:17:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Council Agenda Packet
Date
10/16/2019
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
80
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
appealed and,the U.S.Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia overturned the lower court <br /> decision and ordered the judge to lift the injunction on July 12, 2002. In handing down its <br /> decision,the appeals court found that the NLRA did not preempt the executive order as the AFL- <br /> CIO argued.20 The unions disagreed and filed to have the case reviewed by the United States <br /> Supreme Court. In April 2003,the Supreme Court declined to review the case,and the President's <br /> 2001 executive order remained in place.21 <br /> On February 6,2009,shortly after entering office,President Obama issued Executive Order 13502, <br /> which changed federal government's policy to one that encouraged executive agencies to <br /> consider requiring, on a case-by-case basis, the use of PLAs related to large-scale construction <br /> projects (projects where the federal cost exceeded $25 million).22 The executive order claimed <br /> that,without a PLA,large-scale construction projects are likely to experience(1)labor"disputes," <br /> (2) difficulties in predicting labor costs and in avoiding interruptions in labor supply, (3) a lack <br /> of coordination on construction projects and (4) uncertainty about the terms and conditions of <br /> employment of workers—all of which ostensibly lead to delays and cost overruns.23 If this were <br /> true,then federal construction projects initiated during the George W.Bush Administration's ban <br /> on PLAs should have been rife with labor disputes leading to cost overruns and delays. <br /> That was not the case,however. A 2009 study by the Beacon Hill Institute found no evidence of <br /> any labor disputes or delays on the$57 billion of federal construction projects with a price over <br /> $25 million that were performed during George W.Bush's presidency.24 <br /> 20"Bush Administration,Construction Unions in Fight Over Project Labor Agreements,"Bulletin <br /> Broadfaxing Network,December 5,2002. <br /> 21 Halloran&Sage LLP, "Union Activity Across the Country," Connecticut Employment Law Letter 11,M. <br /> Lee Smith Publishers&Printers,(April 2003). <br /> 22U.S.Department of Labor, "Implementation of Project Labor Agreements in Federal Construction <br /> Projects:An Evaluation,Interactive Elements Corporation&Hill International,"(February 25,2011) <br /> https://www.dol.goviaspkvaluation/reports/20110225.pdf. <br /> 23 David G.Tuerck,Paul Bachman and Sarah Glassman,Project Labor Agreements:A Costly Solution in <br /> Search of a Problem,The Beacon Hill Institute,(August,2009), <br /> http://www.beaconhill.orgBHlStudies/PLA2009/PLAFina1090923.pdf,4. <br /> 24'bid,6. <br /> The Anticompetitive Effects of Project Labor Agreements on Public Construction in Washington State 10 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.