Skip to main content









Donation Heart Ribbon

Comments made by PMP

Should County Ban Project Labor Agreements?

Did you type that while sitting in a house / building?
Just asking...

Still waiting for a reply to my questions. Able to check out that story regarding illegal, er, "undocumented" union workers yet?

October 15, 2010 at 12:32 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should County Ban Project Labor Agreements?

Thank you smarticul, I'll stick to the point. A PLA is not about regulations benefiting hard worker such as your father. In California we have the Department of Industrial Relations (DIR) tasked with rules and regulations pertaining to our workforce. They set wages through a subsidiary. We have the department of OSHA tasked with the safety of our workers. We have Labor Compliance Programs tasked with checking contractors to make sure workers are paid.
The PLA / PSA in question does none of these. You feel this added layer of rules and regulations is somehow needed to what, keep the fabric of our way of life together? How exactly will not forcing non union contractors to pay union dues impact our global economy? How exactly will not forcing non union employees to forfeit their pension money to union plans be our undoing?
I appreciate your wealth of historical knowledge regarding global economics but fail to see the relevance in this particular instance.
Could you please address my questions and retract your statement regarding illegal aliens as it pertains to this discussion?

October 14, 2010 at 4:14 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should County Ban Project Labor Agreements?

I just listened to the debate. I still haven't heard an answer to how taking $8 an hour from a non union electrician and forcing him / her to contribute to the union pension plan helps local workers? Due to union vesting rules this money is forfeited. How does a non union worker benefit from paying union dues? How does the local workforce benefit when roughly 1000 local state approved non union apprentices are denied the opportunity to work? How exactly does forcing an employee with medical coverage through his / her spouse or an ex military person with VA coverage to buy health insurance from the union benefit the middle class?
Lorena said PLAs set wages, benefits and working conditions for workers, doesn't the state do this? I hear "local hire" quite a bit, why wouldn't a PLA make the ratio of local workers mandatory instead of just a goal. "No work will start until 85% of the on site workforce is deemed local". This should be easy as out of town union workers have an address strangely similar to that of the local union hiring hall.
Strange to hear Lorena talk about lies, the commercial on Hispanic TV telling the people of Chula Vista they could be "picked up for looking Hispanic" if PLAs were banned was just "stretching the truth" I guess. Telling people union workers couldn't work on a non PLA job was probably an example of her just "misspeaking". Oh well, the beat goes on...

October 14, 2010 at 3:57 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should County Ban Project Labor Agreements?

"scottw", Many non union contractors have benefit plans similar to those of the unions. Non union contractors paying the "fringe benefit" portion of the wage determination on the employee's paycheck are at a severe disadvantage in the bidding process. Money given to an employee in the form of benefits (health insurance & retirement) is not subject to worker's compensation costs and payroll taxes. Including the fringe money on the check makes it subject to these additional costs, roughly 22% depending on the worker's comp mod rate.
A non union electrician who gives this additional money to the employee instead of providing benefits would see an additional labor cost of roughly $3.52 an hour per employee.
There is no benefit or competitive edge for a non union contractor who doesn't provide employee benefits, quite the opposite. Assuming union contractors have roughly the same profit margin built in to their bids a non union contractor paying the total wage amount on the employee's pay check shouldn't be able to compete. Are union contractors (not union workers) entitled to a greater amount of profit? Why is it we need these extra rules for a union contractor to compete? Why does a tax paying American have to pay (union dues) for the privilege of working on public property whose work their tax dollars will fund?
How many PLA supporters would back a CLA? A Christian Labor Agreement put in place because elected officials put in to office buy PAC donations felt Christian contractors would be more inclined to give an honest bid. How about non Christian workers being forced to make contributions to a local church?
PLAs are not about union workers. They are not put in place by union workers. PLAs are deals cut buy people who make their living off the backs of hard working union members and politicians elected with union contributions.

October 14, 2010 at 1:38 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Should County Ban Project Labor Agreements?

"smarticul", would do well to come down from his 30,000 foot perch and get a grasp regarding what this issue is really about.
A Project Labor Agreement (PLA) or Project Stabilization Agreement (PSA) has nothing to do with the "regulation of the marketplace" and sure as hell doesn't benefit "the middle class". The regulations "you" speak of regarding worker wages, benefits, safety and equally as important compliance of the regulations by employers are already done by the state. These regulations already exist and are enforced with or without a PLA.
There is no benefit regarding the employment of illegal aliens on public works projects because wages are set and enforced BY THE STATE. You may want to rethink your statement regarding illegal aliens not being union members by the way. A certain union dry wall contractor was recently caught with roughly 80 illegal aliens on work being done for Camp Pendleton, feel free to Google it.
What a PLA does do is force non union workers to pay union dues. It forces non union workers to forfeit $8 an hour to union pension plans. It forces people with health coverage through a spouse or the military to buy insurance from the union. The SDUSD PSA went as far as banning 1000 LOCAL STATE APPROVED apprentices from working on the projects. Their crime you ask, well they were convicted of being non union. That's right, schools that many of them attended and who's property taxes will repay the bond can't work on the jobs.
If this is your idea of a regulated workforce or a benefit to the middle class then you may want to come down from 30,000 feet as the air is a little thin.

October 14, 2010 at 12:45 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Apprentices, Zipcodes at Issue in School Labor Deal

Strange how the San Diego Unified School District thinks nothing of offering an education to anyone regardless of citizenship status yet discriminates against the very people that will have to pay for the Prop S Bond. I wonder why the trustees didn't share their social experiment with the tax paying citizens of San Diego BEFORE the Prop S school bond was voted on? I wonder how many non union contractors who live in the area and will have their property taxes assessed would have voted for this bond had they known they would be denied the opportunity to work on the project? I wonder, due to the lack of union workers how many people will come from out of state and be dispatched out of the "local" union hiring hall? I wonder.

August 11, 2009 at 2:20 p.m. ( | suggest removal )

Non-Union Contractors Sue S.D. Unified Over Prop. S

Stephanie, I'm not sure what you call being shut out but the wording in the agreement clearly states that STATE APPROVED non union apprentices will not be allowed to work on Prop S funded school work. Yes Stephanie, these individuals who LIVE IN THE AREA and will pay for the bond will not have the oppertunity to work on the schools they and their children went / go to.
Where exactly did you get your information regarding being "kicked out" of the non union training program?
Perhaps you could explain why a non union contractor has to hire every other employee out of the union hiring hall under this agreement. How about the fact that non union employees must contribute to the union's retirement plan which due to vesting they won't see on dime of their hard earned pension contributions. Stephanie, maybe you could comment on the dire straits of union retirement plans and how non union contractors working under this Prop S agreement have to pay "their fare share" of the union pension plan deficit.
Funny how our school system stands behind everyone getting a tax payer funded education regardless of citizenship yet we deny San Diego citizens the opportunity to build the buildings the education is provided in just because they don't belong to an association (union). In this time of dire education funding our school system voted to eliminate 85% of the construction industry (non union) from bidding / working on a project WE WILL ALL END UP PAYING FOR.
Stephanie please save your sound bites for those less informed.

Philip M. Piel

July 31, 2009 at 11:47 a.m. ( | suggest removal )