Wilson Opposes Union-Only Labor Agreement at Los Alamos

Press Release

Date: Jan. 18, 2008
Location: Washington, DC
Issues: Labor Unions


Wilson Opposes Union-Only Labor Agreement at Los Alamos

Union-only agreement for projects at Los Alamos under consideration

Congresswoman Heather Wilson (R-NM) is opposed to a proposed project labor agreement (PLA) currently under consideration at Los Alamos National Laboratory for current and future construction projects at the lab.

Wilson has written a letter to Dr. Michael Anastasio, Director of Los Alamos urging him to reject a project labor agreement for construction projects at the lab. In the letter, Wilson outlines her concerns and those of the business community with an agreement that would hurt contractors in New Mexico.

This PLA could restrict non-union construction companies and their employees from bidding and working on projects at Los Alamos. Unionized companies and workers would have exclusive job rights on construction projects at the lab.

Wilson spoke with business leaders in New Mexico who would be negatively impacted by a union-only agreement and reinforced her opposition to this proposal.

"Project labor agreements stifle competition for construction projects and effectively exclude a large number of contractors from bidding and construction," Wilson wrote to Director Anastasio.

Over 90% of the construction workforce in New Mexico is non-union. This project labor agreement is opposed by the New Mexico Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors, the Minority Business Association, and the Hispano Chamber of Commerce, as well as numerous individual contractors in New Mexico.

"Project Labor Agreements are bad for New Mexico," said Dawn Matson of the New Mexico Chapter of Associated Builders and Contractors. "They drive up construction costs by reducing competition among project bidders. They also have a poor track record for encouraging the hiring of local employees and putting to work small businesses, minorities, and veterans. LANL is already experiencing budget cuts; why add construction cost increases to the mix?"


Source
arrow_upward