Pros And Cons Of Project Labor Agreements
Why Project Labor Agreements Are Not in the Public Interest According to Tuerck
Gerardo Haro
ENGU 103 - Writhing and Rhetoric
Professor Margy Calil Ameritas College of Brandman University
Abstract
On this document we are going to see the pros and cons, about the Project Laborer Agreement (PLA). WE are going to explore the point of view of David G. Tuerck. On how are Unions in Decline, The History of PLAs, The Strikes that did not Happen, The Nexus between PLAs and the prevailing wage law, the Union Arguments for PLAs, How Real are the treads for labor peace, and Effect and cost David G. Tuerck is Chairman and Professor of Economies and Executive Director of the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, Boston. …show more content…
The arguments used to pitch PLAs to voters and politicians are quite another matter. Once we leave the world of motives and enter the world of politics and public relations, the picture changes dramatically. Tuerck’s counter-argument is: there is a public-relations campaign by the unions to make their case before water authorities, school committees, government agencies, the courts, and the public. The task of the unions, in conducting this campaign, is to show that PLAs serve the public interest rather than merely the interests of their members and officials (Tuerck, …show more content…
PLAs start at some time on 1938, when, work began on the Shasta dam in California. A contractor taking a project this size would see PLAs as a method of maintaining labor peace. Another objection the writer has is the union worker makes more money than nonunion. He states that in 1983, union construction workers earned 74 percent more per week than non union construction workers. In 2008, they earned 51.8 percent more (Tuerck 2009d) One more point Tuerck has is the prevailing wage laws, imposed by federal government and by most states, the purpose of which is to put a floor on wages paid construction workers on public projects. He also says that nowadays there are no strikes and no-lockouts, because nonunion worker do not
Gerardo Haro
ENGU 103 - Writhing and Rhetoric
Professor Margy Calil Ameritas College of Brandman University
Abstract
On this document we are going to see the pros and cons, about the Project Laborer Agreement (PLA). WE are going to explore the point of view of David G. Tuerck. On how are Unions in Decline, The History of PLAs, The Strikes that did not Happen, The Nexus between PLAs and the prevailing wage law, the Union Arguments for PLAs, How Real are the treads for labor peace, and Effect and cost David G. Tuerck is Chairman and Professor of Economies and Executive Director of the Beacon Hill Institute at Suffolk University, Boston. …show more content…
The arguments used to pitch PLAs to voters and politicians are quite another matter. Once we leave the world of motives and enter the world of politics and public relations, the picture changes dramatically. Tuerck’s counter-argument is: there is a public-relations campaign by the unions to make their case before water authorities, school committees, government agencies, the courts, and the public. The task of the unions, in conducting this campaign, is to show that PLAs serve the public interest rather than merely the interests of their members and officials (Tuerck, …show more content…
PLAs start at some time on 1938, when, work began on the Shasta dam in California. A contractor taking a project this size would see PLAs as a method of maintaining labor peace. Another objection the writer has is the union worker makes more money than nonunion. He states that in 1983, union construction workers earned 74 percent more per week than non union construction workers. In 2008, they earned 51.8 percent more (Tuerck 2009d) One more point Tuerck has is the prevailing wage laws, imposed by federal government and by most states, the purpose of which is to put a floor on wages paid construction workers on public projects. He also says that nowadays there are no strikes and no-lockouts, because nonunion worker do not