Exclusive: Unions Frozen Out of $89M Rt 9 Bridge Project
Friday, March 23, 2012
Middlesex Construction won Burns Bridge project
“Obviously, we would have preferred if one of the other two bidders” won the contract to design and build the new Kenneth M. Burns bridge over Lake Quinsigamond on Route 9, said Jack Donahue, business manager for Carpenters Union Local 107.
The project is one of the four largest across the state planned for this year, according to the Massachusetts Department of Transportation (MassDOT).
“We believe in local jobs for local people,” he said. “At this point, it doesn’t appear that’s going to be the case. This is unfortunate. This just means (no) jobs for local people.”
Donahue is adopting a wait-and-see attitude over whether local laborers will score jobs on the project.
“The proof will be in the pudding,” he said. “We’ll see who they bring to the job.”
The Middlesex Corp. - a non-union, or merit-shop, based in Littleton - won the contract after bidding $89.8 million, almost $30 million less than the $118 million MassDOT had expected. Two union-based companies, Walsh/Barletta Heavy Joint Venture and White-Skanska Koch Joint Venture, bid $93,392,750 and $119,230,000, respectively.
No labor agreement
Donahue is particularly discouraged there’s no project labor agreement for the Burns bridge project. Also known as a Community Workforce Agreement, a PLA enters contractors into a collective bargaining agreement to establish terms and conditions of employment. It is a controversial practice that, according to opponents such as The National Right to Work Legal Defense Foundation, discriminates against non-union contractors and often results in cost overruns and higher construction costs for taxpayers.
A PLA is typically not issued for this type of project, according to Michael Verseckes, spokesman for MassDOT.
“It is uncommon to have a PLA as part of a state project,” he said. “For the past several years, no highway project has included a PLA.”
The state is also considering a PLA on the Longfellow Bridge reconstruction project in Boston, Verseckes said, “because of the sensitivity of continuous MBTA Red Line operations during that project.”
In addition, there are no requirements for a non-union contractor to hire union workers.
‘Free enterprise’
Bob Mabardy, president of the Northeast Region for Middlesex Corp., took issue with union opposition to the company’s winning bid.
“[Unions] get upset when we get work,” he said. “It’s quite different when their workers get a job. We believe in a free-enterprise system. You shouldn’t have to be in a union to work in the US.”
The lack of a labor agreement in this case, he said, doesn’t change how workers will be hired. Union employees will be among them, he said.
“We pay the prevailing wage, just like unions do” Mabardy said. “It doesn’t matter whether we are an open shop or union. We hire union subcontractors all the time. If they’re low and qualified, they will get the work.”
That is, Donahue conceded, “entirely their right.”
“It’s their job now,” he said. “How they sub out is entirely up to them. That’s obviously why I would have preferred a union company, because I know how they do things.”
Mabardy had no estimate as to how many jobs the Burns bridge project would create, or how many local workers would be retained, saying only, “Some will be local.”
Middlesex Corp. is based in Littleton, with offices in Connecticut and Orlando, Fla. Mabardy did say no out-of-state workers would be brought in on the project.
‘Bottom of the barrel’
Local 107, with about 700 members, sees the contract as a slap in the face to area workers who have struggled through a deep recession the past three-plus years.
“Some people are struggling,” Donahue said in a nod to the economic challenges facing most Massachusetts families. “Things have been relatively good for the past 12 months. There has been work out there.”
One such project has been at the UMass Medical Center, for more than $300 million.
“The feeling is that the economy has stopped falling. I don’t want to say there’s growth, but we’re looking up from the bottom of a barrel.”
There are, according to Mabardy, plenty of jobs to go around, whether a company is union or not.
Still, he said, “We’re willing to hire union subcontractors on any jobs. On the union side, they cannot hire merit-shop subcontractors.”
James Porter, business manager of Local 243 of the Laborers’ International Union in Auburn, did not want to comment at length on the lack of a labor agreement for the Burns bridge project, saying his chapter “is in negotiations” for work.
“I’m sure there will be,” he said when asked whether he thought jobs would be made available to local union workers.
City officials weigh in
While the project is under state control, Worcester Mayor Joseph Petty signaled both his anticipation of a new bridge and support for local workers.
“As mayor I am glad to see state investment into our infrastructure and welcome the additional construction jobs paying prevailing wage in our local economy,” Petty said in a statement. “I am hopeful any major construction project in the city will be able to utilize the skilled labor of our residents.”
City Manager Michael O’Brien said the issue is about ensuring jobs for all city workers, union or otherwise.
“I clearly desire all new construction jobs are Worcester jobs,” he said. “I’ve got to be practical. There are issues with the Constitution that prevent that kind of action. We’ll work with the state and the local contractor … to maximize this opportunity. I focus on the local workforce, whether it’s unionized or unrepresented.”
Related Articles
- Crumbling Bridges to Cost Millions to Worcester Area
- Brown Seeks Police Union Support - Key to Campaign
Follow us on Pinterest Google + Facebook Twitter See It Read It