Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Procurement Project Labor Agreements topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Contractors urge lawmakers to bar mandated project labor agreements on state projects (SB 88)
Summary
Supporters of SB 88 told the House Labor Committee that requiring project labor agreements (PLAs) on state contracts raises costs and reduces competition; union and labor representatives opposed the proposal, saying PLAs can secure local hiring and quality work. The committee heard both sides and closed the hearing without a vote.
The committee heard testimony on Senate Bill 88, which would prohibit the state from mandating project labor agreements on state or state‑funded construction projects. Proponents — including construction company owners, the Associated Builders and Contractors and the Associated General Contractors of New Hampshire — said mandatory PLAs restrict the pool of eligible bidders, increase project costs and can drive contractors out of state.
Tim Long, president of Meridian Construction, told the committee his firm has completed many state projects and that forced PLAs would upset longstanding procurement practices that allow merit‑shop and union employers alike to bid. Josh Reap of the Associated Builders and Contractors cited studies and industry analyses he said show PLAs can increase costs and reduce competition. The proponents asked for a carve‑out for emergency procurements and for the bill to apply to state — not municipal — projects.
Speakers from labor and the AFL‑CIO strongly opposed the bill. Alan Raph of the NH AFL‑CIO argued SB 88 is a solution in search of a problem and said PLAs can secure local hiring, training and on‑time delivery. Representatives from both sides said they could provide further data comparing costs and local workforce impacts.
No committee action followed. Lawmakers closed the hearing and said they would consult written materials submitted for the record and consider follow‑up questions.
Ending: The committee did not take a vote and left the record open for additional materials from industry and labor.
