LANSING - Are construction industry project labor agreements the "Gift of God or Work of the Devil?"

That was how Associate Professor Dr. Dale Belman of the Michigan State University School of Labor and Industrial Relations summed up the construction industry's contrasting views of PLAs, in a presentation to the Michigan Building and Construction Trades Council's Legislative Conference on March 1.

Belman told delegates that he is taking part in two academic research projects on project labor agreements, and found that when all the hype and criticism are moved aside, "we found that PLAs don't increase costs, but don't reduce costs, either."

There are two ongoing studies on the use, or non-use of PLAs on school construction which were cited by Belman and will be completed this year. One is by researchers at Michigan State University and the University of Tennessee, the other is a group project by the research arm of the National Electrical Contractors Association, the University of Rhode Island and the University of Utah.

The results of these studies, Belman said, will run counter to a year-old "Beacon Hill Study" of schools in Massachusetts, which found that PLAs increase costs on public school projects by 14-17 percent. Belman said the Beacon Hill study was flawed because it looked at complex school projects that would tend to cost more, anyway.

Another recent study, by Hill International, found that a PLA saved 8 percent on labor costs on a freeway project in New York state.

Belman said that while the two ongoing studies found the cost factors involving PLAs are benign, it also highlighted many of the reasons the agreements are controversial - as well as who does and doesn't benefit.

While the agreements vary from job to job and state to state, most have basic premises. Project labor agreements are collectively bargained, pre-hire pacts between an owner or an owner's representative, and organized labor. Once negotiated, agreeing to the terms of the PLA becomes a requirement for contractors bidding for work on the project. Although PLAs seem to have been invented in the 1990s, Belman said their use dates to World War I.

Among the arguments for PLAs, typically made by the union side, are: no work disruptions; better scheduling; guaranteed access to skilled workers, and institutional support for training.

Unions also benefit by the use of unions as a hiring hall, collectively bargained compensation, union security provisions, and the implicit use of signatory employers and union labor.

With PLAs, unions typically give up: the ability to have strikes or slowdowns, neutral third party arbitration of disputes, sometimes harmonization of working times, some premium pay, favorable to journeyman-to-apprenticeship ratios, and drug/safety language.

Among the arguments against PLAs, using arguments typically made by the nonunion side: open shops are usually excluded, scheduling and training are no better; strikes are still possible, and projects cost more.

Project labor agreements can be standardized - or they can vary widely from project to project. Some owners shun them, others insist on them. When it builds plants in the U.S., for example, nonunion Toyota insists on the use of project labor agreements.

Without any built-in cost savings, Belman said, "unions need to learn to educate themselves and learn to use PLAs effectively."

For example, he said unions needed to decide when to be flexible for the greater good. One $7 million project that would have used a PLA fell apart because the owner insisted on using his own nonunion contractor for the $100,000 landscaping portion of the project.

While many union trades workers have little use for project labor agreements - especially the drug testing and restricted access to premium time - Belman maintained that the workforce predictability and standardization brought by PLAs "are very favorable to organized labor. A lot of open shop firms can't make money on PLA projects."

He said project labor agreements "are all about crafting a smoother project for the owner. And when one owner is happy, maybe he will tell six other owners."