Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. letter to Nelson Castellanos, January 16, 2001

ROBERT L. EHRLICH, JR. 2D District, Maryland (2021 225-3061 Ehrlich®™, II. house, gov COMMERCE COMMITTEE ASSISTANT DEPUTY MAJORITY WHIP Congress of tfje Unite!) States Щош of SeprestntatibES Mlaatjington, 2ЭС 20515-2002 January 16, 2001 Mr. Nelson Castellanos Division Administrator Federal Highway Administration 711 West 40th Street Suite 220 Baltimore, Maryland 2121 1 SUITE 304 Lutherville. MD 21093 Bel Air. MD 21014 1011 Old Eastern Avenue Essex. MD 21221 (410)780-3911 ke Shore Professional Bldg. (410) 255-6983 Re: Inquiry/Opposition to Proposed Union-Only PLA on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project Dear Mr. Castellanos: I write in opposition to a proposal by the State of Maryland to impose a set of bid specifications upon contracts to be awarded for construction of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project. The proposed bid specifications would require all bidders to agree, as a condition of contract award, to recognize certain labor unions as the sole and exclusive representatives of all craft employees performing work on the project, and to agree to numerous other discriminatory provisions related to this government-mandated "union-only" requirement. It is my understanding the proposed bid specifications have been submitted to your office for approval, and that such approval is required by the terms of federal financial assistance for construction of the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project. I strongly urge the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) to disapprove the proposed bid specifications in their present form. They are inconsistent with the Competition in Contracting Act and the Department of Transportation’s guidelines implementing President Clinton’s 1997 Memorandum on Project Labor Agreements (PLAs). In my view, the statements published by the Maryland Department of Transportation in support of the PLA fail to provide adequate justification for imposing its union-only provisions. For example, the Maryland Department of Transportation’s press release incorrectly claims that the PLA will "enhance open competition" and will "provide for a stable work force." There is no evidence to support these assertions. Moreover, I have serious concerns with respect to how and why the State arrived at the conclusion that the imposition of the unprecedented union-only PLA serves the interests of Maryland and federal taxpayers. The following is a brief description of my concerns: First, substantial evidence from this geographic area shows the proposed PLA will discourage qualified non-union contractors (85% of Maryland contractors) from bidding on the project. In fact, several major non-union Maryland contractors have publicly and privately expressed the view that they cannot (and will not) bid on the Woodrow Wilson Bridge Project if the PLA is imposed.