It’s a basic question, and I have not a clue about how this would pertain to government contracts in the war. I am sure there is some clause for overseas contingency operations that do not allow labor unions with wartime contracts. I could be wrong, and this is an area that is way out of my lane. (any legal eagles want to step in, or maybe even the folks at IPOA)
Plus, with how globalized contracting has become with DoD and DoS contracts, I just don’t see how you could force some Sri Lankan working at the DEFAC for KBR to pay the dues for some union. There are just so many pieces to this, and I really have never explored this area.
Now I have heard of numerous discussions amongst contractors while working out there, revolving around organizing. Most of the times, it was all talk born from poor labor practices of companies. There have even been some attempts at creating unions for this industry, but nothing with any teeth or longevity. I could be wrong, and there might be some solid stuff out there that I am not aware of. I know for CONUS, there are security related unions. But for OCONUS, I have yet to see it.
For fun though, what would happen if we were forced to be unionize? Would that be a good thing, or a bad thing? –Matt
—————————————————————–
Can the Government Force Contractors to Unionize?
By Jim Garrettson
March 29, 2010
Executive order 13502 [1]from February 2009 garnered relatively little attention when it was issued. It reads, “in order to promote the efficient administration and completion of Federal construction projects,” executive agencies are allowed to require contractors working on federal construction projects to implement “Project Labor Agreements.”
This order applies to any construction, renovation or rehabilitation project that costs over $25 million, and encompasses all agencies but the GAO. The order also rescinded Bush’s Executive Order 13202 [2]from February, 2001, which prohibits the government from requiring contractors to abide by these agreements, or discriminating against contractors for “refusing to become or remain signatories or otherwise to adhere to agreements with one or more labor organizations, on the same or other related construction project(s).”
Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) [3] require all employees working on a specific project to abide by the same collective bargaining agreement. This enables the hiring of non-unionized contractors, but typically requires them to pay into multi-employer union pension plans, putting non-union contractors at a financial disadvantage because they must pay for the union plan and for their existing company plan, according to the Associated Builders and Contractors [4]. Another problem for contractors is that many union pension funds are underwater, according to this recent article in the Washington Times [5]. Employers bound to collectively bargained agreements are forced to cover costs for underfunded union pensions when other contractors drop out.