Governor Tina Kotek’s recent executive order mandating Project Labor Agreements PLAs for state-run construction projects is stirring significant debate in Oregon.
The move, which aligns with similar pro-union policies under Democratic presidents like Joe Biden, requires PLAs on projects where labor costs exceed 15% of total expenses. While proponents argue that PLAs ensure efficiency, reduce labor disputes, and support apprenticeship programs, critics—primarily Republicans and non-union contractors—contend they unfairly limit competition, drive up costs, and create barriers for smaller, open-shop firms.
The controversy is fueled by timing and impact. Issued just before Christmas, the order has been criticized for blindsiding contractors and triggering immediate opposition from Republican lawmakers and industry groups.
While labor unions champion the decision as a pathway to high-quality, timely project completion, detractors highlight examples like the Newberg interchange project, which received only one bid at 22% above state estimates, as evidence that PLAs deter non-union bidders and inflate costs.
The debate reflects a broader national divide. Critics point to studies suggesting PLAs raise project costs, while supporters cite research showing minimal or no cost increases, particularly for complex projects. The Oregonian editorial board has joined the opposition, calling for the order’s reversal, while Kotek maintains the policy balances resource stewardship with equitable workforce development.
As the Oregon Supreme Court considers related legal challenges and lawmakers prepare a substantial transportation funding package, Kotek’s executive order is poised to influence the state’s construction landscape profoundly. For now, the battle lines remain drawn, with unions and contractors, rural and urban interests, and political ideologies clashing over the future of Oregon’s infrastructure projects.
