Senate Republicans and Deputy OMB Director for Management John Koskinen fundamentally disagreed at a hearing today on the practical effects of the proposed project labor agreement executive order that has held up the confirmation of Labor Secretary-designate Alexis Herman and placed the supplemental appropriations bill in jeopardy.
The Senate Labor and Human Resources Committee hearing shed little new light on the specifics of President Clinton's proposal, but instead reinforced each side's different interpretation -- whether the order would require or would only encourage project labor agreements for federally funded projects.
Project labor agreements are negotiated at the outset of a construction project between a contractor and labor unions representing the project's workers, and generally cover wages, working conditions, work rules and dispute-resolution procedures.
Sen. Tim Hutchinson, R-Ark., charged the executive order "would result in most, if not all, federal construction being performed by union shop contractors."
Koskinen countered the order "will not require that a project labor agreement be used on any individual project, much less on every project." Most important, Koskinen said, is that "a project labor agreement generally guarantees that the project will be built without strikes, lockouts or other disruptions which might delay completion and increase costs."
The proposed executive order, which is being redrafted, would retain the discretion of federal agencies to decide if such agreements should be used on particular construction projects, Koskinen said.
He emphasized that if an agency does require a labor agreement for a project, "no business would be excluded from bidding on the contract ... whether or not the contractor's employees are represented by a labor union."
But committee Republicans said the administration has yet to articulate why an executive order is needed if such agreements already are in use.
"This executive order is in search of a problem," said Labor and Human Resources Chairman Jeffords, adding, "It may answer a perceived political imperative of the administration, but it solves no real problem."
Jeffords said non-union contractors should be able to bid against union shops for projects and that the executive order would "prejudge the outcome of that competition." Jeffords also linked the executive order with the support of Democrats in the last election by organized labor. "This executive order itself may be a preview ... of the next presidential election," he said.
Meanwhile, Senate Majority Whip Nickles' talks with the administration over the proposed executive order and the Herman nomination have been "positive," a Nickles aide said today, adding that "they just have to do a few simple things and it [the nomination] could be ready to go [Thursday] afternoon."
The aide said Nickles has suggested a number of ways the White House could address Senate opposition to the executive order and is waiting for a response.
Also today, the Senate again failed, by a vote of 55-44, to invoke cloture on a GOP proposal that would protect volunteers from liability lawsuits.
The Senate Tuesday defeated a first attempt at cloture, 53-46. The volunteer liability issue has become entangled in the controversy over the executive order and the Herman nomination. Two more cloture motions have been filed and votes could occur early as Thursday.
NEXT STORY: CPI Adjustment Off Table