 |
Subscribe / Renew |
 |
Contact Us |
| ► Subscribe to our Free Weekly Newsletter | |
Construction Bids
| home | Welcome, sign in or click here to subscribe. | login |
Opinion
 print  email to a friend  reprints add to mydjc |  |
August 28, 2006
Letter to the Editor: PLAs cover labor, not products
I certainly can understand the feelings of Kathleen Garrity (DJC, Aug. 17) regarding the current strike and shutdown of a lot of construction projects in the Seattle area.
I think that the largest point she has missed, is that they are suppliers of product, not suppliers of labor. In this case there is nothing that a PLA would cover in regards to a supplier. If her thinking is to prove that PLAs are not good for the general public taxpayers and it would be wiser to use non-union labor, that is not logical thinking, because this situation has no relevance to a strike by labor unions. Supplies are not covered by a PLA, whether it is union or non-union.
The current strike is definitely affecting all contractors, not just those that are using union labor.
Bob Miller
Seattle
Tell us what you think...
The Daily Journal of Commerce welcomes your comments.
- E-mail: editor@djc.com
Previous columns:
- Opinion: Strike raises PLA questions, 08-17-2006
- Opinion: Twelker was a teacher, too, 07-31-2006
- Letter to the Editor: Viaduct visionaries avoid messy details, 06-05-2006
- Letter to the editor: We need more data on a tunnel's cost and benefits, 05-30-2006
- Letter to the editor: Only one viaduct solution solves the problems -- tunnel, 05-22-2006
- Opinion: Another vote for viaduct repair, 05-15-2006
- Opinion: Viaduct tunnel most viable, 05-08-2006
- Opinion: It's time to just say no to the NBA, 04-03-2006