• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • Tale of the Red Tape #19: A More Perfect Union Advantage

    Let’s take a closer look at how the Obama Administration demonstrates “efficiency” and “economy” in actual practice. Fair warning: It ain’t pretty.

    New rules (supposedly) intended to maximize the services of government contractors require such firms to give first preference in hiring to the workers of the company that lost the contract. That is, when a government contract is awarded to a different firm, this new contractor must first offer employment to the workers of the previous contractor before hiring anyone else. As delineated in the Federal Register of August 29, tens of thousands of companies—representing more than $23 billion in government contracting—will be affected.

    According to the U.S. Department of Labor, which issued the new regulation, “The Federal Government’s procurement interests in economy and efficiency are better served when a successor contractor hires the predecessor’s employees.”

    Oh, really?

    That certainly doesn’t appear to be the case. Even by Labor Department estimates, complying with the myriad hiring rules will cost government contractors tens of millions of dollars. Those additional costs are ultimately borne by taxpayers in the form of higher contract costs.

    And, to the extent that the rules dissuade firms from bidding for government business—some business owners just might want to make their own hiring decisions—a smaller pool of contractors will raise the price floor.

    But that’s not all.

    The rule effectively ensures that a non-unionized contractor cannot replace a unionized one. That’s because any new contractor will be obliged to hire its predecessors’ unionized workers, and thus forced by the “Successorship Doctrine” to bargain with the union(s). Insulating union wages from market competition will also escalate the costs of government contracts.

    The new rule implements provisions of Executive Order 13495, issued by President Obama on January 30, 2009.

    All of which adds up to a taxpayer shafting of egregious proportions. That the government attempts to masquerade this union payoff as “economic and efficient” just makes the whole sorry exercise all the more unseemly.

    #1: We See Dead People

    #2: The EPA Is Fueling Nonsense

    #3: Don’t Touch That Dial!

    #4: The Unwitting Peddlers of Toxic Tomes

    #5: Calorie Counts Forced Down Our Throats

    #6: Equine Equality Under the ADA

    #7: Energy Department Plumbing for More Regulatory Powers

    #8: How Many Hazmat Suits Does It Take to Change a Light Bulb?

    #9: Regulators Going Off on Microwave Ovens

    #10: The State Department’s Passport Inquisition

    #11: Circumcising Principle in San Francisco

    #12: Regulatory Grapes of Wrath

    #13: An “F” for Train Regulation

    #14: Old MacDonald’s Commodity Cartel

    #15: More Regulatory Manure from USDA

    #16: Tackling Serious Matters in Washington, D.C.

    #17: A Myopic Regulatory Vision

    #18: Americans Take a Regulatory Bleating



    Posted in Featured [slideshow_deploy]

    2 Responses to Tale of the Red Tape #19: A More Perfect Union Advantage

    1. Sky Flyer says:

      Contracts are usually reassigned/rewarded due to inefficiency, cost, time requirements, etc. So, if you're getting such bad results out of one contractor with a given set of workers, why would it matter when the same project is put into the hands of the same set of workers operating under a new contractor name?

      What was that old line? "Old habits die hard." Or, another… "If you do what you've always done…" Well, you can figure out the rest.

    2. West Texan says:

      Big power grabbing social progressive government in bed with big power grabbing socialist worker unions. The ugliest form of corruption at its finest. All in the guise of being an American democracy. Yea. right!

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.