07 Sources Sought PLA RFI Questions.pdf
PDF 67 KB Posted
- Attached to
- Construction Services for the Specialized Mission Training Facility (SMTF) Project, Laurel, MD
- Solicitation number
- 47PH0826BOTALPOESourcesSought
- Issued by
- Not on record
About this file
This document is a Request for Information (RFI) seeking input from construction companies about their experience with Project Labor Agreements (PLAs) for a Specialized Mission Training Facility (SMTF) project in Laurel, Maryland. The RFI contains six detailed questions aimed at understanding companies' past experiences with construction projects using PLAs and collective bargaining agreements (CBAs) in Maryland and Washington DC, with specific inquiries about project costs, union workforce percentages, schedule impacts, and the practicability of using PLAs for the SMTF project.
The questionnaire asks respondents to provide detailed information about their previous construction projects, including the percentage of union versus non-union workers, how PLAs affected project budgets and schedules, differences between PLAs and traditional CBAs, and the specific characteristics that might make PLAs practicable or impracticable for the SMTF project. Companies are asked to provide quantitative data on cost increases, wage rates, benefit contributions, compliance costs, and project scheduling impacts when responding to the RFI.
View the file
On GovTribe
Work with this file
- Download the original file
- Contacts named in this file
- Similar government files
- Ask GovTribe AI about this file
Text version
Company Name: _____________________________________________________
Point of Contact: _____________________________________________________
Point of Contact Phone and Email: _____________________________________________________
Company Address: _______________________________________________
UEID: _____________________________________________________
Request for Information (RFI) Questions for Specialized Mission Training Facility, Laurel, MD
1. Is your company interested in responding to a large-scale construction project that includes a project labor agreement (PLAs) in Laurel, Maryland, other parts of Maryland or Washington DC?
Choose Response: _______ Yes_______ No
2. Has your company ever performed construction work of any size in Laurel, Maryland, state of Maryland or Washington DC?
If yes, provide a brief description of the project and its location.
3. Has your company ever been the prime or subcontractor for a construction project using a PLA which is a special kind of collective bargaining agreement preferably in Laurel, Maryland, other parts of Maryland or Washington DC?
If yes, please respond to the following questions:
a. What was the overall cost or cost range of the construction project not including design? Provide date of construction project and where it was located.
b. What percentage of construction workers were union compared to nonunion on the project? If known, how many of those workers were on an existing collective bargaining agreement?
c. Did your overall proposed construction project costs due to PLAs require a bid that was significantly above or below the rate for the exact project, scope and location without a PLA?
i. If increased, please quantify the percentage over what you would bid for same project without PLA:
Choose Response:_______ 0% – 9% _______ 10% – 14%
_______ 15% – 19% _______ 20% or higher
ii. If below, please provide the percentage below what you would bid for same project without PLA
Choose Response:_______ 0% – 9%
_______ 10% – 14%
_______ 15% – 19%
_______ 20% or higher
d. If increased, what were the actual primary contributing factors, include quantifiable data such as the percentage increase in the overall construction budget and number of employees on the project who for example:
i. received significantly higher rates over the Davis-Bacon Act (DBA) required for specific labor categories, open-shop and/or non-union worker rates for those labor categories not subject to DBA due to PLA union scale wage requirement;
ii. were subject to double benefit contributions to union (only include the additional benefit paid to the union not the benefit the employee was entitled to under normal construction work conditions); and/or
iii. compliance costs (e.g., complying with union work rules, hiring hall procedures, tracking requirements that are above and beyond what the company or normal construction projects charge)
e. How did PLAs affect the project schedule? Do not include unforeseeable events beyond the control of either the contractor or Government (i.e., "force majeure"); Inexcusable (contractor-caused) delays (e.g., poor planning or scheduling unless the union made the schedule without input from the contractor, or faulty workmanship not caused by something required by the PLA such as union apprentices)
Choose Response
_________ No effect on Schedule – on time based on nature of construction
_________ Minimal effect on Schedules – Shorter on-time project
_________ Minimal effect on Schedule – longer but not more than 30 days
_________ Significant effect on Schedule – major delays over 2 weeks due to union
_________ Significant effect on Schedule – took more than 30 days
i. Briefly and clearly describe the situation that led to the above response based on actual experience (i.e., walk us through the PLA project at high level)
4. Has your company ever been the prime or subcontractor for a construction project using a general collective bargaining agreement (CBA) in Laurel, Maryland, other parts of Maryland or Washington DC?
If yes, what makes PLAs different from traditional CBAs?
5. Would or has your company hired workers on a CBA to complete construction projects?
If yes, what makes PLAs different from traditional CBAs?
6. In your experience with PLAs, what characteristics of the SMTF project and area make the use of PLAs practicable or impracticable? Please explain in detail.
File details come from the government source that posted it. Updated .