This is from the last page of the study.
The Associated Builders and Contractors, Inc. (ABC), which represents nonunion contractors, has long opposed Project Labor Agreements. Directly addressing the ABC, a litigant in the Boston Harbor case, the U.S. Supreme Court made clear that
…those contractors who do not normally enter into such agreements [PLAs] are faced with a choice. They may alter their usual mode of operation to secure the business opportunity at hand, or seek business from purchasers whose perceived needs do not include a project labor agreement.
The New York Court of Appeals later echoed the U.S. Supreme Court. Answering charges that PLAs are “anti-competitive” – meaning that they unfairly favor the union sector and cut into the business of open shop contractors – the Court of Appeals stated:
The fact that certain non-union contractors may be disinclined to submit bids does not amount to the preclusion of competition…
The ABC has chosen not to accept these court endorsed marketplace rules. It has instead conducted a relentless misinformation campaign designed to confuse the general public and government officials about the actual nature and purpose of Project Labor Agreements. The ABC hopes to bring about an ill-conceived retreat from the sound public policy that PLAs represent. No one should be confused. When public entities enter the marketplace as owners, users, and/or purchasers of construction services, they have a responsibility to protect and promote the public interest by spending funds wisely, judiciously
and efficiently. Project Labor Agreements are a vital instrument to fulfill that responsibility.