Doublebreasted operations and the decline of construction unionism

Abstract

Labor relations in the construction industry are conducted under a legal framework that is both different and more favorable to unions than is that in industry generally. One aspect of this favored union environment is that construction employers are more subject to challenge than other employers if they operate both union and nonunion subsidiaries (“doublebreasted operations”). For almost a decade, the construction unions have attempted to obtain legislation disallowing this practice on the erroneous claims that it is unique to the construction industry and responsible for the decline of construction unions. This article examines the facts of the case and concludes that having both union and nonunion construction subsidiaries is no different from having both union and nonunion manufacturing subsidiaries insofar as the structure and operational organization of such companies are concerned; that the initial National Labor Relation Board decision in regard to doublebreasted operations in the construction industry was merely an application of precedent of some years previous in other industries; and that construction industry doublebreasted operations are much more a result than a cause of union decline.