If Nevada politicians want to make our state less affordable and less competitive, repealing the states’ right-to-work law is a clear way to start.
In a recent statement, Attorney General Aaron Ford said that, if elected governor, he would move quickly to repeal Nevada’s 70-year-old right-to-work statute, a policy that protects all employees, including construction workers, and ensures employees can decide for themselves whether to join a union and pay dues as a condition of employment or not.
Reversing that long-standing policy would harm our workforce and undermine the vast majority of Nevada’s construction labor pool, which has chosen to remain nonunion. At a time when our state is facing rising costs, and issues such as the housing shortage, limiting access to jobs and talent is a step in the wrong direction.
The stakes become even higher when this proposal is paired with the growing use of government-mandated project labor agreements on publicly funded construction projects.
Anyone who is truly pro-worker and believes in access to opportunity should be deeply concerned with these policy proposals.
Supporters of repealing right-to-work often frame it as pro-worker. In reality, it is the opposite because it removes a worker’s ability to choose who they affiliate with. More than 80 percent of Nevada’s construction workforce has opted not to join a union. Nevada’s workforce as a whole is more than 85 percent nonunion.
Requiring workers to join a union or pay dues just to keep their jobs doesn’t expand opportunity. It puts new barriers on an individual’s access to work and under what conditions. Workplace safety, wages and employee protections are already established under federal and state law, and they apply to all workers regardless of whether you belong to a union or not. The idea that basic protection exists only through union membership is not true.
The best protection workers have is from the companies that employ them. Skilled labor in construction has become harder to secure in recent years, and employers are actively competing to attract qualified workers. That reality puts pressure on firms to offer competitive wages, meaningful benefits and safe job sites. In practical terms, their workforce is their most critical asset. That tried and true dynamic, not mandates, is what drives better conditions.
Project-labor agreements operate in a similar vein. While often presented as a pathway to better outcomes, they effectively require contractors to hire through union channels, sidelining much of their existing workforce. Pair that model with the repeal of right-to-work and the result is a system where unions control access to jobs.
This impact extends beyond individual workers. It extends to many small businesses, including women and minority-owned firms that have historically taken part in public projects. Although the intent of PLAs is often described as promoting equity and stability, the effect will be a reduced number of bidders, fewer pathways for nonunion contractors to compete on taxpayer-funded work and less opportunity for Nevada’s workforce.
Research on project labor agreements also consistently points to higher construction costs.
One analysis from the Beacon Hill Institute found that Ohio school projects built under PLAs cost about 13 percent more than comparable non-PLA projects. Similar studies examining school construction in states such as California, New Jersey, New York, Connecticut and Massachusetts have found cost increases generally ranging from 12 percent to 18 percent.
The question is not whether unions have a role in the industry. The question is whether public policy should limit who is allowed to build public infrastructure or where a person works. Shouldn’t a pro-worker agenda support all Nevadans?
These decisions are not abstract policy discussions. They shape whether projects actually break ground, whether employment grows and whether working families can afford to stay in the communities they serve.
Nevada’s focus should be on expanding opportunity, supporting development and maintaining a competitive business environment. Policies that raise costs and narrow access to work moves Nevada in the wrong direction.
Mac Bybee is president and CEO at ABC Nevada, the leading advocate for free enterprise in construction.
