Will new federal rule affect security contractors?

The Wall Street Journal is up in arms about a new federal rule passed on Tuesday that allows federal agencies to require that contractors working on jobs of $25 million or more be union shops. Let's just say that the editorial is strongly worded:
There's almost a direct correlation these days between the Obama Administration's complaints about "special interests" and its own fealty to such interests. Consider its latest decree that federal contractors must be union shops.
Of course, that's a misleading final sentence. Some might call it a total untruth (that's the PC word for "lie"). In fact, the WSJ itself would argue with such a characterization. Its news story on the subject put it this way (warning, the WSJ requires a subscription):
The rule doesn't mandate that federal agencies require contractors to bargain with unions on all jobs...
How do you get from "doesn't mandate" to "decree that federal contractors must be union shops" in your own paper in the matter of one day? That's insanity. Anyway, I'm not saying I agree with the federal rule one way or the other, but I am trying to figure out whether this is likely to affect security companies or not. Essentially, it gives the federal agencies the power to require "project labor agreements" for contracting jobs over $25 million. The San Francisco Chronicle/Bloomberg describe it this way:
Under the order, unions have the ability to bargain for wages, hours and work-rules in exchange for agreeing not to call a strike. Supporters of project-labor agreements say it promotes efficiency on government purchases. Opponents say the arrangements discriminate against the more than 85 percent of construction workers who aren't union members.
So, how do security contractors fit in? Can they subcontract to non-union shops? Is the security system considered part of the construction only on new builds? I'm looking for answers on this today. Hope to have something on the newswire later.


[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by SecurityFeeds. SecurityFeeds said: SSN: Will new federal rule affect security contractors? http://bit.ly/9BUVxw [...]

Of course it will affect security contractors as well as the 85% of construction firms that are non-union. This is a pure pay back for the unions support during the elections. Not only is this not fair but will cost the taxpayers money having to pay for inflated wages for sub standard quality because when you limit competition it produces inflated costs and poorer quality. Show me one example of union labor coming in cheaper and with better quality.

Send me an email through www.TheTruthAboutPLAs.com and I will break down everything for you. It is a complicated rule because it is not a mandate for PLAs (which would likely be illegal) so federal agencies have discretion in requiring PLAs. On top of that, PLAs allow nonunion contractors to "technically" bid on the project, but the terms and conditions of the PLA contract are so loaded to favor Big Labor that few nonunion shops bother bidding. In essence, nonunion firms will be locked out from federal contracts greater than $25 million where a government agency has mandated a PLA. And believe me, since Big Labor runs the White House, they will be turning up the pressure on federal agencies and procurement officials to require PLAs. If you represent nonunion firms, they will have to jump through a bunch of union hoops ot get federal work subject to PLAs.