Case: Labor agreement A unionized public water district solicited bids for the construction of a $500 million water reservoir project. The request for quotations required all bidders to accept a project labor agreement, which was included in the contract documents and negotiated between the water district and the local unions. This was a complex project, and the water district was concerned about the qualifications from potential out-of-town open shop construction firms. Bids were received from several union contractors, with the lowest at $490 million and one open shop contractor at $480 million. The open shop bidder was disqualified based upon the above requirements. The water district awarded the bid to the low union firm on the basis that they complied with the bid documents and their bid was within the project budget. The open shop contractor took the water district to court on the basis that the project labor agreement violates state law, which requires open and competitive bidding, and the owner is required to hire the low bidder. Was the disqualification fair to the open shop firm? Is this fair to the taxpayers? Will they be successful in overturning this award? If the $480 million firm wins the award, will the $490 million firm have a basis for their own claim? How do government agencies generally address these situations in their bid documents? What are DavisBacon wages or prevailing wages? What if this scenario was with a private utility provider