No Preference Act
- Sponsor
- Rep. Bice, Stephanie I. [R-OK-5]
- Committees
- Armed Services Committee (primary)
- Last action
- Sep 3, 2026
Bottom line
The bill seeks to eliminate union labor requirements or preferences in federal contracting, potentially altering the landscape for both unionized and non-unionized contractors seeking government work.
What it actually does
This bill, the "No Preference Act," amends federal contracting law (Title 41) and defense contracting law (Title 10) to explicitly prohibit executive agencies, including the Department of Defense, from requiring or giving preference to contractors based on whether they use workers covered by a collective bargaining agreement. It aims to ensure that federal contracts are awarded without regard to a contractor's union status.
Proponents argue
Proponents argue that this bill promotes fair and open competition for federal contracts by preventing agencies from favoring unionized labor, thereby ensuring that contracts are awarded based solely on merit, cost-effectiveness, and quality, rather than labor affiliation. They contend it reduces costs for taxpayers and expands opportunities for all businesses, including small businesses, to compete for government work.
Opponents contend
Opponents contend that prohibiting agencies from considering collective bargaining agreements undermines efforts to ensure fair wages, benefits, and safe working conditions for federal contractors. They argue that project labor agreements (PLAs), which often involve unions, can promote efficiency, prevent labor disputes, and ensure a skilled workforce, and that this bill would remove a valuable tool for agencies to achieve these goals.
The bill is very short and straightforward, making it highly accessible for any reader to understand its core intent quickly.
Section 2(a), amending Chapter 47 of title 41, United States Code, by adding new section 4715.
Prohibition on Union Labor Preference in Executive Agency Contracts
This provision explicitly states that the head of any executive agency cannot require or give preference to a company bidding for a federal contract based on whether that company uses workers who are part of a collective bargaining agreement (i.e., union labor). It aims to create a level playing field for all contractors, regardless of their labor organization status, when competing for non-defense federal contracts.
Supporters argue
Supporters argue this provision ensures fair and open competition, allowing all qualified businesses, including small and non-union firms, to bid on federal projects without facing discrimination based on labor affiliation. They believe it will lead to more efficient and cost-effective government procurement.
Critics contend
Critics argue this provision eliminates an important tool for agencies to ensure high-quality work, fair wages, and labor stability, which they contend are often associated with collective bargaining agreements. They suggest it could lead to a "race to the bottom" in terms of wages and working conditions.
Tradeoffs
The provision balances the desire for open competition and potentially lower costs against the potential benefits of project labor agreements, such as labor stability, skilled workforce development, and fair labor standards.
Section 3, amending Chapter 243 of title 10, United States Code, by adding new section 3345.
Prohibition on Union Labor Preference in Defense Contracts
This provision specifically extends the prohibition on requiring or giving preference to union labor to contracts awarded by the Department of Defense. It ensures that defense contractors are selected based on criteria other than their adherence to collective bargaining agreements, mirroring the restrictions placed on other executive agencies.