c) In deciding whether the use of a project work contract is appropriate for the construction project, agencies may also consider the following factors: Although the 2002 Court of Appeal`s decision upheld the executive order prohibiting federal projects from using PTAs, some states and districts have been allowed to use AOCs for certain public works projects for which funding came from public and local revenues. These LASs have received opposition from organizations such as the Associated Builders and Contractors and the Black Contractors Group.  A remarkable example of pro-PLA legislation was passed in New Jersey, which passed legislation in 2002 authorizing the use of LPAs for certain state-funded projects.  a) General. Project work contracts concluded under this part must be fully compliant with all statutes, regulations and executive orders. Project work agreements increase the cost of public works at great cost to taxpayers, while they discriminate against the hiring of more than 80% of construction workers who have decided not to be represented by a union. In August 2001, the U.S. District Court decided to invalidate Executive Order 13202 in a case of review of Maryland`s use of a PLA for the Woodrow Wilson Bridge replacement project. The court found that the order was invalid because it was in conflict with the National Labor Relations Act.  On November 7, 2001, the judge issued a permanent injunction to block the enforcement of the order. In July 2002, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia overturned the District Court`s decision and ordered the injunction to be quashed.  As a result of this decision, the Department of Defense, NASA and the General Services Administration formally recognized the order in the Federal Register and transposed it into their construction process.  The use of a project employment contract generally results in cost overruns and higher construction costs for taxpayers. Independent contractors from qualified trade unions who wish to offer cheaper offers and workers who wish to work without unions will be excluded from the project. However, politicians and government officials continue to impose project work contracts to reward union officials who finance and maintain their political campaigns in power. Supporters say THE PLAs can be used by owners of public projects, such as school leaders or municipal councillors, to set goals for local job creation and social assistance goals through the construction projects for which they are applying.    PLA may include provisions relating to targeted recruitment and learning relationships.
Supporters believe that PLns can be used to help local workers develop skills by integrating the requirements of a certain proportion of local workers to participate in union apprenticeship programs working in the construction program.  The term “Community Workforce Agreement” (CWA) can be used to describe AEPs with Community provisions.   Supporters state that the Community`s labour agreements will return to the municipalities the taxpayers` funds paid for these infrastructure projects.    Opponents of the PLA referred to examples such as the construction of Yankee Stadium and the Washington Nationals Ballpark, for which the two community agreements were concluded, but which did not achieve the objectives of local attitude and resources that were to be made available to the Community.    According to a report for the DC Sports and Entertainment Commission, the PLA for the Nationals Ballpark did not achieve its three main objectives, namely that local workers worked 50% of company hours, apprenticeship places only for city dwellers and apprentices to work 25% of the hours of work for the project.  According to groups such as ABC, since TTPs require that workers be recruited through unions and that there are far fewer union workers, this may mean that it is impossible to