Electrical Contractors, Inc. v. Department of Education
35 A.3d 188
Conn.2012Background
- ECI and six nonunion employees challenged state PLA bid specifications on two Hartford school projects funded in large part by state funds; the PLA required union-only work and union membership for field labor, with most workers referred through unions; ECI bid and was rejected for refusing to sign the PLA, while the contracts were ultimately awarded to union bidders; trial court dismissed on standing grounds, remand directed for jurisdictional analysis; CT Supreme Court granted partial affirmance and partial reversal, addressing standing and preemption; issues included whether nonunion bidders have standing under CT bidding statutes and whether state actors’ involvement negates standing; the majority clarified the Associated Builders framework and allowed ECI’s standing under the public bidding regime; the decision also considered antitrust and constitutional attack implications; the case was remanded to address remaining claims consistent with the opinion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Standing to challenge PLA under bidding statutes | ECI had bid; PLA harmed competition | ECI lacked threshold standing under Associated Builders | ECI has standing under CT bidding framework |
| Individual plaintiffs’ standing under CT Constitution | Plaintiffs suffer direct rights violations by PLA | Plaintiffs not prequalified bidders; no direct injury | Individuals lack standing |
| Antitrust standing of ECI | CT Antitrust Act permits ECI standing as bidder | Record insufficient; nonstate channels precluded | ECI has antitrust standing; merits to be developed on remand |
| Federal preemption under Garmon/Machinists | Claims not merely labor regulation; not preempted | PLA as labor regulation preempts state claims | Not preempted; state claims may proceed as proprietor purchasing labor |
| Sovereign immunity | State actors immune | Sovereign immunity not a bar to the state defendants' claim; some reversal of dismissal for state entities |
Key Cases Cited
- Connecticut Associated Builders & Contractors v. Hartford, 251 Conn. 169 (1999) (standing limits in bid protests; colorable injury; used to shape thresholds and approach)
- Connecticut Associated Builders & Contractors v. Anson, 251 Conn. 202 (1999) (standing analysis in PLA context; not reaching merits; context for standing limits)
- Unisys Corp. v. Dept. of Labor, 220 Conn. 689 (1991) (essence of standing requires colorable injury from procedural irregularity)
- Spiniello Construction Co. v. Manchester, 189 Conn. 539 (1983) (historic expansion of standing for certain procedural flaws in bidding)
- Cheryl Terry Enterprises, Ltd. v. Hartford, 270 Conn. 619 (2004) (antitrust standing for unsuccessful bidders; broader standing under CT Act)
- Building & Construction Trades Council v. Associated Builders & Contractors (Boston Harbor), 507 U.S. 218 (1993) (federal preemption in PLA context; PLA not per se preempted; government purchaser role matters)
- Boston Harbor v. Associated Builders & Contractors, 507 U.S. 218 (1993) (PLA not preempted when state acts as purchaser; government market participant exception)