Union vs. Non-Union: The Great Divide in Construction Recruiting 

Summary

Union and non-union construction hiring are increasingly operating as two separate systems. The rules, timelines, relationships, and even what “a good hire” looks like can change depending on whether a project is governed by a Project Labor Agreement or operating as open shop. Contractors and recruiters that treat these as interchangeable often lose time, miss talent, and create avoidable risk. The best outcomes come from clarity: knowing which system you are hiring in, understanding the constraints, and using a recruitment approach that actually fits the labour model.

Construction Hiring is Splitting into Two Distinct Markets

In 2026, it is getting harder to pretend union and non-union recruitment are just variations of the same thing.

On one side, union work is driven by structured agreements, defined pathways, and established channels. On the other, non-union hiring is driven by market competition, speed, and negotiated packages. Both play a major role in the industry, but they are not operationally similar.

This matters because recruitment outcomes are not just about how hard you search. They are about how well your process aligns with the labour system governing the project.



A contractor can be outstanding at delivering work, have strong leadership, and still struggle to staff projects if the recruitment approach does not match the hiring environment. The same is true for agencies and internal hiring teams. You can have a great brand, a strong network, and still lose time because your strategy is built for the wrong system.

The Project Labor Agreement Reality is Shaping Major Work

Many large projects, particularly infrastructure, are increasingly delivered under union frameworks and Project Labor Agreements. The moment a project moves into that category, hiring stops being a pure open-market exercise.

A Project Labor Agreement on a $100 million infrastructure project changes how labour is accessed, how work is structured, and how staffing is managed. It affects who can be engaged, how workers are dispatched, and how compliance is maintained. It also changes what “recruitment” means.

In many cases it becomes less about sourcing and more about coordination, relationships, and adherence to specific rules.

At a national level, policy has also reinforced this direction. Executive Order 14063 requires PLAs on federal construction contracts of $35 million or more. Whether you agree with the approach or not, the practical impact is simple: more large projects will require union-aligned labour and union-aligned processes.



For recruitment partners, this is not something you can “wing.” It requires understanding how union channels function and how to plan labour around them.

Union Hiring is a Different Ecosystem, not a Different Job Board

Union hiring relies on relationships, structure, and approved pathways. Contractors operating under PLAs often need to engage union hiring halls and apprenticeship programs, and success depends on knowing how those pipelines work.

That means understanding:

• How dispatch works and what can and cannot be requested.
• How trade jurisdiction can influence who performs which tasks.
• How apprenticeship ratios and training requirements affect workforce planning.
• How benefit funds and reporting may affect payroll and job costing.

For many employers, the biggest challenge is not finding workers. It is navigating the system correctly while keeping the project moving.



For recruiters, the skill set is different too. Traditional recruitment strengths like cold outreach, competitive offer packaging, and headhunting do not always translate. In union environments, the value often comes from coordination, network depth, and process fluency rather than aggressive sourcing.

Non-union hiring is an open-market talent war

Outside of PLA frameworks, the market behaves differently.

Non-union hiring is still the bulk of the industry. In many discussions, non-union merit-shop contractors—roughly 80% of the market represents where most competitive recruitment pressure lives. Here, labour is secured through speed, offers, project appeal, and practical decision-making.

Employers compete directly on:

• Compensation and per diems.
• Schedule and rotation.
• Project pipeline and stability.
• Growth opportunity and training.
• Work environment and leadership quality.
• How quickly they can make a decision.

This is where slow processes get punished. A candidate does not wait two weeks for a second-stage interview when another contractor is ready to move. Hiring managers that demand long chains of approvals, excessive interviews, or unclear offer timelines often lose talent, even when they are paying well.



Non-union hiring is also where recruiters must stay sharp on market movement. Rates shift, project demand spikes, and certain skills command premiums that vary by region and project type. This is not static. It is live competition.

The Operational Divide is Bigger Than Most People Expect

Regulation and Geography Can Shift the Rules Overnight

Construction hiring in the US is heavily shaped by local and state realities. The union and non-union balance changes by region, and regulations can reshape hiring strategy quickly.

Different states create different operating conditions. Right-to-work laws create patchwork regulations across markets, and that influences how contractors plan bids, staff projects, and engage labour. If you recruit across multiple states, you cannot assume the same approach will work everywhere.

There are also local policy changes that shift the playing field. In some markets, PLA requirements are expanding, changing how public work is staffed and which labour channels become essential. For example, New Jersey eliminated the $5 million threshold for PLA requirements, which widened the scope of projects likely to fall under PLA structures. That type of change matters because it can push more contractors into a union hiring environment even if their core business model is non-union.



Recruitment partners that operate nationally need to build for this complexity. Otherwise, they are constantly reacting instead of planning.

Fence-Sitting Creates Weak Execution

A common mistake in construction recruitment is trying to be everything to everyone.

Union and non-union work require different networks, different expertise, and different systems. Agencies and internal teams that treat them as interchangeable often struggle to deliver consistently because the operational foundations are not aligned.

The result is usually one of two problems:

• Union projects get delayed because the team lacks the right relationships and process knowledge.
• Non-union projects lose candidates because the team relies on slower, more administrative workflows.



It is not that an organisation cannot support both. It is that supporting both requires deliberate capability building, not generic recruitment.

What This Means For Contractors

If you are a contractor, the most important step is clarity.

Be explicit internally on what labour environment you are operating in for each project. Is it union under a PLA? Is it open shop? Is it mixed? The recruitment strategy should change accordingly.

If you rely on recruitment partners, ask direct questions:

• Do you specialise in union staffing, non-union recruiting, or both?
• If both, what systems and relationships support each side?
• How do you plan labour for union-aligned projects versus open-market projects?
• What is your expected timeline from candidate engagement to start date in each model?



The goal is not to pick a side. The goal is to align your hiring approach with the environment you are actually operating in.

What This Means For Workers

Workers should also understand that union and non-union pathways often offer different trade-offs.

Union work can provide structured wage scales, defined benefits, and established apprenticeship routes. It can also create clarity around progression and protections, particularly in certain markets.

Non-union work can offer more direct negotiation, flexibility, and potentially faster progression for those who move between projects and build diverse experience. It can also allow workers to choose environments and employers that fit their goals, without being bound to a single channel.



Both are valid routes. The key is understanding the system you are stepping into and asking the right questions about expectations, dispatch, job stability, and the reality of the pipeline.

What This Means For Recruiters

For recruiters, the message is simple: construction recruitment is splitting into two disciplines.

Union-aligned staffing requires deep relationships with union structures and a strong understanding of how labour dispatch and apprenticeship pathways work. Non-union recruiting requires speed, market intelligence, candidate management, and strong negotiation capability.



Trying to deliver both without building the operational foundation usually leads to mediocre results. The agencies and teams that win over the next few years will be those that build real competence on the side of the market they serve, rather than offering vague coverage across both.

Final Thoughts

Union and non-union construction hiring are not just different approaches. They are different systems.

If you treat them as the same, you will lose time and lose talent. If you treat them as distinct, you can build hiring processes that match the realities of your projects.



Construction is under pressure to deliver more work with fewer people. The recruitment partners that succeed will be the ones who understand the rules of the system they are hiring in and can execute within it, quickly, consistently, and with credibility.