The agreement would provide a solid foundation for the Harvard Students Union-United Automobile Workers, with the National Labor Relations Board preparing to obtain legal protection for private university graduates to form unions. It could indicate a change in the graduation movement for workers, which has been pushed back by high-level schools like Harvard with enormous pressure. A Laboratory Project Agreement (PLA), also known as the Community Workforce Agreement, is a pre-employment collective agreement with one or more labour organizations that sets the terms and conditions for a given construction project.  Before workers are hired for the project, construction unions have the right to negotiate, determine wage rates and benefits for all workers working on the project concerned, and approve the provisions of the agreement.   The terms of the agreement apply to all contractors and subcontractors who offer success for the project and replace all existing collective agreements.  PLAs are used for both public and private projects and their specific provisions can be adapted by the signatory parties to the needs of a given project.  The agreement may contain provisions to prevent strikes, lockouts or other work stoppages during the duration of the project.  As a general rule, TTPs require that employees recruited for the project be returned to union rental premises, that self-employed workers in trade unions pay trade union rights for the duration of the project, and that the contractor comply with union rules on pensions, working conditions and dispute resolution.  An independent study conducted in 2011 by the National University System Institute for Policy Research analyzed the impact of GPs on school construction in California from 1996 to 2008.
 The study analyzed 551 school construction projects and is reported to be the largest study on LTAs to date.  It found that the use of PLA increased construction costs by 13-15%, which would represent an increase of $28.90 to $32.49 per square metre if adjusted for inflation.  However, the findings of this study were vigorously challenged by Dr. Dale Belman of Michigan State University, a long-time supporter of the use of PLA, whose previous research has been mentioned several times and who stated that the study misrepres shot its results. He wrote to the authors: “Although your study has serious statistical problems, your results are ultimately consistent with the results on LTCs and Massachusetts school construction costs. The summary of your results can be summarized as follows: if appropriate controls are included for differences between the characteristics of built schools, including the type and location of the school, construction specifications, materials used, etc., there is no statistical evidence that PLA schools are more expensive than non-PLA schools.” The authors of the study indicate in the report that they used robust regression methods to account for deviations in school materials/techniques and construction sites.