Jump to content

missgamecock

Members
  • Posts

    30
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation

0 Neutral
  1. I have worked for DOD, USACE, and VA. It is issued after the bonds and insurance are recieved. Geez, if I had to wait for all submittals, I would NEVER get a project done. I've always gotten submittals throughout the process in all three agencies.
  2. Actually even on a fixed price contract, the CO is still responsible for ensuring that the line item has the minimum wage in it. I was the lucky recipient of dealing with a labor dispute with DOL for a Contractor that was not paying her workers the correct wage rate (to the tune of $150k!!!! for one year). I can't remember where in the regulations it says all of that. It was a darn good thing I document. Because I had documented where we had questioned her rates as not meeting the minimum. If the contractor proposes rates below the minimum wage rate (this is when you are breaking wages per hour out on a fixed price contract) the CO still has to make sure the rates are above the minimum. So this contractor had crazy wages for several areas. Then for the librarian, she had enough money to just cover the wage and fringe. Nothing for overhead or profit. Same on another position. We went back to her during negotiations. She still insisted that rate. We said fine and took it. Then SHE tried to sue us for the overhead and profit that was missing from the line item even though we verified. The outcome of the investigation was she owed some of her employees hefty amounts. Thankfully I had documented the negotiations. Had we have not paid the minimum wage, we would have been required to modify the contract for the difference. Since we verified and she had enough money on the line item, she was on the hook for the whole amount. The last I heard of that contract since I left the agency was that she was suing the agency for the amount that DOL levied against her. She didn't have a chance of he!! in winning. We let her out of her contract quietly by not renewing the option year. We could have gone after reprocurement costs. We ended up not taking the option and explaining it to her. Oh and she was suing for not taking the option too. Whatever......
  3. Why are you assuming you are losing because of fringe benefits? Contracting officers are not required to police the contractors on fringe and breakout of pay. When we get a labor contract, we are required to look at the wage and what labor classification the contractor has proposed and make sure there is enough money to cover wage rate. Contractors are required to make sure they pay the correct wages. As a contracting officer, you would not accept a labor rate that did not cover the minimum. How do you know what they are paying them for fringe? The only monetary rate is the health and welfare. The rest would be covered in their G&A/overhead costs. See this from a wage rate I pulled: ALL OCCUPATIONS LISTED ABOVE RECEIVE THE FOLLOWING BENEFITS: HEALTH & WELFARE: $3.50 per hour or $140.00 per week or $606.67 per month VACATION: 2 weeks paid vacation after 1 year of service with a contractor or successor; 3 weeks after 8 years, and 4 weeks after 15 years. Length of service includes the whole span of continuous service with the present contractor or successor, wherever employed, and with the predecessor contractors in the performance of similar work at the same Federal facility. (Reg. 29 CFR 4.173) HOLIDAYS: A minimum of ten paid holidays per year, New Year's Day, Martin Luther King Jr's Birthday, Washington's Birthday, Memorial Day, Independence Day, Labor Day, Columbus Day, Veterans' Day, Thanksgiving Day, and Christmas Day. (A contractor may substitute for any of the named holidays another day off with pay in accordance with a plan communicated to the employees involved.) (See 29 CFR 4174) THE OCCUPATIONS WHICH HAVE NUMBERED FOOTNOTES IN PARENTHESES RECEIVE THE FOLLOWING: 1) COMPUTER EMPLOYEES: Under the SCA at section 8(, this wage determination does not apply to any employee who individually qualifies as a bona fide executive, administrative, or professional employee as defined in 29 C.F.R. Part 541. Because most Computer System Analysts and Computer Programmers who are compensated at a rate not less than $27.63 (or on a salary or fee basis at a rate not less than $455 per week) an hour would likely qualify as exempt computer professionals, (29 C.F.R. 541. 400) wage rates may not be listed on this wage determination for all occupations within those job families. In addition, because this wage determination may not list a wage rate for some or all occupations within those job families if the survey data indicates that the prevailing wage rate for the occupation equals or exceeds $27.63 per hour conformances may be necessary for certain nonexempt employees. For example, if an individual employee is nonexempt but nevertheless performs duties within the scope of one of the Computer Systems Analyst or Computer Programmer occupations for which this wage determination does not specify an SCA wage rate, then the wage rate for that employee must be conformed in accordance with the conformance procedures described in the conformance note included on this wage determination. Additionally, because job titles vary widely and change quickly in the computer industry, job titles are not determinative of the application of the computer professional exemption. Therefore, the exemption applies only to computer employees who satisfy the compensation requirements and whose primary duty consists of: (1) The application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, software or system functional specifications; (2) The design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications; (3) The design, documentation, testing, creation or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems; or (4) A combination of the aforementioned duties, the performance of which requires the same level of skills. (29 C.F.R. 541.400). 2) APPLICABLE TO AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS ONLY - NIGHT DIFFERENTIAL: An employee is entitled to pay for all work performed between the hours of 6:00 P.M. and 6:00 A.M. at the rate of basic pay plus a night pay differential amounting to 10 percent of the rate of basic pay. 3) AIR TRAFFIC CONTROLLERS AND WEATHER OBSERVERS - NIGHT PAY & SUNDAY PAY: If you work at night as part of a regular tour of duty, you will earn a night differential and receive an additional 10% of basic pay for any hours worked between 6pm and 6am. If you are a full-time employed (40 hours a week) and Sunday is part of your regularly scheduled workweek, you are paid at your rate of basic pay plus a Sunday premium of 25% of your basic rate for each hour of Sunday work which is not overtime (i.e. occasional work on Sunday outside the normal tour of duty is considered overtime work). HAZARDOUS PAY DIFFERENTIAL: An 8 percent differential is applicable to employees employed in a position that represents a high degree of hazard when working with or in close proximity to ordinance, explosives, and incendiary materials. This includes work such as screening, blending, dying, mixing, and pressing of sensitive ordance, explosives, and pyrotechnic compositions such as lead azide, black powder and photoflash powder. All dry-house activities involving propellants or explosives. Demilitarization, modification, renovation, demolition, and maintenance operations on sensitive ordnance, explosives and incendiary materials. All operations involving regrading and cleaning of artillery ranges. A 4 percent differential is applicable to employees employed in a position that represents a low degree of hazard when working with, or in close proximity to ordance, (or employees possibly adjacent to) explosives and incendiary materials which involves potential injury such as laceration of hands, face, or arms of the employee engaged in the operation, irritation of the skin, minor burns and the like; minimal damage to immediate or adjacent work area or equipment being used. All operations involving, unloading, storage, and hauling of ordance, explosive, and incendiary ordnance material other than small arms ammunition. These differentials are only applicable to work that has been specifically designated by the agency for ordance, explosives, and incendiary material differential pay. ** UNIFORM ALLOWANCE ** If employees are required to wear uniforms in the performance of this contract (either by the terms of the Government contract, by the employer, by the state or local law, etc.), the cost of furnishing such uniforms and maintaining (by laundering or dry cleaning) such uniforms is an expense that may not be borne by an employee where such cost reduces the hourly rate below that required by the wage determination. The Department of Labor will accept payment in accordance with the following standards as compliance: The contractor or subcontractor is required to furnish all employees with an adequate number of uniforms without cost or to reimburse employees for the actual cost of the uniforms. In addition, where uniform cleaning and maintenance is made the responsibility of the employee, all contractors and subcontractors subject to this wage determination shall (in the absence of a bona fide collective bargaining agreement providing for a different amount, or the furnishing of contrary affirmative proof as to the actual cost), reimburse all employees for such cleaning and maintenance at a rate of $3.35 per week (or $.67 cents per day). However, in those instances where the uniforms furnished are made of "wash and wear" materials, may be routinely washed and dried with other personal garments, and do not require any special treatment such as dry cleaning, daily washing, or commercial laundering in order to meet the cleanliness or appearance standards set by the terms of the Government contract, by the contractor, by law, or by the nature of the work, there is no requirement that employees be reimbursed for uniform maintenance costs. The duties of employees under job titles listed are those described in the "Service Contract Act Directory of Occupations", Fifth Edition, April 2006, unless otherwise indicated. Copies of the Directory are available on the Internet. A links to the Directory may be found on the WHD home page at http://www.dol. gov/esa/whd/ or through the Wage Determinations On-Line (WDOL) Web site at http://wdol.gov/. REQUEST FOR AUTHORIZATION OF ADDITIONAL CLASSIFICATION AND WAGE RATE {Standard Form 1444 (SF 1444)} Conformance Process: The contracting officer shall require that any class of service employee which is not listed herein and which is to be employed under the contract (i.e., the work to be performed is not performed by any classification listed in the wage determination), be classified by the contractor so as to provide a reasonable relationship (i.e., appropriate level of skill comparison) between such unlisted classifications and the classifications listed in the wage determination. Such conformed classes of employees shall be paid the monetary wages and furnished the fringe benefits as are determined. Such conforming process shall be initiated by the contractor prior to the performance of contract work by such unlisted class(es) of employees. The conformed classification, wage rate, and/or fringe benefits shall be retroactive to the commencement date of the contract. {See Section 4.6 ©(vi)} When multiple wage determinations are included in a contract, a separate SF 1444 should be prepared for each wage determination to which a class(es) is to be conformed. The process for preparing a conformance request is as follows: 1) When preparing the bid, the contractor identifies the need for a conformed occupation(s) and computes a proposed rate(s). 2) After contract award, the contractor prepares a written report listing in order proposed classification title(s), a Federal grade equivalency (FGE) for each proposed classification(s), job description(s), and rationale for proposed wage rate(s), including information regarding the agreement or disagreement of the authorized representative of the employees involved, or where there is no authorized representative, the employees themselves. This report should be submitted to the contracting officer no later than 30 days after such unlisted class(es) of employees performs any contract work. 3) The contracting officer reviews the proposed action and promptly submits a report of the action, together with the agency's recommendations and pertinent information including the position of the contractor and the employees, to the Wage and Hour Division, Employment Standards Administration, U.S. Department of Labor, for review. (See section 4.6((2) of Regulations 29 CFR Part 4). 4) Within 30 days of receipt, the Wage and Hour Division approves, modifies, or disapproves the action via transmittal to the agency contracting officer, or notifies the contracting officer that additional time will be required to process the request. 5) The contracting officer transmits the Wage and Hour decision to the contractor. 6) The contractor informs the affected employees. Information required by the Regulations must be submitted on SF 1444 or bond paper. When preparing a conformance request, the "Service Contract Act Directory of Occupations" (the Directory) should be used to compare job definitions to insure that duties requested are not performed by a classification already listed in the wage determination. Remember, it is not the job title, but the required tasks that determine whether a class is included in an established wage determination. Conformances may not be used to artificially split, combine, or subdivide classifications listed in the wage determination. I think you are blowing smoke in the wrong direction. You need to see DOL regarding wage rates. I suspect you either have too many hours for a job, have too high an overhead or profit rate, or the wrong classification for the job and that is why you are not winning. Remember it is DOL who investigates. Contracting Officers only responsibility is to make sure that there is enough money to cover the wage rate.
  4. You know that doesn't really give a lot of information. Do you have an IDIQ contract (that is what a TO is awarded off of)? Is it a multi award IDIQ? Did you give a full proposal? Usually Contracting Officers don't torture contractors for fun. They are doing it because someone higher up has tasked them to make sure they have this documentation. Why not just return the form as asked? It might be a final call for the proposal. Are you sure you submitted a proposal? Many contractor confuse a sources sought notice for an actual RFP even though we CLEARLY state that there is no solictation at this time and that this is simply a sources sought to see who has the capability to do this work. Even though we do that, we still get proposals....
  5. "What I find interesting is that typically I've seen contractors afforded the flexible schedules, coffee breaks, and even the '59 minute' early dismisals that the Govt personnel enjoy." Just because it happens doesn't mean it is right. This quote above illustrates the contractors being treated the same as govt employees. They can't because they are contractors and there is a difference. They should not be getting 59 min early breaks. Everywhere I have worked at has said NO to the contractors wanting that. If the company pays for it, fine, they can leave whenever they want. If the govt is paying for this "59 min leave early", then no, they stay. If they want the govt benefits, apply for a govt employee job. Coffee breaks are allowed per SCA. They get 2 15 mins breaks a day. I don't have a problem with flexible schedules as long as someone is here to cover the void.
  6. Found my answer! Even though he may or may not have violated the PIA. Past protests have been sustained where there was a suspicion of unfair advantage. See this link: http://www.gao.gov/decisions/bidpro/4016523.pdf look for unfair competitive advantage. So it will be up to me to decide at the time if they bid whether to keep them in or throw them out. At least I have past protests to back up the decision if I end up throwing them out in future bids. You guys are awesome.
  7. Thanks for confirming that I am not being overdramatic! I know with the two projects that I have that the Chief was intimately involved with, I am probably going to exclude this company and cite a violation to the PIA, conflict of interest, and I'll cite the case above in my documentation for exclusion. I and my current COTRS feel strongly that there is an unfair advantage. I hate having to be in the position of going against the majority.
  8. I expressed it to the KO. He said well I talked with the lawyer in depth. He was involved with design not construction. I have the feeling that legal does not realize the true implications of this. For me, I am trying to mitigate any damages to my contracts. I know as soon as the first protest hits or some contractor gets mad he didn't get a project and blows it to IG the crap is going to hit the fan. Like I said fortunately they have not won any contracts with me so far..... Every project I have awarded in the last year has gone to a different contractor. I am very detail oriented. I document everything!
  9. I agree. I was going by the "covered relationships" rule by the office of Government ethics, but also violating procurement integrity. So my question is this company I KNOW will bid on several high profile projects that I have coming out which are projected with high dollar amounts (millions). The Chief was intimately involved in these projects. He sat on the AE evaluations boards. He was intimately involved and hands on in the design process. As we know design produces specs, drawings, bid documents, and project costs. I know as the Contracting Officer that if I do not agree with legal's decision (we have had discussions here on how much lawyers really know contracting) I can go with my decision and they would still have to defend me. The problem is you are going against the grain. Another problem is higher ups in the agency has said ok we have a decision from legal. You have to allow the bid. I am like NO WAY. He was intimately involved in these projects. So you are going against all of the higher ups. I also know if this company is awarded any contracts from here on out (it's already out to the contractors that the Chief is with X company), every contract awarded to this company will be protested and rightfully so. I don't like this situation that the Chief has put several contracting officers in at all! I have jumped and down and provided regulations on email discussions with the area contracting officers and contracting managers. Everyone is going with what legal said....... I don't think I will be the first test case of this situation. I do think as soon as we get the first protest and it goes to GAO or a contractor gets mad he didn't win a project and it gets blown into IG that this will change.
  10. I have actually dealt with contracts like this at DOD but it was for IT support. I didn't care if the employee flexed their schedule as long as the period of time during the day was covered by the number of employees requested. SO if I had a contract for three helpdesk employees and 2 systems administrators from 8-430. Then I expect 5 employees there from 8-430. There is a reason why I need 5 employees. Now however the contractor wants to handle that is his business. If he can pull someone once a week from their position elsewhere to cover it, fine. I need the five employees there to cover the workload. Helpdesk is very busy as are the SAs. I can't pull my employees (govt employees) from their jobs to provide coverage to the contractor. What ended up happening is one of the SAs worked a flex schedule and someone else came in for that employee on the day he was off. The other SA kept a regular schedule. This isn't any different than scheduled vacations etc. Someone still has to come in for that person so I can have coverage. If the contractor has to hire another employee or pull one off of another job, that is his business. The lines between contractor employees and govt employees often become blurred. I remember that contractor employees didn't understand why they had to come in on Martin Luther King day and their govt employees did not. They get ten holidays per year according to the SCA and wage determinations. What ten holidays their employer gives is their business. Or when the Commander says you can go home 59 minutes early or gives some other administrative leave, they want to go to. They can't unless their employer pays for it.
  11. Chief of Engineering retires effective Sept 1st. 2 weeks later calls the Contracting Officer and asks about a contract that has just come in from bidding. Contract will be awarded based on source selection. Contracting Officer gives information such as bid prices, who bid etc. Then at the end of the conversation, former ex chief says oh by the way. I am now working for X company as their Vice President. X company bid on the above project and has many contracts with the contracting office. Contract has NOT been awarded yet and is in evaluations! Their proposal on the project lists Ex Chief as the Vice President of the Company. Contracting Officer feels immediately sick. Contacts ethics officer and legal. Legal renders the decision that since the Chief was not actively directly involved in the projects, x company can bid and there is no conflict of interest. Everyone is all hunky dory because legal ruled that way. Now I am a Contracting Officer within the District at a remote location. I hear this and I am like WHAT? Even though he was not the engineer handling the contracts, he was CHIEF of engineering. He knows what the cost estimates are for each project as he handled funding them. He sat on AE evaluation boards for the design and was intimately involved in the design of each project. He knows the specs, cost estimates, etc for the construction part of each project. To me, he has information that other normal contractors would not have access to or would be privy too. He also knows better than anyone projects that are in the pipeline for three years out. Personally I think that X company should be suspended from bidding for the next 3 years as they are now privy to govt information. X company was awarded 60% of the contracts for that office in the last FY. Anyone see a problem with this or am I being overdramatic? I thank God that I have never awarded to this company (they have always come in too high). I am changing how I do my source selections because he would have been privy to that. I feel that legal made a poor decision and it just doesn't look good. Somehow this is going to come back and bite the Contracting Officer who does award to them from here on out in the butt. I can just see "but legal said it was ok"......How do I mitigate the damages so I don't get bit in the behind on this.
  12. When I started in my new agency in July, I had to go through a new process of background investigation and credit checks even though I had been a govt employee for over 10 years... I don't agree with a minimum credit score. Credit records are often not accurate and they are geared to the creditors. I know it took me a long time and a lot of effort to get erroneous information off of my record. When you ask them to prove it, it is a simple sheet sent to someone in India who calls the company that doesn't check. They just reverufy bad information and do not investigate it like they are supposed to. In addition, a lot of people have been hit with hard times in this economy with a spouse losing a job, medical bills, divorce, etc.
  13. Corps of Engineers has it's offices for sale for engineering and contracting. They LOVE outside money as everything has to have a project labor code. Right now they are courting my agency especially in contracting, but I am thanks, no thanks. Other ideas, have someone from another Contracting office within the agency come tdy for 4 mos to help with the backload till you can get some people hired. Have other contracting offices within the agency pick up the load.
  14. Ok and the winning answer is - talked with DOL and SBA (two different specialists in two different offices) both agencies said the NAICS code is the appropriate code of 562910 for environmental remediation services. The bulk of the contract is the removal of lead paint, which is a service under maintenance and repair. If there is not a classification listed in the service wage rates, the contractor has to do the conformance process. Every single person when looking at the scope, knowing the buildings involved, and discussing it said it is a service contract including those in management and engineering. So I that is what we are going with. In addition, the work being done does not have to happen in order for a construction project to take place. The contractor is NOT protesting the NAICS code. He is saying that because the construction wage rates are higher in the area it should be construction. Which is not a reason to make a contract a construction contract. The rates are the minimum paid. He can pay the contractor whatever he wants as long as he is paying them the minimum. Oh and I am at a civilian agency. We don't use the DFAR (Thank God).
×
×
  • Create New...