Jump to content

C Culham

Members
  • Posts

    2,947
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by C Culham

  1. Thanks for the clarification, in my re-read I see that I missed that clarifying point - "anyone". I was schooled by my kids the other day. They remain loyal fans to their alma mater and travel to fall football games. Oregon State University. They shared, and I did not realize, that to enter the stadium they must show ID and their vaccination card. No card, no entry. The rest of my Q & As did elude to some interesting inconsistencies but all the same a requirement of entry for "anyone".
  2. Interesting. Is the EO and its subsequent clause public and general and not directed a particular contractors?
  3. My mind went here which is a little beyond the CPI matter of sorts. Does the subcontract provide the CPI increase, if not are just using to help justify your position. If the former maybe you ought to get clarification as to what CPI standard you are to use from your prime and possibly even get the wording modified in the contract to avoid future confusion. If the latter I just wonder about using some sort of index as opposed to your actual experience. Maybe I am not fair minded but I would rather negotiate with a sub ( and have) based on their actual experience as opposed to what indexes day. By your very example you might use the Green Book but the prime might use a whole different document and view in considering what you propose.
  4. A look see at this may add detail to Neil's response as it provides what the Government will look for in a CPSR review. May help you understand a standard you may want to adopt. Do an internet search on - Contractor Purchasing System Review (CPSR) Guidebook February 26, 2019
  5. I will be bold. Organized labor that is why. I believe a deep dive into the creation and evolution of the USDOL can in a large part be attributed to organized labors ability to sway legislation.
  6. You may have made the above statement to implicate all three branches. If not, may I suggest that it is so!
  7. Suggest you contact legal counsel. As I read you are talking about a prime sub matter and I do not believe the FAR references will dictate what your alternatives might be, your subcontract with the prime will.
  8. IDIQ I am guessing. Some one may be able to offer case law that might set some standard, I did not go looking, but my general view would be as many as reasonable considering the facts as well as what if anything the contract might provide. I say this noting that clause at 52.216-22 might place some limitation. However such limitation could most likely be adjusted by a bilateral modification to accommodate a reasonable situation. This might be an interesting read with regard to your use of "expired".
  9. Past experience with the US Forest Service Incident Response. While USFS uses the incident response system for wildfires they also are dispatched for other efforts. Work is done both remotely and via relocation but was usually temporary. Example 21 days to Louisiana for post Katrina effort. I learned what "hot bunking" was really all about where I shared a motel room with a law enforcement officer that worked nights and I worked days on the procurement side of things. https://www.fs.usda.gov/managing-land/fire/ibp There is also this that may provide insight - https://www.fai.gov/topics/contingency-contracting-corps Absolutely worth it. Both career building experience and personal satisfaction of being able to help.
  10. The point being the superior for this particular discussion being the agency head! Ref. FAR 1.602.
  11. I was intrigued by the OP's statement above and watched intently as the thread unfolded. We found out FFP competitively awarded. "(M)y agency" "contractors choose" and "my agency calls" it "field office". Made me wonder if the OP has not shared a specific solicitation instruction that might possibly evolve into a contract term/condition telling how a contractor is formulate their FFP? If so it might be very important language to the ensuing question posed by the OP. For me the nuance in this thread is something might be missing that has not been said and might actually be demanded by the contract.
  12. The mechanics of overriding is as noted in a previous post. I see these as possible disadvantages if the mechanics are accomplished. Possible protest of the stay to the Court of Federal Claims as in general decisions to lift can not be protested to GAO except in very certain circumstances. Such a protest to USCFC will involve more work and the possibility that the USCFC will sustain the protest regarding overriding the stay. If the override is not protested to GAO addressing the matter of the work not stayed should they, GAO, sustain the protest - example cancel procurement and start again. And maybe even disregarding GAO's decision all together. It is possible to do so generally speaking agencies usually do not. Lots to think about!
  13. Have you found this document in your research. Might not answer your question but will get you on the road to what might be possible. I do suggest that your specific question would be best answered by the CO for your prime contract. https://www.acq.osd.mil/log/MPP/.policy.html/PPP_for_Product_Support_Guidebook_Oct2016.pdf
  14. I agree but let me pose a few more thoughts. In the end it will be the contractors responsibility to determine application of FLSA/SCA to their employees as well as DOL. Your conclusion suggests you are making a conclusion pursuit to FAR 22.11, not include a wage determination(?), and as such FAR 22.1015 may come into play. I suspect in your research you have encountered these references but offering them just in case.
  15. Good point. I will add another reference that may be helpful to the OP even if not DoD. https://www.acq.osd.mil/dpap/policy/policyvault/Managing_Contracts_under_COVID-19_Memo_DPC.pdf
  16. No doubt...but in a true read it seems only a macro when intent is to affect the procurement world.
  17. Does this help answer your questions. Contract clause (as applicable) Purchase order for commercial item - FAR 52.212-4(f) Purchase order for non-commercial item - FAR 52-213-4((e) Or otherwise in the contract 52.249-8(c) FAR 42.505(b)(1) https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/science/about-epidemiology/identifying-source-outbreak.html?CDC_AA_refVal=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.cdc.gov%2Fcoronavirus%2F2019-ncov%2Fcases-updates%2Fabout-epidemiology%2Fidentifying-source-outbreak.html
  18. Here we go again....https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/11/18/executive-order-on-nondisplacement-of-qualified-workers-under-service-contracts/ For me the litmus test is more about what you are actually asking a contractor to do than a classification series of a position in the Federal government that determines SCA applicability. Have you looked around here - https://www.dol.gov/agencies/whd/government-contracts/service-contracts Especially at references regarding the exemption you note, with the reminder that it includes not only "professional" but executive and administrative employees as well. Maybe Fact Sheet 17A. Whenever such a subject comes up I am also reminded of FAR 7.3 and 7.5 the latter which was recently discuss in Forum here. The original topic is not spot on but the rest of the discussion may be of interest -
  19. One of the basics - A contract must have legal purpose and object to be enforceable. Conclusion not enforceable if the EO is unlawful? A very pertinent question with regard to a modification exercising an option that includes the clause. Yes I know but as it goes the adjudication does not stop with with a competent court declaration regarding the EO the questions posed in the most recent post create their own need for declarations by competent courts or other forums. Actions throughout the whole contracting process have their own questions of unlawfulness.
  20. It does not end with the signing. It is the actual administration and enforcement of the clause and the confusion that will follow. Remember one post somewhere in Forum has already lamented about the inconsistency of application of the clause. Passing the requirement on to a COR, possibly an inspector, or whom ever the CO depends on for assistance in administration and enforcement of the clause will undoubtedly raise as many questions as the requirement for the clause has. This reality relates to a segment of your comment that My experience with reality is that administration and enforcement of a contract clause goes way beyond the CO and in some cases the designated contractor representative. My experience was just a small piece of the giant procurement machine of the Federal government but yet impact was seen as giant in some geographical areas of the US! https://newhouse.house.gov/sites/newhouse.house.gov/files/firefighter_vaccine_letter_final.pdf
  21. The gaping holes the EO left open on how to implement is what would have for me as a CO , raised questions and today do, question. The legality is a side-bar on what might be faced in the future should it be found not legal. Not sure it is a a question of does it matter, but more of the reality that isn't the whole thing just another edict on the perennial pile of "it depends!"
  22. The scenarios are unlimited at this point..... "I did market research for my labor intensive service." "It meets the definition of commercial item - service based on the market research." "Market research confirms H2B workers are not required to have vaccine when entering US." "The major labor intensive service industry that I canvassed for the particular NAICS code does not require COVID vaccine for employees." "Pursuant FAR 12.302 the clause is not implementing listed statutory requirements, is an E.O. and not a statutory requirement, and is inconsistent with customary commercial practice." "I intend to not put the clause in the solicitation and contract."
  23. Newbie to the subcontractor role to a Federal prime contractor, and/or newbie to Federal government contracting wholly as well a reach out to the Association of Procurement Technical Assistance Center (APTAC aka PTAC) in your area may be of an assist to your company and the questions that may arise. To find out more about the services (free or at affordable costs)of APTAC's go here - https://www.aptac-us.org/
×
×
  • Create New...