Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ji20874

  • Rank
    Contributing Member

Contact Methods

  • Website URL

Profile Information

  • Gender
  • Location

Recent Profile Visitors

24,431 profile views
  1. Really? I’m not so sure. Are you thinking unilaterally, or bilaterally?
  2. ji20874

    Contractor Request to Extend POP

    Consideration from the contractor can be a reduction in contract price (benefit to taxpayer) or added value in the product (benefit to your program). You already know this. Either one is fine, whatever you can negotiate. Consideration from the Government can be a delivery date extension and forbearance in terminating for default or cause. Retreadfed covered this. BEWARE! Your COR may take the contractor’s side in any disagreement or recollection of facts. You may be left standing alone in this matter, and may be seen as an enemy to the mission for disturbing the peace of the contractor. Your COR really may not care about the contract text or about correct principles. Does the contract include the Government Delay of Work clause? If so, you are liable in a REA situation only for costs or delays starting within 20 calendar days before you receive the required written notice which the contractor hasn’t even submitted yet. If a REA asks for additional time, the contractor has to comply with whatever clause applies. You are right — even though it is Christmas, Uncle Sugar does not give gifts to contractors.
  3. It will be very easy to ask the offeror to identify the supplier.
  4. You may be barking up the wrong tree. Is there case law where the assignment was made by power of attorney (assignor (the bank) and assignee (the bank) are the same), over the objection of the contractor (who is supposed to be the assignor)? I think that is your problem area.
  5. Have you complied with FAR 32.802(e)? Are you registered in SAM amenable to FAR 32.805(d)(4)? FAR 32.805(a)(1), (2), and (3) list who make assignments -- a contractor's attorney-in-fact is not listed there. Could that be part of the problem?
  6. ji20874

    Overriding the evaluators

    That would be fine -- but usually, the selecting official is at a higher grade than the evaluators, and he or she relies on the evaluators to handle the minutiae.
  7. ji20874

    Exempt EE's working LESS than 40 hours

    I suppose any contractor with employees in France will have to use 35 hours as the base work week. 🙂
  8. apsofacto, How about this? The FAR had to default one way or the other. They wrote FAR 52.215-1 to default to allowing for (but not mandating) award without discussions (with Alt I mandating discussions) -- the contracting officer picks the clause with or without the alternate. Maybe they flipped a coin. If they had written it the other way, your question today might be the reverse. There is an error in the question. Here is the question-- Why is the government's default position that competitively "negotiated" contracts will be awarded without discussions? That is not the default position. Here is a better phrasing of the question-- Why is the government's default position that competitively "negotiated" contracts will may be awarded without discussions? Since we're in the beginner's area, let's teach correct principles: the default (no alternate) is to allow for award without discussions. To me, it makes sense to allow for award without discussions as the default.
  9. Yeah, AndiiM, you should talk to your attorney. Even if h2h is right about the Government having forfeited to you the payments for the unqualified person, there is still a false claim or statement matter which might or might not stick, depending on the facts. And you might reasonably get a CPARS hit if your contract is reportable in CPARS.
  10. Whatever you call it (really, it is a price adjustment, not an equitable adjustment (there is a difference)), deny it. They can re-submit it after you exercise the option. You buy yourself some time to get your agency labor adviser involved.
  11. AndiiM, For a T&M contract, you are entitled to hourly rate payments only for persons who are qualified -- you are entitled to ZERO hourly rate payments for an employee who does not meet the qualification requirements. By submitting your invoice for that unqualified person, you may have made a false statement, which could have criminal penalties. So if you don't settle this amicably with the contracting officer, you may find yourself facing bigger problems. See para. (i)(1)(B) of the clause at FAR 52.212-4 with its Alternate I, or para. (a)(3) of the clause at FAR 52.232-7, whichever is included in your contract. You probably need to correct and re-submit all of your invoices that requested hourly rate payments for this unqualified person. But don't just take my word for it -- hopefully you have an attorney who can advise you. You probably want to make the corrections without admitting any fault.
  12. Guardian, You might have a rock solid reason to deny the REA if you haven't exercised the option yet -- isn't the contractor's request for adjustment (not equitable adjustment, just adjustment) supposed to happen AFTER the option exercise? IF you follow this course, the same issue will present itself again, so you will still have to find answers to your questions. Is your agency labor adviser of any help? See https://www.wdol.gov/ala.aspx and FAR 22.104(b)(2) and (3).
  13. https://www.cbca.gov/files/decisions/2016/CHADWICK_06-22-16_5084__SECTEK_INC.pdf I don't know if this case is relevant to your situation...
  14. Part One. I agree that the contractor has not made its case. The fact that the CBA caused the average employee's pay to increase by $1.30/hour is irrelevant. The contractor needs to demonstrate the before and after effect of the WD (or CBA). You also should have some concern that the contractor may not have negotiated the CBA in good faith, because it assumed that it would pass all increased costs to the Government -- but a contractor is still supposed to vigorously negotiate the CBA, and a comparison with other prevailing wages might be helpful. Hopefully, your agency labor adviser will ne able to help you. Part Two. You should deny the REA. The contractor has a choice: new employee or overtime for existing employees. The contractor is asking for a gift, not a REA -- and Uncle Sam doesn't give gifts to contractors (although Christmas is almost here). What contract clause is the contractor invoking to assert its right to a gift REA?