Xactly

Thank you Vern and Joel. I admit, there's a bit of square-peg/round-hole syndrome going on here. I will present all comments to the ACO for this contract and see how they wish to proceed. Thank you again for the fast responses!

Trying to reply again (first time didn't go through): Thank you for the fast responses! Vern, the contract is for services to include carpet installation. The purchase of the carpet is a rare exception to the rule, but one that comes up once every year or two. To respond to Jason_A's post, I agree full-heartedly with the thought that Walsh Healey would normally be the appropriate WD under a supply contract. The problem is, one, we are using a service contract that does not have Walsh Healey included and, two, we would be hard-pressed to find a contractor that would install carpet for minimum wage, thus bringing me back full circle...

Recently, there has been an issue regarding how to appropriately pay for a service being performed on a BOSC. Here?s the deal: The contract has rates with foundations from Service Contract Act and Davis Bacon, but not Walsh Healey. The work in question is to purchase and install carpeting. The guidelines for the purchase of a supply would indicate that Walsh Healey act applies. Under Walsh Healey, the wage requirement is equivalent to minimum wage. Finding someone to install carpet for minimum wage is not reasonable (and likely, not possible). If, however, we use a higher wage rate (say we negotiate with the contractor and agreement to pay SCA wages), the contractor would not be obligated to pay their employees the higher wage, at least not from a DOL standpoint. The contractor is required only to meet the guidelines associated with Walsh Healey. Additionally, the contractor would not be obligated to meet any other standard, such as Health and Welfare, or, in the case of Davis Bacon, a submittal of certified payrolls. So, my question is, where in Federal Contracting is there language that protects the government from paying more to a contractor than they may be paying to their employees? How can we insure that what we pay for a labor rate is what the employee will actually receive? Or is that even possible?