Jump to content
The Wifcon Forums and Blogs


  • Content Count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

0 Neutral

About ConTraCula

  • Rank

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. If you would like to do private sector entirely (nothing related to the FAR), then I would job search "Procurement". Private companies have a profit motive and often procurement agents are integrated with the business planning team since procurement represents expenditures and often performance. Changes are easier to make and just must adhere to company policy, the UCC, and what legal might advise. Depending, competition requirements are much more relaxed as well, and negotiations can happen more quickly and deeply. Procurement professionals are in high demand. I made more money in private sector procurement, but the benefits were not as good as the federal government. Also, people do not like to hear this one... I worked loads more! There was an upside though. The sky is the limit in the private sector if you are ambitious. Our Chief Procurement Officer made shy of a million $ annually. SVPs made $250k-450k. VPs made $180k-250k. Directors $120-180k. Managers $100-160k. Seniors $80k-120. Specialists $60-90k. Buyers $40-70k. There weren't many real benefits though. Crummy healthcare and retirement. 2 weeks of vacation a year. Bonuses comprised some of the salary potential and is a huge issue if you have an unsympathetic boss. Hiring and firing takes weeks, not months or years. Instead of Congress, you have the Board of Directors and the C-levels (and all of their shenanigans and motives) to deal with.
  2. Hello All! I stumbled across this closed topic earlier and was curious about which parts of the FAR you would propose to eliminate? Our Agency went through a discovery exercise earlier and I am not sure if we identified as many regulations for elimination as we would have liked. An example: Subpart 4.3—Paper Documents and 11.303 Special requirements for paper are possibly an example of complexity created by private interests.
  3. Thank you for your interpretation. It matches my initial reading. The contract in question does not designate US govt property specifically either, so I believe c 2 does indeed apply. There is just an eerie feeling to giving such discretion to a contractor and a cooperating government. Then again, that discretion was already given upon contract signing.
  4. 48 CFR 752.245-71 - Title to and care of property. "(c) (2) For non-expendable property titled to the Cooperating Government, the Contractor shall, within 90 days after completion of this contract, or at such other date as may be fixed by the contracting officer, submit an inventory schedule covering all items of non-expendable property under its custody, which have not been consumed in the performance of this contract. The Contractor shall also indicate what disposition has been made of such property." My reading of this clause is that the Cooperating Government (one on a bilateral obligating agreement) works with the Contractor to dispose of/reuse non-expendable property. Then, the COR/CO should be notified of the disposition after the fact and it does not need to necessarily follow the priority list in FAR 45.602-2. What do you think? Should FAR 45.602-2 be followed and should the COR review and CO approve of the disposition plan, or, in this case, do the Contractor and Cooperating Government have discretion? -The Count.
  • Create New...