Application of the Service Contract Act & Davis-Bacon Act

[trplyr]

37.301 Labor standards.

Contracts for dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements are subject to either the Service Contract Act (4l U.S.C. 351-358) or the Davis-Bacon Act (40 U.S.C. 3141 et seq.). If the contract is solely for dismantling, demolition, or removal of improvements, the Service Contract Act applies unless further work which will result in the construction, alteration, or repair of a public building or public work at that location is contemplated. If such further construction work is intended, even though by separate contract, then the Davis-Bacon Act applies to the contract for dismantling, demolition, or removal.

Does the Davis-Bacon Act apply to the contract for dismantling, demolition, or removal if further construction is intended, but is to be done by another contractor? If so, why?

[Guest Vern Edwards]

Does the Davis-Bacon Act apply to the contract for dismantling, demolition, or removal if further construction is intended, but is to be done by another contractor? If so, why?

The answer to your first question is yes, for the simple reason that "separate contract," as used in FAR 37.301, and "another contract," as used in FAR 22.402(a)(ii), logically encompass contracts by a "separate" or "another" contractor. See, too, 29 CFR ? 4.116(:

[C]ontracts are accordingly subject to the McNamara-O'Hara Act where their principal purpose is to furnish services in the United States through the use of service employees. For example, a contract for clearing timber or brush from land or for the demolition or dismantling of buildings or other structures located thereon may be a contract for construction activity subject to the Davis-Bacon Act where it appears that the clearing of the site is to be followed by the construction of a public building or public work at the same location. If, however, no further construction activity at the site is contemplated the Davis-Bacon Act is considered inapplicable to such clearing, demolition, or dismantling work.

As to your "why" question, I don't know the answer. But the likely answer is that since the same workers will probably be employed under both contracts, the Secretary of Labor wants to ensure that compensation for work at the same site is consistent from one contract through the other. It makes no difference that the employers are different.

[RedHorse74]

The answer to your first question is yes, for the simple reason that "separate contract," as used in FAR 37.301, and "another contract," as used in FAR 22.402(a)(ii), logically encompass contracts by a "separate" or "another" contractor. See, too, 29 CFR ? 4.116(:

As to your "why" question, I don't know the answer. But the likely answer is that since the same workers will probably be employed under both contracts, the Secretary of Labor wants to ensure that compensation for work at the same site is consistent from one contract through the other. It makes no difference that the employers are different.

On the same topic of applicability of Davis-Bacon, what happens when the Davis-Bacon rates change during the life of the contract? My situation is this: We are in the 1st option year of a multi-year contract. The Davis-Bacon rates for one of my subcontractors has risen significantly from when we proposed on the contract. Does the contractor have to adjust the rates accordingly or wait until the new rates are modified into the contract by the Contracting Officer?

Thanks!