Jump to content

Is Construction Considered a Service?


aordway

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 61
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Guest Vern Edwards

The question is not whether construction is a service in economists' terms. It is. The question is whether construction is a service in terms of the FAR. It is not.

Regulations must be read and interpreted as a whole.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Got it. I read, for understanding, every reference each poster provided so you weren't casting your pearls before swine. I learned a lot.

Attempt at contracting humor: The canons of construction deemed construction is not a service.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Jamaal, you are a breath of fresh air. I sure hope you work for the government. But whether you do or not, you have earned a free berth at The FAR Bootcamp (assuming you haven't attended already). The executive director will be in touch through Bob. Welcome to Bob's site.

Vern

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you very much. I do work for the Government, and I have not attended the FAR Bootcamp.

I am very appreciative...I am sure my co-workers are too because now they don't have to deal with my constant campaigning to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jamaal - Of little consequence but an added comment all the same admitting that my library of qualified references is not as plentiful as others...but it is interesting to read the definitions of the words “construction” and “service” in the varied dictionaries one can find.

Vern – I wonder if you have now thrown Jamaal into the world of reading, understanding, and appreciating all the aspects of standards of conduct and conflict of interest that apply to a Federal employee? I guess time will tell.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Carl:

I'm not sure what you are alluding to, but I have no contract with the government that includes the Gratuities clause, and even if I did my offer of a free berth in the Bootcamp would not violate the terms of that clause, since I did not make the offer with the intent of obtaining a contract or favorable treatment under a contract, and I've got maybe 1,000 witnesses to that effect.

However, I encourage Jamaal to check with his ethics officer before accepting my gift, and I encourage you to call an IG or the Department of Justice if you think that my gift is a violation of the law. Really, Carl, I urge you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vern: I am alluding to 5 CFR 2635.203 and 5 CFR 2635.204 that may apply regardless of whether you have a contract or any other intentions.

Your advice to Jamaal is sound to run your offer by the appropriate ethics official. As to your impertinent encouragement to me I will just write that off to a veiled attempt to once again pick a fight which is of no interest to me all the way around.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Vern Edwards

Mr. Culham:

Thank you.

I want to point out to you and to others that I made the offer to Jamaal before I knew that he was a government employee. (I hoped he was one, because we need people like him in government.) I made the offer with no intention of improperly influencing him or of selling him anything. I think that post was the first in which I have ever mentioned the Bootcamp myself or even acknowledged my involvement with it. I also want to point out that I have made gifts or awarded prizes here before, usually books. And I have spoken at many government and private conferences without charge, not even for travel expenses, and I have given free training berths to people who wanted the training but couldn't afford it or whose organization couldn't afford it.

As for the "impertinent encouragement," I didn't mean it to be impertinent. I meant it sincerely. If you (or anyone else) thinks that I have done something unethical or illegal I encourage you to report it. I think it is your duty to do so.

As for picking a fight with you, why bother? But I have to defend myself against your sly accusation. All you needed to do in Post # 56 was advise Jamaal to check with his ethics official. Had you done that I would have told Jamaal that you were absolutely right and I would have urged him to do so myself. Direct address to me in that post was unnecessary, and it was undesirable then and in the future. It is clear that you wanted to score a point. Well, you did. Thanks to you I won't be offering any more freebees here: books, training, or anything else. Well done, Carl. Mission accomplished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Vern....My post was not intended as sly and apologize you took it that way. Rather it was intended as both a nudge and with a smile so to speak with regard how posts on WIFCON always lead to something new that is not connected to the original post.

And as I indicated you do want a fight because now you blame me for your failure to consider prudent actions. That is in a word and pardon me, crap. For it were me and I had a way to offer items in form of prizes in a contest I would. As noted your first offering here in this thread as to what appears to be a "gift" which gets to what I will call the borderline. So in the end blame yourself for a usual bait and over reaction.

Carl

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Jamaal:

Carl was correct in mentioning that an agency ethics officer might consider Vern's offer as a gift.

However, viewing the discussion as it occurred, I would consider it falling under an exception to a gift "a gift motivated solely by . . . personal friendship" which would exempt it as a gift.

Here is the Office of Government Ethics site and I have it linked to Invitations From Outside Sources

The government will derive a huge benefit from your attendance and at no cost to the government--except maybe travel and the days of your attendance. Check with you Agency Ethics Official. If they have any questions, please ask them to contact me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...