Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited


0 Neutral
  1. Correct, which is why I said I would have liked to see the component give the employees the information for the contractor. It was public knowledge at that point. If they wish to reach out to the new contractor, that is on them. I see the problems with the component getting involved. I pointed that out at the beginning. I’m trying to be better prepared for next time. I am also still interested in transition in general. Say it is one employee. The component loves him. The employee wants to stay. Is not interested in other opportunities with the incumbent. The new contractor wants to hire him. Nobody wants a disruption of service. Who contacts who first? What can and can’t be done. How did the new contractor find out the component loves the person in place? 🙂 I don’t know. I don’t want to stray too far. I’ve gotten a lot of great feedback to this point.
  2. Thanks for the responses. Their information was not released without their permission. They knew the contract was ending. The component asked if they would be interested in staying on with the new contractor. I would have liked for them to be given the new contractors information and let the employees reach out to them. I think that once the component knew they would like to stay, they provided the new contractor with their information. With their permission. I am really interested in what formerfed was discussing, and it kind of relates to this as well. The new contractor was looking for information from the component more along the lines of a recommendation of current employees. If all of them would like to stay on, and all of them contact the new contractor, the new contractor is still likely to ask somebody with knowledge of their performance for their thoughts.
  3. Thanks, C Culham. Once again, I really appreciate the dialogue. 52.222-41 is not in the contract, but I was looking at this earlier. It is not a collectively bargained position, but there was a wage determination (SCA). I will review, more closely, the additional aspects of it. Very much appreciated and grateful.
  4. Thank you for the response. This was my first real solicitation (Option years, etc.). Having a blast. FWIW, I told the COR to not answer that question if it came up in the kick-off meeting, which it did. I told them I would follow-up on it. The component, at some point, followed up while I sought guidance. The incumbent is angry. They failed to perform several times during the last quarter with employees not showing up. The invoice was rejected and equitable adjustment was offered. That’s when the incumbent brought up the transfer of information. The issues were not related, but conflated. I was just curious as to, at a minimum, best practice, if nothing is spelled out in black and white. And if it is in black and white, what that is? I have been searching. Loving the forum and my new job! Again, thank you for taking the time to reply.
  5. At the end of OY4 one contractor was being replaced by another. The new contractor said it is always their preference to retain staff that the component is happy with and have demonstrated good performance. This contract would not be affected by any EO. The component provided the name and contact info for the staffers to the new contractor. The soon to be previous contractor states that the government should have referred the new contractor to them for the transfer of information. Just curious if anyone has come across this, and if there is a regulation/protocol/best practice that you are aware of?
  • Create New...