Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'department of labor'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type


  • Instructions and Terms of Use
    • Terms Of Use
    • Before You Register, Before You Post, Instructions for Writing Your Question
  • Contracting Forum
    • What Happened?
    • Polls
    • For Beginners Only
    • About The Regulations
    • COVID-19 And Its Effect on Contracting
    • Contracting Workforce
    • The Good, The Bad, the Ugly
    • Recommended Reading
    • Contract Award Process
    • Contract Pricing Including CAS & Allowable Costs
    • Contract Administration
    • Schedules, GWACS, MACs, IDIQs
    • Subcontracts & Subcontract Management
    • Small Business, Socioeconomic Programs
    • Proposed Law & Regulations; Legal Decisions


  • The Wifcon Blog
  • Don Mansfield's Blog
  • Government Contracts Blog
  • Government Contracts Insights
  • Emptor Cautus' Blog
  • SmallGovCon.com
  • The Contractor's Perspective
  • Government Contracts Legal Forum

Product Groups

There are no results to display.


  • Rules & Tools
  • Legal Opinions
  • News

Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start





Website URL







Found 2 results

  1. Good morning, all! I handle Job Corps Center contracts. We compete companies capable of running the center, top to bottom, for multi-year option contracts. Recently, the topic of vacation time came up with regard to a new contract being awarded to a successor contractor versus what is owed by the predecessor contractor. Currently, when a contract is awarded to a non-incumbent, the incumbent contractor pays the employee vacation time earned but unused as a part of the final paycheck received. Title 29, Part 4 of the CFR, Section 4.173 indicates that the vacation accrual continues, as long as their is no break in service. The contractor by whom a worker is employed at the time the vacation right vests (i.e. on the employee's anniversary date of employment) must provide the full benefit required by the Wage Determination which is applicable on that date, whether or not it is the predecessor or the successor contractor. Two questions come up from a potential bidder. 1) Will the successor contract be entitled to a list of incumbent service employees required to be provided by the CO/incumbent contractor at the time of transition (along with names, date of hire, and position) along with a listing of active employees vacation utilized in the current year? I am inclined to say yes, of course, as this is key information in the administration of the contract. This would be provided after award. 2) Will DOL modify new contracts that are awarded to the non-incumbent with funding to absorb the unknown vacation balances to be assumed and paid out under the new contract? This is where things become uncertain. Vested vacation will be paid out under the predecessor contract. For those employees without a break in service whose vacation time is NOT yet vested, their vacation will vest after the successor assumes control via the new contract. Because we cannot release information to a bidder prior to award, this limits the potential successor contractor's ability to calculate potential vacation benefit costs into their proposal. With that said, they may not be aware of what vacation will vest after they transition and take control of the center. This has been a difficult one to answer, because I cannot find anything in any regulation (even internally) that outlines this process other than to say that the successor is responsible to pay out vacation that vests after they take control of the center. Does anyone have any analysis on either of these topics to offer? Thanks!
  2. Good afternoon, Mr. Edwards: First, let me thank you in advance, for your assistance. This site is wonderful for getting another perspective on all things Federal Government contracting. Here is my question: Recently, the Department of Labor has been conducting an audit of the Service Contract Act to ensure we have been following appropriate procedures (i.e. paying correct wage and health and welfare). Last week, we received an amendment to modify a Blanket Purchase Agreement (BPA) through an amendment that retroactively incorporates the Wage Determination schedules for 2011 and 2012. What they are attempting to do is force our customer to have us sign the amendment so that we would be responsible for the wage differences and health and welfare from the inception of the contract. I have done a quick calculation and for the number of hours that we have put into the BPA calls, it would add up to a very large number. We would have never priced the contract as we did if this was an SCA contract and we stand to lose a significant amount of dollars if we were to accept this retroactively. Can you please tell me what recourse we may have. Thank you very much!
  • Create New...