Contractual Remedies-mischarging?

[Neurotic]

11 minutes ago, Retreadfed said:

Why not?  I agree with Vern's last post.  Also, note you can always verify the hours worked under the CPFF CLIN.

We can and will verify the hours on the CPFF. I just don't think the person is putting a full time effort in the FFP...but that's irrelevant. Thanks

[Vern Edwards]

On 9/26/2024 at 7:53 AM, Neurotic said:

The contract does not define "full time".

4 hours ago, Neurotic said:

I just don't think the person is putting a full time effort in the FFP...

The contract doesn't define it, but you think the contractor's not delivering it.

From a Google search:

Quote

What is a full-time job?

A full-time job typically implies a set work week, usually with eight-hour days and 40 hour weeks, although this can vary depending upon the industry and the nature of the position. The assumption is also a five-day workweek although this especially can vary for some professions.

That being said, while full-time employment is indeed defined by a 40-hour workweek (or at least a schedule of no less than 32 hours), there are no set parameters for when those hours have to occur. 

The U.S. Department of Labor does not list an exact definition of full-time employment, generally leaving the details up to individual employers. The idea of a "9 to 5" generates a common understanding of a full-time job or "business hours," with much of office and corporate culture keeping hours of Monday through Friday between the hours of 9:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., with some variation on the hours depending on the company's culture and industry.

https://www.indeed.com/career-advice/finding-a-job/full-time-job#:~:text=A full-time job typically,can vary for some professions.

@Neurotic Are you that COR I wrote about?

Quote

This story sounds like some suspicious and/or disgruntled COR making a mountain out of a molehill. 

Time to move on.

[Neurotic]

20 hours ago, Vern Edwards said:

The contract doesn't define it, but you think the contractor's not delivering it.

From a Google search:

@Neurotic Are you that COR I wrote about?

Time to move on.

Yes it is. I am not a COR, and actually always disagreed with the CO and COR's position but presented the issue here from their perspective. I know what a full time employee is, and I don't think the individual is working full time. Still, that again is not relevant to the issue because is not defined in the contract so is not a requirement. What I know or think is separate from what the contract says but that should be clear to everyone. Thanks, always appreciate everyone's input. 

 

[Vern Edwards]

15 hours ago, Neurotic said:

I don't think the individual is working full time.

Well, "full time" is nebulous. It might mean 40 hours per week or it might mean as many hours as necessary to get the job done properly, whether 40 hours 60 hours. Most "full time" business people work a lot more than 40 hours per week.

Let me ask: Do the CO and the COR think that the test manager's performance is unacceptable, i.e., that it does not conform to contract quality requirements? If so, then the CO should seek corrective action, no matter how many hours per week the test manager is working. Or is quality just a matter of hours worked?

[REA'n Maker]

On 10/1/2024 at 2:11 PM, Neurotic said:

So, they promised (proposed) something but the government did not make it a requirement. No way this individual is able to work full time under the FFP CLIN and also charge the hours billed under the CPFF.

The contractor disclosed the basis of estimate in their proposal, which cannot be conflated with contract type. All service contract prices are estimated by hours * rates, but that doesn't mean the contract is not FFP. As a consultant, that was an endless source of frustration on my part - my company would disclose hours/rates on an FFP proposal which then flowed through to award, so we ended up with an FFP contract that looked like cost-type. What most people on the Federal side miss is that even though a proposed FFP is estimated based on cost, in the FFP world a vendor can make a top-line decrement to the total price for competitive purposes. IBM used to refer to it as "management challenge".  

CORs always hate FFP because it requires them to manage performance and results, not count butts in seats.

[Vern Edwards]

2 hours ago, REA'n Maker said:

my company would disclose hours/rates on an FFP proposal which then flowed through to award, so we ended up with an FFP contract that looked like cost-type.

I don't understand what you mean. How does an FFP contract "look like" a cost type? Please explain. Are you saying that the customer expects the outcome to match the estimate?

[REA'n Maker]

On 10/3/2024 at 1:14 PM, Vern Edwards said:

I don't understand what you mean. How does an FFP contract "look like" a cost type?

I mean it's not overtly set up as a vehicle to accomplish an objective at a FFP, rather, the contract schedule and PWS is a detailed collection of labor categories priced by hours * rates added up to a total price. The result is that CORs "manage" by counting the hours of whoever they have a petty gripe with at any given time and decrementing the invoice accordingly.

[Vern Edwards]

What you describe does not sound like a "cost-type" contract. It sounds like a fixed-price arrangement to provide specified types of labor in estimated quantities (hours) at specified hourly rates to do specified work. The COR for each type of labor counts hours delivered to determine what the government should pay for. 

 

[joel hoffman]

On 9/26/2024 at 7:00 AM, Neurotic said:

The agency requested, and the vendor proposed named Key Personnel for various labor categories within this CLIN, to include a full time "Test Manager" (for Quality Assurance*). The Key Person's names were incorporated into the contract. 

*Does the contract require full time quality assurance? What is the role of a quality assurance test manager?

On 9/26/2024 at 9:53 AM, Neurotic said:

The contract does not define "full time". Not only that, just found out there is no actual requirement in the contract for Key Personnel to be full-time*.

 

On 9/26/2024 at 9:53 AM, Neurotic said:

The contractor may have "promised" full time in their proposal but if it's not in the contract I would say is meaningless now. So what I see is a contractor performing on an FFP, which includes a Key Person, whose effort is not clearly defined, and that is also working and charging a CPFF CLIN.

I don’t believe that the contractor incurred any additional cost for the person who performed the additional tasks, assuming that you have verified who performed the task and that the tasks were performed during normal duty hours. You have the right to find out who performed the tasks.

The contractor proposed and is essentially charging you in the FFP contract price for a full time employee. Is that correct? 

Now the contractor is charging you again for some of that same person’s time. That is double charging in my opinion.

Under cost reimbursement, the contractor has to be able to show that it incurred a cost to perform the task.

I don’t think that the contractor can prove that there is any additional cost incurred to perform those reimbursable tasks if it is already paying the person and charging it to the contract in its accounting system.

Is the person an hourly or salaried employee? If salaried, it (probably?) already incurred a cost to the contract that it supposedly included in the contract price.

Did you say whether the employee is working full or part time on the job? Is this an on-site or off-site employee? I may have missed that

For a cost reimbursement CLIN, It is the contractor’s responsibility to justify the additional cost to the contract to be reimbursed. You didn’t say that it is a time and material CLIN. I didn’t see where you or the COR/KO required the contractor to or where the contractor substantiated the additional cost to be reimbursed. 

[joel hoffman]

On 10/2/2024 at 3:15 PM, Neurotic said:

I know what a full time employee is, and I don't think the individual is working full time. Still, that again is not relevant to the issue because is not defined in the contract so is not a requirement. What I know or think is separate from what the contract says but that should be clear to everyone. Thanks, always appreciate everyone's input

Is the QA function required to be full-time when work is being performed and is the work being performed on-site or off-site?

Edit: One point is that, regardless of the limitations of the contract language, if the employee’s  full cost of salary and fringes, etc. is being charged directly to the FFP portion of the contract in the company’s accounting system, there is no extra COST to the company for performing the cost reimbursable tasks. Then the company is double charging…

Edited October 8, 2024 by joel hoffman
Last paragraph added