How Did President Obama's Four Impact Federal Government Contractors?
EXECUTIVE ORDERS 13494, 13495, 13496 & 13502
President Obama has signed four executive orders that will greatly impact federal government contractors. These orders require the following:
All federal contractors may not seek reimbursement for funds spent on influencing employees regarding unionization (EO 13494); EO 13494 prohibits federal contractors from passing on to contracting departments and agencies the costs of attempting to persuade employees to exercise – or to refrain from exercising – their rights to organize or engage in collective bargaining.
I agree with this because it is the policy of the executive branch in procuring goods and services that, to ensure the economical and efficient administration of Government contracts, contracting departments and agencies, when they enter into, receive proposals for, or make disbursements pursuant to a contract as to which certain costs are treated as unallowable, shall treat as unallowable the costs of any activities undertaken to persuade employees—whether employees of the recipient of the Federal disbursements or of any other …show more content…
I agree with this Executive Order because it essentially ensures “representational security” for unions in collective bargaining relationships with federal contractors. The requirement in Executive Order 13495 that a successor contractor provide all of the predecessor contractor’s employees the right of first refusal for employment with the successor employer combined with the SCA’s requirement that the successor contractor pay the same, or better, wages and provide an equivalent level of benefits to employees as did the predecessor, makes finding that the successor contractor is a “perfectly clear” successor under the NLRA much more
President Obama has signed four executive orders that will greatly impact federal government contractors. These orders require the following:
All federal contractors may not seek reimbursement for funds spent on influencing employees regarding unionization (EO 13494); EO 13494 prohibits federal contractors from passing on to contracting departments and agencies the costs of attempting to persuade employees to exercise – or to refrain from exercising – their rights to organize or engage in collective bargaining.
I agree with this because it is the policy of the executive branch in procuring goods and services that, to ensure the economical and efficient administration of Government contracts, contracting departments and agencies, when they enter into, receive proposals for, or make disbursements pursuant to a contract as to which certain costs are treated as unallowable, shall treat as unallowable the costs of any activities undertaken to persuade employees—whether employees of the recipient of the Federal disbursements or of any other …show more content…
I agree with this Executive Order because it essentially ensures “representational security” for unions in collective bargaining relationships with federal contractors. The requirement in Executive Order 13495 that a successor contractor provide all of the predecessor contractor’s employees the right of first refusal for employment with the successor employer combined with the SCA’s requirement that the successor contractor pay the same, or better, wages and provide an equivalent level of benefits to employees as did the predecessor, makes finding that the successor contractor is a “perfectly clear” successor under the NLRA much more