Search form

DOL and FAR Council Publish Final ‘Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces’ Rules for Government Contractors

By Laura A. Mitchell and Leslie A. Stout-Tabackman
  • August 25, 2016

The U.S. Department of Labor and the Federal Acquisition Regulatory (“FAR”) Council have published the highly anticipated final guidance and regulations implementing President Barack Obama’s “Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces” Executive Order (E.O. 13673), often called the “Blacklisting” or “Bad Actors” Executive Order. Signed by President Obama in July 2014, the Executive Order’s stated goal is to promote efficiency in government procurement by ensuring federal agencies contract only with “responsible” contractors who comply with federal and state workplace laws (see our articles, President Obama Signs Executive Order on Federal Contractor Blacklisting and ‘Blacklisting’ Rules for Government Contractors Proposed by Federal Agencies under Executive Order). The effective date of the regulations is October 25, 2016.

The Executive Order and proposed regulations and guidance set forth procedures requiring federal agency contracting officers to consider an employer’s record of workplace law compliance when awarding contracts and subcontracts valued at more than $500,000. The relevant workplace laws on which employer compliance must be assessed remain unchanged in the final rules and include the following:

  • Fair Labor Standards Act
  • Occupational Safety and Health Act (and state law equivalents)
  • Migrant and Seasonal Agricultural Worker Protection Act
  • National Labor Relations Act
  • Family and Medical Leave Act
  • Davis-Bacon Act
  • Service Contract Act
  • Title VII of the Civil Rights Act
  • Americans with Disabilities Act
  • Age Discrimination in Employment Act
  • Executive Order 11246 (affirmative action and equal employment opportunity)
  • Vietnam Era Veterans’ Readjustment Assistance Act
  • Section 503 of the Rehabilitation Act
  • Executive Order 13658 (federal contractor minimum wage)

The state law equivalents of these laws, which contractors will also be required to report on, will be subject to a future rulemaking. The exception to this is OSHA state law equivalents, which are subject to the reporting requirements set forth in the new final rules.

One notable distinction between the proposed and final guidance is the definition of “civil judgments,” which the DOL revised to clarify that temporary restraining orders and offers of judgment pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 68 are excluded and, therefore, not reportable.

Effective Date and Timeframe of Reporting

Answering a big question raised by the proposed rules, the final regulations set out a phased-in reporting requirement with regular reporting beginning October 25, 2016, by contractors with  workplace law violations received within the first year preceding the start of a contract bid (which will be phased in to a three-year look back period by October 25, 2018). Such contractors must make updated disclosures every six months thereafter for the duration of the contract. Notably, for bids on contracts valued at less than $50 million, contractors are not required to report violations as of the October 25, 2016, effective date under a six-month “no reporting” grace period ending on or about April 25, 2017. 

Subcontractor Reporting Obligations

Two additional big changes from the proposed regulations involve the reporting obligations for subcontractors. First, subcontractor reporting will begin one year later, on October 25, 2017. Second, subcontractors must report their labor violations directly to DOL and then must report back to the prime contractor regarding the results of these disclosures. President Obama has signed an amendment to the Executive Order effectuating this reporting change. 

Reporting Entity Clarification

The final rules address a critical issue that was unclear in the proposed rules and guidance: the identity of the reporting entity for the purpose of “whose” violations must be reported. Under the final rules, the legal entity required to report its violations is that listed on the bid/offer or contract and not that entity’s parent or other subsidiaries. A contracting entity that is a division of a corporation will be required to make disclosures regarding the corporation’s compliance record.

Assessment by Contracting Agency

Likely in response to public comments, the proposed regulations set out a more detailed and defined process for an assessment by contracting officers and designated “Labor Compliance Advisors” of the disclosures to determine whether the contractor has engaged in “serious, willful, repeated, and/or pervasive violations.” The final rules set forth a process for contractors to receive notice of, and respond to, Agency recommendations prior to a final responsibility determination. There also is now a process by which contractors can, and are encouraged (but not required), to go to DOL for pre-assessment of their violations before bidding on contracts.

Paycheck Transparency and Pre-Dispute Arbitration Agreements

Still intact are the other elements of the regulations and guidance involving paycheck transparency (hours worked, overtime hours (for non-exempt employees) by workweek and totaled for pay period, pay, deductions, identifying exempt employees and independent contractors). The final rules also preserve the prohibition on pre-dispute arbitration agreements to resolve Title VII of the Civil Rights Act and related tort claims for contracts of $1,000,000 or more. The effective date for pay transparency is January 1, 2017. The effective date for the arbitration prohibition provision is the same as the effective date for the final rule, October 25, 2016.

Jackson Lewis will continue to provide additional analysis of the final rules in the coming weeks.  For more information or questions about the Executive Order and the final guidance and rules, please contact the attorneys listed or the Jackson Lewis attorney with whom you regularly work.

©2016 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm with more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries. Having built its reputation on providing premier workplace law representation to management, the firm has grown to include leading practices in the areas of government relations, healthcare and sports law. For more information, visit www.jacksonlewis.com.

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

April 15, 2019

Revamp of Mexico’s Federal Labor Laws: What U.S. Employers Need to Know

April 15, 2019

Employers with operations in Mexico must brace themselves for significant changes in the labor laws in their workplace. Mexico is expected to pass legislation that will effectively overhaul the country’s labor laws to a standard similar to that in the United States. The changes will reshape Mexico’s labor relations for a generation.... Read More

April 12, 2019

Top Five Labor Law Developments for March 2019

April 12, 2019

The National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) ruled that a private-sector union may not require non-member objectors (known as Beck objectors) to pay for its political lobbying expenses. United Nurses and Applied Professionals (Kent Hospital), 367 NLRB No. 94 (Mar. 1, 2019). Several of the employer’s workers had resigned their union... Read More

April 4, 2019

EEOC Provides Update on EEO-1 Pay Data Reporting Plans

April 4, 2019

September 30, 2019, is the earliest the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) could collect pay data from employers in the EEO-1 report, the agency advised the federal district court in the District of Columbia on April 3, 2019. National Women’s Law Center et al. v. Office of Management and Budget et al., No. 17-2458. The... Read More