Executive Orders

Subscribe to Executive Orders

On August 25, 2016, the United States Department of Labor (“DOL”) and Federal Acquisition Regulatory (“FAR”) Councils published “Guidance for Executive Order 13673, ‘Fair Pay and Safe Workplaces’” (“final rule”).  See 81 Fed. Reg. 58562. Also referred to as the “blacklisting” rule, it imposes strict disclosure guidelines and requires that both prospective and existing contractors – as well as subcontractors – disclose violations of federal labor laws that resulted in administrative merits determinations, civil judgments, or arbitral awards or decisions.  The final rule also requires that contractors and subcontractors disclose specific information to workers each pay period regarding their wages and also prohibits contractors from requiring that their workers sign arbitration agreements that encompass Title VII violations and claims of sexual assault or harassment.
Continue Reading Agencies Publish Strict New Labor Reporting Guidelines for Government Contractors

By David Gallacher

On March 30, 2013, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia issued a decision imposing certain socio-economic contract requirements on subcontractors operating hospitals associated with the University of Pittsburgh Medical Centers. See UPMC Braddock, et al. v. Harris, Civ. 09-1210 (PLF) (D.D.C. Mar. 30, 2013) (“UPMC Braddock”). Even though the hospitals’ subcontracts did not include these socio-economic clauses, the court applied the age-old “Christian Doctrine,” which assumes that certain contract requirements reflecting a “significant or deeply ingrained strand of public procurement policy” will apply to a Government contract even if those requirements have been omitted from the text of the actual contract. See G.L. Christian & Associates v. United States, 312 F.2d 418, 426 (Ct. Cl. 1963). Even though no court has ever before held in the 50-year history of the Christian Doctrine that this legal rule applies to subcontractors (Christian and its progeny apply only to prime contractors doing business directly with the U.S. Government), the court has now radically expanded the doctrine.Continue Reading Playing Cards With a Government That Stacks the Deck – D.C. District Court Radically Expands The “Christian Doctrine” To Subcontracts

Since 2005, federal contractors have been on notice that the Government has “zero tolerance” for any federal contractor found to be complicit in aiding human trafficking. For the past seven years, however, that “zero tolerance” has been focused on halting only some aspects of human trafficking, namely involuntary servitude and commercial sex acts. We have previously discussed the human trafficking regulations that are currently in place here. But, as Bob Dylan once said, “The times, they are a changing.” On September 25, 2012, President Obama issued an executive order requiring the Federal Acquisition Regulations (“FAR”) Council to amend the FAR to strengthen protections against human trafficking in persons. As before, the new FAR requirements will apply to solicitations, contracts, and subcontracts for supplies or services (including construction and commercial items) and prohibit contractors and subcontractors from engaging in various trafficking-related activities. However, the trafficking activities identified in the Executive Order have expanded dramatically and will require contractors to plan review, and to revamp as needed, their policies and procedures for the recruitment of personnel and the monitoring of compliance with the expanded requirements.
Continue Reading The Government on Combatting Human Trafficking: “We REALLY, REALLY Mean It”

By: Scott Maberry and Reid Whitten

On November 21, 2011, President Barack Obama signed Executive Order 13590 expanding sanctions against non-U.S. companies doing business in Iran. Under the new rules, whole sectors of business between Iran and third countries are now subject to U.S. sanctions. Overnight, non-U.S. companies working in Iran—in sectors not previously subject to sanctions—found their contracts subject to punishment under U.S. law. Many of these companies had invested significant resources in making sure their transactions in Iran did not fall afoul of U.S. sanctions, some having met directly with U.S. Government agencies, including the U.S. State Department, to understand the rules. These companies must now again adjust the aim of their compliance efforts to hit moving targets.

Fortunately for these companies, it appears likely that in the near-term, contracts already in place and compliant with the rules at the time of the November 21 order will not be the target of enforcement actions.
 Continue Reading Aiming for a Moving Target: Bad and Good News on Changing Iran Sanctions

By Thaddeus McBride , Reid Whitten & Corey Phelps

On August 18, 2011, based on the “continuing escalation of violence against the people of Syria,” President Barack Obama issued Executive Order 13582 (“EO 13582”) to expand significantly U.S. sanctions on Syria.  This briefing summarizes those sanctions as well as the General Licenses issued—first on August 18 and again on September 9—by the U.S. government to authorize limited transactions with Syria.
 Continue Reading Syria Update: Significant New Sanctions Imposed

By John W. Chierichella

On June 13, 2011, the President issued Executive Order No. 13576, entitled “Delivering an Efficient, Effective, and Accountable Government.” Citing
 

  • The need to “advance efforts to detect and remediate fraud, waste and abuse in Federal programs,” Section 3(a)
     
  • The desire to “eliminate wasteful, duplicative, or otherwise inefficient programs,” Section 1 and
     
  • The “innovative technologies and approaches for preventing and identifying fraud and abuse” that purportedly have been developed by the Recovery Accountability and Transparency Board under the Recovery Act (Id.), this most recent Executive Order creates – yes – a new board.
     

Continue Reading The RAT Board Begets the GAT Board – Who Could Ask for Anything More?