Federal Sub-Contractors: Beware of the Big Guys

Tuesday, June 19, 2012
Doing business as a small government contractor has distinct vulnerabilities, like getting used and tossed aside by bigger contractors.
 
In a survey by American Express, almost 30% of small contractors said they had been victimized by bait-and-switch tactics employed by larger firms. This can happen when a large contractor needs a particular type of smaller contractor—one owned by a veteran or a minority, for instance—in order to win a bid from a federal agency. They list the subcontractor on the bid, but once the prime contractor gets the deal, they dump the little guy.
 
Such actions are not considered illegal under federal contracting law. In a tepid response to this problem, the House of Representatives has passed a bill that would require notifying government agencies if a prime contractor changes subcontractors after winning a contract.
-Noel Brinkerhoff, David Wallechinsky
 
To Learn More:
Obama Administration Allows Bigger Businesses to Qualify as Small Businesses (by David Wallechinsky and Noel Brinkerhoff, AllGov)

Comments

John Steinsvold 11 years ago
an alternative to capitalism (if the people knew about it, they would demand it) several decades ago, margaret thatcher claimed: "there is no alternative". she was referring to capitalism. today, this negative attitude still persists. i would like to offer an alternative to capitalism for the american people to consider. please click on the following link. it will take you to an essay titled: "home of the brave?" which was published by the athenaeum library of philosophy: http://evans-experientialism.freewebspace.com/steinsvold.htm john steinsvold “insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different result."~ albert einstein
Roger Clegg 11 years ago
why do race, ethnicity, and sex need to be considered at all in deciding who gets awarded a subcontract? it's good to make sure contracting programs are open to all, that bidding opportunities are widely publicized beforehand, and that no one gets discriminated against because of skin color, national origin, or sex. but that means no preferences because of skin color, etc. either--whether it's labeled a "set-aside," a "quota," or a "goal," since they all end up amounting to the same thing. such discrimination is unfair and divisive; it breeds corruption and otherwise costs the taxpayers and businesses money to award a contract to someone other than the lowest bidder; and it's almost always illegal—indeed, unconstitutional—to boot (see 42 u.s.c. section 1981 and this model brief: http://www.pacificlegal.org/page.aspx?pid=1342 ). those who insist on engaging in such discrimination deserve to be sued, and they will lose.

Leave a comment