CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS MAY EXCLUDE WAGE ADJUSTMENTS EVEN IF THERE IS A NEW WAGE DETERMINATION

Exclude Wage Adjustment Clauses” this author explained that contracting officers may include a “no wage adjustment clause for a new wage determination” as follows:

Construction contracts that are subject to the Davis-Bacon Act (40 USC §§ 3131-3148), are required to include one of three possible wage adjustment clauses where there is a wage determination increase, one of which is a “no-adjustment” clause. Contracts for services that are subject to the Service Contract Act, 41 USC Chapter 67 are required to include two possible wage adjustment clauses where there is a wage determination increase, but in those contracts, the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) does not permit a “no-adjustment” clause. Gulf Pacific Contracting, LLC, ASBCA No. 61434, Sept. 26, 2021.

Recently, in Pacific Dredge & Const., LLC, ASBCA No. 63234, August 17, 2022, the Board showed the consequences of a “no-adjustment” clause in a construction contract.  Pacific Dredge had a contract awarded by the Army Corps of Engineers for dredging federal navigation channels at the Santa Barbra Harbor.  The contract included Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”) 52.222-30, Construction Wage Rate Requirements-Price Adjustment (None or Separately Specified Message).  The clause states:

  • The wage determination [issued by Dept. of Labor] that is effective for an option to extend the term of the contract will apply to that option period
  • The Contracting officer will make no adjustment in contract price, other than provided for elsewhere in this contract, to cover any increases or dereases in wages and benefits as a result of-
  • Incorporation of the Department of Labor’s (“DOL”) wage determination at the exercise of the option to extend the term of the contract(Emphasis added)

The agency issued a unilateral modification which exercised an option for the second contract year.  This modification stated that a new DOL construction wage determination issued three months before the option began applied and superseded the prior wage determination.  Pacific Dredge filed a claim for $42,700, asserting that this modification constituted a change pursuant to FAR 52.243-4, Changes.  When the claim was denied, Pacific Dredge appealed to the Board.

The Board held that there could be no change in price unless a specific method of adjustment was provided for elsewhere in the contract.  The Board said that neither the solicitation nor the contract contained “elsewhere” a separately specified pricing method.  Rather, the contractor was allowed to propose separate prices for option periods.  The Changes clause cannot be read to create an independent basis for the agency to pay the contractor the claimed wage increase.  The changes clause is a mandatory change, and if the Board agreed that this clause required an equitable adjustment it this case, it would render FAR 52.222-30 meaningless because there never would be a situation where NO adjustment would be made.  The Board concluded that either the contract contains no method to adjust prices after award, or there is a separately specified method, such as the application of a coefficient to pricing obtained from pricing data.  However, the Changes clause is not a separately specified pricing method.

Takeaway.  Contractors must use caution when pricing construction contracts.  Check FAR 52.222-30 in the solicitation, and if the “no adjustment” in price language is included, be sure to carefully price all options for any expected increase in construction wage costs that might occur prior to each option.  Your price should not be “fixed” throughout the contract.

For other helpful suggestions on government contracting, visit:

Richard D. Lieberman’s FAR Consulting & Training at https://www.richarddlieberman.com/, and Mistakes in Government Contracting at https://richarddlieberman.wixsite.com/mistakes.

Other Wage Rate Articles:

FOR PROFESSIONAL EMPLOYEE COMPENSATION, GOVERNMENT WIDE AVERAGE RATES ARE NOT ADEQUATE FOR REQUIRED RISK ASSESSMENT

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS MAY EXCLUDE WAGE ADJUSTMENTS EVEN IF THERE IS A NEW WAGE DETERMINATION

CONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS (BUT NOT SERVICE CONTRACTS) MAY EXCLUDE WAGE ADJUSTMENT CLAUSES

HOW TO GET PAID FOR WAGE DETERMINATION INCREASES IN OPTIONS AND EXTENSIONS UNDER THE SERVICE CONTRACT ACT

WHEN WILL BOARDS HAVE JURISDICTION TO ADJUDICATE MATTERS THAT RELATE TO SERVICE CONTRACT ACT ISSUES?

IN A FIXED PRICE CONTRACT, THE CONTRACTOR GENERALLY ASSUMES THE RISK OF HIGHER COSTS

Related Post

Season 11: Episode 9: FAR Facts

Hello and thank you for joining us for Episode 8 of Fun with the FAR Season 11! In our next session, we will cover FAR Part 15 (Contracting by Negotiation) As we prepare for our 9th episode of Season 11, here are a few FAR Facts for us to think about: A contract...

EXCULPATORY CLAUSE DOES NOT INSULATE GOVERNMENT FROM ITS OWN BREACH

Where a contract imposes an obligation on the government, and that obligation is a condition that ensures the contractor can perform its duties, but the government breaches that obligation, an exculpatory clause in the contract does not relieve the government of...

Season 11: Episode 8: FAR Facts

Hello and thank you for joining us for Episode 7 of Fun with the FAR Season 11! In our next session, we will cover FAR Parts 9 (Contractor Qualifications) and 14 (Sealed Bidding). As we prepare for our 8th episode of Season 11, here are a few FAR Facts for us to think...