Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office and Microform Data Systems - Term Paper Example

?Running Head: Contract Disputes Contract Disputes Insert Insert Grade Insert 09 December Contract Disputes Introduction Contract disputes involving the government have become a major concern to most contractors having plans in securing a great business opportunity with the government. Government Accountability Office (GAO) files show that these cases have been increasing recently, a trend believed by several analyst to have been caused by the increasing value of specific contract awards and current growth of expenditure in federal procurement (Brodsky, 2010). I will give an example of a contract dispute that occurred between the Government Printing Office (GPO) and Microform Data Systems, Inc. between 1980 and 1981. In a letter written by the Acting Controller General of the United States to Mr. McClosky, House of Representatives in Microform Data Systems, he explained the correspondence made by Microform Data Systems, Inc. for their contract appeals and dissatisfaction with the processes and composition of GPO board. Microform Data Systems, Inc was not happy at all by the steps taken by the GPO board in dealing with their Contract dispute and claims concerning a business contract between the two associates (Government Operations: Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office, 1981). The facts about the Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office and Microform Data Systems The statement from the acting controller General clearly indicated that Microform criticized a couple of actions taken by GPO board against their company. They claimed that the administration of the GPO was too harsh by handing over their contract dispute to a new board to rehear. They expressed their concern that the GPO board in question is not a full time working board characterized by unqualified staff members and lack of consistency. Microform Company was not amused about this step taken by GPO administration. The question in their mind was that, how can a new board, handle a case like that without the prior knowledge and deeper understanding of what they were claiming. Microform believed that the act used by GPO administration to delegate their contract issue is not a direct application required by legislative branch agencies. The controller General office directly disagrees with Microform claim about a contractor shopping immediately after receiving an administrative ruling from the board. Microform required the GPO Board to satisfy a Contract Disputes they claimed in the first matter (Government Operations: Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office, 1981). Microform was worried more about the time their claim was going to take. A GAO effort in solving a contract dispute generally ensures an automatic existence of the contract award or performance while the claim is still pending, although the agency is still right to move on under urgent and compelling circumstances. The Company feared losing the contract as they were claiming against their business partner, which was also the federal government. I think they did not put all their assistance and needs to GAO. GAO is always having a period of fourteen weeks or a hundred days to give out a decision; a deadline that is not difficult to miss (Brodsky, 2011). Microform Data Systems, claims indicated that they had not fit to the panel's qualifications, despite the time a decision was to be made (Government Operations: Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office, 1981). This contract dispute clearly reflects how certain contractors have to take government contracts carefully. The Acting Controller General office said that Microform criticized the concerned board that they consist of inexperienced board members who lack the knowledge of public contract law. This is the reason why some companies would criticize government actions, as the government with all the authority, will be difficult to deal with (Government Operations: Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office, 1981). Various Federal Acquisition Regulations (FAR) clearly indicates the steps that Microform Data Systems should have taken. It also indicates the mandates that the government must consider in handling contract issues with contractors. The issue of contract continuation is openly supported by the FAR as prescribed in the Contract Disputes Act of 1978 41 U.S.C. 601-613 in FAR 33.215 (i). The clause clearly states that the contractor is free to continue the duties of the contract, putting in consideration any request of appeal and what the contracting officer may decide. Microform Data Systems would otherwise use an alternative solution to end this dispute. FAR 33.215 (g) states that if the claim(s) of the contractor presented to the contracting officer or a government claim submitted to the contractor the two associates may agree to solve the dispute using an Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR). If not the contractor have to write a note to the contracting officer explaining the reasons for refusing that option (Disputes, 2002). Recommendations The Acting Controller General recommends that his office believes that the concern of both the parties is enough in giving out the reasons why the Public Printer did not choose an executive branch board for their decision-making delegation (Government Operations: Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office, 1981). This decision is actually fair to both the parties and I recommend that the acting controller general gave out a fair recommendation. Microform needed to know and understand why the Public Printer had to use a new board to solve this dispute. Lessons to students There are number of facts about this contract dispute that are very important to note. First, a fair solution to any Contract dispute or related cases is important, no matter what the situation is. This should involve consideration or obeying the laid down regulations set by FAR and listening to the opinions of the involved parties. This is also a better way that GAO will express its services by solving issues rapidly and fairly through transparency, integrity, and accountability. This represents one of the success stories of the federal procurement structure of America (Brodsky, 2011) Secondly the students understand that any contract or business activity whether its involving the government or not will always have governing policies, terms and regulations. Therefore, it is effective to raise an appeal to any contract dispute whenever one is unsatisfied. In this case, Microform sent several letters to the control general, addressing their concern about the contract dispute and their opinion (Government Operations: Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office, 1981). Conclusion A contract dispute will always create and attract different opinions from concerned parties. We can see that Microform Data System is blaming heavily on nature of the GPO board, while the Public printer believes that their board is effective to handle the matter. Different companies have raised their concern on how the government handles this contract disputes. This is one reason why the number of protest against government contract and bid is rising each year in Government Accountability Office (GAO). The current worlds have seen contractors finding alternative ways to settle these disputes in their favor. They are finding a way to avoid middle agents and negotiate directly to agencies (Brodsky, 2010). Companies now days are abusing the process of solving these contract disputes by trying to open small errors in order to cause reversal or thinking of extending the contract for some time (Brodsky, 2011). References Brodsky, R. (2010). Contract disputes reach 15-year high: Government Executive. Retrieved December 9, 2011 from http://www.govexec.com/dailyfed/1210/120110rb1.htm Brodsky, R. (2011). Bidders Bite Back: The contracting education academy, Georgia Tech. Retrieved December 9, 2011 from http://contractingacademy.gatech.edu/tag/contract-dispute/ Disputes. (2002). General services Administration (US). Retrieved December 9, 2011 from https://acquisition.gov/far/html/52_233_240.html Government Operations: Contract Dispute Involving Government Printing Office. (1981). GAO Report. Retrieved December 09, 2011 from http://www.legistorm.com/showFile/L2xzX3Njb3JlL2dhby9wZGYvMTk4MS8y/ful9404.pdf Read More