B-198463 L/M, JUN 10, 1980
Highlights
SMITH WE REFER TO THE MATTER OF RIVERS CONTRACTING CORPORATION (RIVERS) WHICH WAS REFERRED TO THIS OFFICE BY THE EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS ADMINISTRATION. IS THAT DUE TO HARASSMENT. THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR STATED THAT OUR OFFICE IS CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF INVESTIGATING COMPLAINTS OF ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION INVOLVING MINORITY CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS. THIS IS A MISUNDERSTANDING ON THE PART OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR CONCERNING OUR JURISDICTION. WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT UNDER OUR BID PROTEST JURISDICTION WE WILL INVESTIGATE CERTAIN ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION. THIS IS TRUE ONLY IF IT IS ALLEGED THAT THE DISCRIMINATION WAS THE BASIS FOR THE REJECTION OF THE COMPLAINANT'S BID ON A FEDERAL CONTRACT.
B-198463 L/M, JUN 10, 1980
OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL
DONALD R. RIEGLE, JR., UNITED STATES SENATOR:
ATTENTION:
MR. MICHAEL P. SMITH
WE REFER TO THE MATTER OF RIVERS CONTRACTING CORPORATION (RIVERS) WHICH WAS REFERRED TO THIS OFFICE BY THE EMPLOYMENT STANDARDS ADMINISTRATION, OFFICE OF FEDERAL CONTRACT COMPLIANCE PROGRAMS, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF LABOR.
RIVERS' COMPLAINT, ESSENTIALLY, IS THAT DUE TO HARASSMENT, THREATS AND DISCRIMINATION BY THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAYS AND TRANSPORTATION IT (RIVERS) HAS SUFFERED FINANCIAL LOSSES AND IMPAIRMENT OF ITS CREDIT RATING WITH THE RESULTING LOSS OF STATE CONTRACTS.
WE NOTE THAT IN ITS LETTER OF MARCH 31, 1980, TO YOUR OFFICE, THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR STATED THAT OUR OFFICE IS CHARGED WITH THE RESPONSIBILITY OF INVESTIGATING COMPLAINTS OF ALLEGED DISCRIMINATION INVOLVING MINORITY CONTRACTORS AND SUBCONTRACTORS. THIS IS A MISUNDERSTANDING ON THE PART OF THE DEPARTMENT OF LABOR CONCERNING OUR JURISDICTION. WHILE IT IS TRUE THAT UNDER OUR BID PROTEST JURISDICTION WE WILL INVESTIGATE CERTAIN ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION, THIS IS TRUE ONLY IF IT IS ALLEGED THAT THE DISCRIMINATION WAS THE BASIS FOR THE REJECTION OF THE COMPLAINANT'S BID ON A FEDERAL CONTRACT. SEE JOSEPH LEGAT ARCHITECTS, B-187160, DECEMBER 13, 1977, 77-2 CPD 456. HOWEVER, EVEN WHERE A FEDERAL CONTRACT IS INVOLVED, WHICH THE INFORMATION FURNISHED TO US INDICATES IS NOT THE CASE HERE, WE WILL NOT CONSIDER ALLEGATIONS OF DISCRIMINATION OCCURRING DURING PERFORMANCE OF THE CONTRACT. SEE ARSCO, INC., B-132740, JANUARY 26, 1976, 76-1 CPD 54, AND MUSTANG INDUSTRIAL CLEANERS, B-172531, MARCH , 1976, 76-1 CPD 158.
FOR THE ABOVE REASONS, WE MUST DECLINE TO TAKE ANY ACTION IN THIS MATTER.