This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-06-27 
entitled 'Service Contract Act: Wage Determination Process Could 
Benefit from Greater Transparency, and Better Use of Violation Data 
Could Improve Enforcement' which was released on January 6, 2006.

This text file was formatted by the U.S. Government Accountability 
Office (GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part 
of a longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every 
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of 
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text 
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the 
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided 
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed 
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic 
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail 
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this 
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.

This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright 
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed 
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work 
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the 
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this 
material separately.

Report to the Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, 
Education and Related Agencies, Committee on Appropriations, U.S. 
Senate:

United States Government Accountability Office:

GAO:

December 2005:

Service Contract Act:

Wage Determination Process Could Benefit from Greater Transparency, and 
Better Use of Violation Data Could Improve Enforcement:

Service Contract Act:

GAO-06-27:

GAO Highlights:

Highlights of GAO-06-27, a report to the Subcommittee on Labor, Health 
and Human Services, Education and Related Agencies, Committee on 
Appropriations, U.S. Senate

Why GAO Did This Study:

Recipients of federal government contracts for services are subject to 
wage, hour, benefits, and safety and health standards under the 
McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA) of 1965, as amended, which 
specifies wage rates and other labor standards for employees of 
contractors. SCA requires the Department of Labor (DOL) to set locally 
prevailing wage rates and other labor standards for employees of 
contractors furnishing services to the federal government. DOL’s 
Employment Standards Administration’s Wage and Hour Division (WHD) 
administers the SCA and each year determines prevailing wage and fringe 
benefit rates for over 300 standard service occupations in 205 
metropolitan areas. SCA also authorizes DOL to enforce contractor 
compliance with SCA provisions. This report describes how DOL (1) 
establishes locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits and (2) 
enforces SCA.

What GAO Found:

When making a wage determination, WHD analysts consult several sources 
of information, such as its SCA directory of occupations and data 
collected through two Bureau of Labor Statistics national wage surveys, 
for wage data on occupations. Relying on these tools and their own 
expertise, analysts calculate prevailing wages and fringe benefit 
amounts for specific geographic locations. The wage determination 
process produces a wealth of nationwide wage data for service 
occupations that WHD makes available online and strives to update 
annually. However, stakeholders (e.g., unions, contractors, employees, 
and others) contend that the wage determination process is not 
transparent and that the resulting wages do not necessarily reflect 
local wage conditions. For example, WHD does not include a description 
of the methodology used to derive the wage rates in its wage 
determinations, such as wage data sources used or the procedures 
analysts’ follow. As a result, analysts spend considerable time 
responding to inquiries about the methodology used to determine wages.

Examples of Wages Paid to Selected Service Contract Occupations in 
Selected Localities:

[See PDF for Image]

[End of Figure]

WHD enforces SCA by conducting investigations, ensuring contractor 
payments, and providing compliance assistance to stakeholders. WHD 
investigates complaints from service contract employees, federal 
agencies, unions, and others who allege that contractors have failed to 
pay either the wages or fringe benefits, or both, specified in SCA 
contracts. WHD collects violation data, but it does not fully use these 
data to plan compliance assistance, target specific service industries 
or geographic locations for SCA investigation, or set strategic 
enforcement goals. As a result, WHD may be overlooking some SCA 
violators and industries that need further enforcement. A review of 
prior SCA violation data could provide WHD assurance that it is using 
the most effective mix of available compliance assistance and 
investigative efforts.

What GAO Recommends:

To improve the transparency of its wage determination process and its 
SCA strategic enforcement planning efforts, GAO recommends that WHD, 
among other things, make publicly available the basic methodology it 
uses to issue wage determinations and consider analyzing its historical 
SCA contractor violation data to help plan its compliance assistance 
and investigative efforts. In its written comments, DOL agreed with all 
of the report’s recommendations.

To view the full product, including the scope and methodology, click on 
the link above. For more information, contact Robert Robertson at (202) 
512-7215 or robertsonr@gao.gov.

[End of Figure]

Contents:

Letter:

Results in Brief:

Background:

Wage Determination Process Relies on Multiple Data Sources and 
Professional Judgment but Lacks Transparency:

DOL Enforces SCA by Conducting Investigations, Ensuring Contractor 
Payments, and Providing Compliance Assistance, but WHD Could Make 
Better Use of Violation Data:

Conclusions:

Recommendations for Executive Action:

Agency Comments:

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:

Appendix II: Examples of Standard and Non-standard Wage Determinations:

Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Labor:

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:

Related GAO Products:

Tables:

Table 1: Number and Percentage of SCA Investigations by Category, 
Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004:

Table 2: Number of SCA Debarments, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004:

Figures:

Figure 1: Location of ESA's Offices:

Figure 2: Factors Considered in SCA Wage Determination Process:

Figure 3: Cases with SCA Violations, Including Those Registered under 
Other Acts:

Figure 4: Employees with Back Wages Due, and Employees Whom Contractors 
Agreed to Pay, Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004:

Abbreviations:

BLS: Bureau of Labor Statistics:

DOD: Department of Defense:

DOL: Department of Labor:

ECEC: Employer Cost for Employee Compensation:

ESA: Employment Standards Administration:

FGE: federal grade equivalency:

FLSA: Fair Labor Standards Act:

FPDS: Federal Procurement Data System:

GS: general schedule:

H&W: health and welfare:

NAF: Non-Appropriated Fund:

NCS: National Compensation Survey:

OES: Occupational Employment Statistics:

OSHA: Occupational Safety and Health Administration:

SCA: Service Contract Act:

WG: wage grade:

WHD: Wage and Hour Division:

WHISARD: Wage and Hour Investigative Support and Reporting Database:

United States Government Accountability Office:

Washington, DC 20548:

December 7, 2005:

The Honorable Arlen Specter: 
Chairman:
The Honorable Tom Harkin: 
Ranking Member: 
Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, Education and Related 
Agencies Committee on Appropriations: United States Senate:

Recipients of federal government contracts for services are subject to 
wage, hour, benefits, and safety and health standards under the 
McNamara-O'Hara Service Contract Act (SCA) of 1965, as amended, which 
specifies wage rate and other labor standards for employees of 
contractors. In fiscal year 2003, federal agencies spent over $45 
billion on contract services covered under SCA, an increase of about 
$13 billion from fiscal year 2000.[Footnote 1] In 2002, the Department 
of Labor (DOL) estimated there were about 60,000 federal service 
contracts. SCA requires DOL to set locally prevailing wage rates and 
other labor standards for employees of contractors furnishing services 
to the federal government. DOL's Employment Standards Administration's 
(ESA) Wage and Hour Division (WHD) administers the SCA and each year 
determines prevailing wage and fringe benefit rates for approximately 
300 standard service occupations, such as janitor and cafeteria worker, 
in 205 metropolitan areas. SCA also authorizes DOL to conduct 
investigations to enforce contractor compliance with SCA provisions.

SCA requires federal contracting agencies to include a wage 
determination from WHD in their advertisement for a service contract 
with the private sector.[Footnote 2] Over the years, contractors, 
employees, and others have raised concerns to us that WHD-determined 
wage and benefit rates are either too high or too low, and do not 
reflect current employment conditions in their vicinity. In addition, 
they contend that the way in which WHD arrives at its determinations is 
unclear. In this context, you asked us to describe how DOL (1) 
establishes locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits and (2) 
enforces SCA. You also asked that we identify potential areas of 
improvement found in the course of our work.

To respond to your request, we reviewed literature on SCA and its 
corresponding regulations. We interviewed officials in DOL headquarters 
and field offices, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), and the two 
federal contracting agencies with the largest proportion of service 
contract activity--the Department of Defense (DOD) and the General 
Services Administration. In addition, we interviewed representatives 
from several service industry unions and key trade associations. We 
analyzed data obtained from DOL, including data on WHD investigations; 
national, regional and district office training and outreach efforts; 
and file data on debarments. We also reviewed BLS national wage survey 
data in order to better understand the wage determination process. In 
addition, we contacted state and private sector groups who also produce 
wage and benefit rates to better understand DOL's method of arriving at 
wage determinations. See appendix I for detailed information on the 
scope and methodology of our work.

We performed our work in accordance with generally accepted government 
auditing standards between November 2004 and September 2005.

Results in Brief:

WHD consults multiple wage data sources and relies on analysts' 
professional judgment when issuing wage determinations, but the process 
lacks transparency and leaves wage determinations prone to criticism. 
When issuing a wage determination, WHD analysts look to match the 
occupations listed in agency contracts with its SCA directory of 
occupations. If the occupation is listed, the analysts will consult 
several sources of information, such as data collected through two BLS 
national wage surveys, for wage data on that occupation. The analysts 
will calculate a prevailing wage and fringe benefit amount for a 
specific geographic location in a way that ensures a generally 
consistent wage rate from year to year within the occupation and across 
similar occupations. If the BLS surveys do not have specific data for 
the occupation or if analysts find that the occupation is not listed in 
the directory, they will apply professional judgment to select a 
comparable listed occupation upon which they base the new wage rate. 
For example, an analyst may use the wage data for a computer operator 
to derive a wage rate for a peripheral equipment operator, knowing that 
the job duties for both occupations are rated the same by the federal 
government under the system it uses to categorize federal employees. 
The wage determination process produces a wealth of nationwide wage 
data for service occupations that WHD makes available online and 
strives to update annually. However, stakeholders (e.g., contract 
employees, federal contracting agencies, unions, trade associations, 
and others) contend that the process is not transparent and that the 
wage determinations do not necessarily reflect local wage conditions. 
For example, WHD does not include a description of the methodology used 
to derive its wage rates in its wage determinations, such as wage data 
sources used or the procedures analysts follow. As a result, WHD 
analysts spend considerable time responding to inquiries about the 
methodology used to determine wages. In addition, WHD has not issued a 
comprehensive edition of its SCA directory of occupations since 1993 
and has no systematic process in place for doing so. As a result, the 
directory does not include a broad range of emerging occupations that 
are covered under SCA.

WHD enforces SCA by conducting investigations, ensuring contractor 
payments, and providing compliance assistance to federal contracting 
agencies, contractors, and others. All SCA investigations stem from 
stakeholder complaints that contractors are not providing service 
employees with the requisite wages and benefits. WHD may, on its own 
initiative, expand the scope of the investigation beyond the original 
complaint to include additional employees, contracts or locations. In 
fiscal year 2004, DOL conducted 654 SCA investigations, 13 percent of 
which were expanded investigations. Over 80 percent of those 654 
investigations found that employers operating under SCA failed to pay 
the wages or the fringe benefits or both specified in the applicable 
SCA wage determination issued for the contracts. As a result of its 
investigations, WHD uncovered 20,347 individual SCA violations--each 
instance of failure to pay a contract employee the proper wage counts 
as a separate violation of the act. Additionally, in fiscal year 2004, 
as a result of WHD's investigations, contractors agreed to pay $16.4 
million in unpaid back wages and fringe benefits to over 14,000 service 
contract employees. DOL also debarred from future federal government 
contract work 17 SCA contractors who failed to provide the requisite 
back wages and fringe benefits or otherwise met SCA and WHD conditions 
for debarment. WHD does not use available investigations data, however, 
to examine the extent to which specific service industries or 
geographic locations may warrant more SCA investigations. As a result, 
WHD has limited assurance it is using the most effective mix of 
available compliance assistance and investigative efforts. The data on 
repeat SCA violators could be analyzed with a minimal investment of 
additional resources. To improve compliance with SCA, WHD conducts 
outreach efforts. For example, WHD provides training to federal 
contracting agencies and contractors on when contracts should be SCA- 
designated and how to comply with the act's requirements.

This report contains recommendations for improving the transparency of 
the wage determination process and for improving SCA strategic 
enforcement planning. In its written comments on our report, ESA agreed 
with the report's recommendations. ESA provided us with written 
comments, suggesting several technical corrections, as did BLS, that we 
incorporated throughout the report, as appropriate.

Background:

SCA was enacted to give labor standards protection to employees of 
contractors and subcontractors providing services to federal agencies 
in the United States. SCA requires that, for contracts exceeding 
$2,500, contractors pay their employees, at a minimum, the wage rates 
and fringe benefits that have been determined by DOL to be prevailing 
in the locality where the contracted work is performed. The types of 
service jobs covered by the act include, for example, security guard 
services, food service, maintenance, janitorial services, clerical 
workers, and certain health and technical occupations.

Until recently, DOL regulations required that federal contracting 
agencies complete and submit a form to DOL indicating their intention 
to offer a service contract and requesting current wage and benefit 
determinations for the occupational class(es) and geographic area(s) 
involved in the contract. Since the mid-1990s, however, some 
contracting agencies have been able to obtain wage determinations 
through a DOL online wage determination database, rather than 
requesting one from DOL. Many of their covered service contracts were 
renewals and the applicable SCA wage determinations for these contracts 
were already well established and posted online for information 
purposes. For these reasons, DOL entered into memoranda of 
understanding with several agencies to allow them to use posted 
standard wage determinations without first formally requesting a new 
one. On August 26, 2005, DOL issued regulations that allow all federal 
contracting agencies to use its www.wdol.gov Web site to meet their 
obligation to obtain SCA wage determinations from DOL. This final rule 
eliminates the required paper form when requesting a wage determination.

Under SCA, WHD establishes wage rates that apply to the United States, 
including the District of Columbia, and certain territories. WHD issues 
SCA wage determinations that are location-specific, listing nearly all 
standard occupations on each wage determination. These wage 
determinations are generally referred to as "consolidated" wage 
determinations.[Footnote 3] WHD strives to update its list of 
consolidated wage determinations annually, issuing 410 consolidated 
wage determinations covering almost 300 standard occupations in 205 
geographic locations.[Footnote 4] These consolidated wage 
determinations altogether, contain approximately 61,500 individual wage 
determinations. In addition, between August 1, 2004, and July 31, 2005, 
WHD issued at least 15,786 other wage determinations upon request, 
including those for non-standard occupations and conformance 
requests.[Footnote 5] See appendix II for an example of a consolidated 
and a nonstandard wage determination for a specific geographic locality.

Steps for Obtaining a Wage Determination:

The initial responsibility for determining SCA coverage and the need 
for a wage determination rests with the federal contracting 
agency.[Footnote 6] An agency initiates the wage determination process 
when it determines that it has a need for a particular service and that 
the anticipated contract falls under the auspices of SCA. Wage 
provisions for construction or manufacturing and furnishing goods are 
covered under other acts.[Footnote 7] In its request for a wage 
determination from WHD, the contracting agency must provide a 
description of the services to be performed under the contract and 
specify the dates and location where the services are to be 
performed.[Footnote 8] In addition, the agency must provide information 
on incumbent contractors, the previous wage determination for the 
needed occupations, and any collective bargaining agreements that may 
apply.[Footnote 9] It also must identify the occupational titles (e.g., 
secretary) and classes (e.g., secretary I, II, and III) and the number 
of service employees needed to perform the work on the contract, and 
the hourly wage rates that would be paid if such workers were federally 
employed. The contracting agency uses DOL's SCA directory of 
occupations when listing the occupational titles of workers to be 
employed under the contracts. Use of the directory allows the federal 
contracting agency, WHD staff, and ultimately the contractor to match 
standard job descriptions with these titles. The directory contains 360 
job classifications.

DOL's SCA directory of occupations contains information on the federal 
civil service grade levels most likely to correspond to the listed 
occupations. For example, the directory lists the occupation of janitor 
as a wage grade (WG) 2, indicating the rate at which a janitor would be 
paid if performing the work as a federal employee. WHD staff have the 
option to use such information to develop prevailing wages for 
occupations with no available survey data. Contractors and federal 
agency staff may utilize this federal grade equivalency (FGE) 
data[Footnote 10] to guide wage rate proposals for occupations to be 
"conformed" (i.e., the derivation of a wage rate for an additional 
occupational class not originally included in the wage determination). 
These comparable pay rates or grade levels are used to apply the 
principles of "due consideration" required by the SCA.[Footnote 11]

The contracting agency may also attempt to obtain a wage determination 
through DOL's online wage determination database. The Web site provides 
guidance on, among other things: selecting the appropriate wage 
determination for each contract action, access to the most current wage 
determinations, as well as an alert service for notification of future 
revisions to particular wage determinations. Contracting agencies can 
use the Web site to identify a wage determination from the online 
database or to submit an electronic request for a wage determination 
when one is not listed or if the contracting official is unsure about 
the applicability of the online selections.

Each year DOL issues wage determinations that are specific to a 
selected geographical area--sometimes for an entire state--and provide 
the minimum wages and benefits that contractors in that area must pay 
to service employees. The wage determination becomes a part of the 
solicitation and, later, part of the awarded contract.

WHD Conducts Enforcement Efforts:

WHD enforces and administers laws governing legally-mandated wages and 
working conditions.[Footnote 12] Its responsibilities include enforcing 
SCA and related WHD enforcement policies. When WHD finds through its 
enforcement efforts that workers have been underpaid, SCA requires that 
the contractor pay the unpaid wages and benefits. WHD may also sue to 
recover wage and benefit payments or ask the federal agency to either 
withhold contract payments or terminate a contract. Although WHD has no 
legal authority to assess civil monetary penalties against contractors, 
contractors violating SCA may be debarred for 3 years from obtaining 
future government contracts.[Footnote 13] WHD tracks investigations, 
violations, and findings in its investigations database-the Wage and 
Hour Investigative Support and Reporting Database (WHISARD). 
Contractors and subcontractors may challenge determinations of 
violations and debarment before an administrative law judge. 
Contractors and subcontractors may appeal decisions of administrative 
law judges to the Administrative Review Board. Final Board 
determinations on violations and debarment may be appealed to and are 
enforceable through the federal courts.

WHD staff are located in 5 regional and 72 district, area, and field 
offices throughout the country. Regional Administrators plan, schedule, 
and target enforcement efforts in their respective regions. Regions are 
comprised of district and area offices, each of which operates under a 
district director (see fig. 1). The district directors oversee 
investigators, who play a key role in carrying out WHD's enforcement 
policies. There were approximately 800 investigators in district and 
area offices in fiscal year 2004. Investigators are trained to 
investigate a wide variety of workplace conditions and complaints and 
enforce a variety of labor laws in addition to SCA.[Footnote 14] Each 
region also has a regional wage specialist who can provide advice on 
SCA matters.[Footnote 15]

Figure 1: Location of ESA's Offices:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

FPDS statistics indicate that federal service contracts continue to 
increase in number and total dollar volume each year. According to 
ESA's fiscal year 2003 Annual Performance Plan, federal contractors and 
subcontractors employed nearly 25 percent of the civilian workforce-- 
about 26 million workers--in the U.S. economy. Although the exact 
number of workers in the subset covered by SCA is unknown, it has been 
estimated that hundreds of thousands of federal service contract 
workers are employed annually under such contracts.[Footnote 16]

Wage Determination Process Relies on Multiple Data Sources and 
Professional Judgment but Lacks Transparency:

WHD consults multiple wage data sources and relies on analysts' 
professional judgment when making wage determinations, but the process 
lacks transparency and leaves wage determinations prone to criticism. 
When making a wage determination, WHD analysts consult several sources 
of information, such as its SCA directory of occupations and data 
collected through two BLS national wage surveys, for wage data on 
occupations. Relying on these tools and their own expertise, analysts 
calculate prevailing wages and fringe benefit amounts for specific 
geographic locations. Stakeholders contend that the wage determination 
process is not transparent and that the resulting wages do not always 
reflect local wage conditions. As a result, analysts spend considerable 
time responding to inquiries about the methodology used to determine 
wages. Stakeholders with these concerns, such as unions and 
contractors, told us that they might have fewer questions about the 
process if WHD made more information available. In addition, WHD last 
issued a comprehensive edition of its SCA directory of occupations in 
1993 and has no systematic process in place for updating it. As a 
result, the directory does not include a broad range of emerging 
occupations that are covered under SCA.

WHD Relies on Multiple Data Sources and Staff's Professional Judgment 
When Making Wage Determinations:

WHD analysts consult the SCA directory of occupations as a first step 
in the process of determining wages. They then consult a number of 
different sources of data when calculating wage rates. Finally, 
analysts must also include the fringe benefit rate for the specific 
locality in each wage determination.

Directory of Occupations:

WHD analysts use the SCA directory of occupations, a reference tool 
that describes standard service occupations typically utilized in the 
performance of SCA-covered contracts, to develop wage 
determinations.[Footnote 17] The directory is not just an information 
document-it is a critical part of the wage determination process 
throughout the federal contracting system. However, the process that 
WHD uses to update its SCA directory of occupations is not written down 
and is essentially ad hoc. There are neither written procedures that 
describe how or when WHD updates the directory, nor a required or 
standard time interval for how often the directory should be updated.

DOL has no systematic process for updating its SCA directory of 
occupations, but instead, updates it periodically. The current edition 
of the directory was issued in 1993. Since then, there have been three 
supplements to the directory.[Footnote 18] According to WHD officials, 
when there is a sufficient volume of smaller-scale changes proposed by 
stakeholders, they will issue a supplement to the directory. 
Stakeholders usually bring the need for supplements to WHD's attention. 
Supplements can involve adding some classes of jobs as well as editing 
or removing others. WHD can make these changes to job classes either 
with or without getting stakeholder approval. A recent effort to update 
and release a new edition of the directory, begun in 2002, was 
initiated after federal contracting agencies, contractors, trade 
associations, and unions raised concerns that the existing directory 
did not meet their needs. In fact, stakeholders independently drafted 
an update to the directory and presented it to WHD. While WHD is not 
legally required to include outside parties in the update process, WHD 
has encouraged stakeholders to participate, allowing them to review all 
suggested changes. According to WHD officials, the update has been long 
in the making, due in part to the number of suggested changes received 
from and deliberated by the stakeholders.

Some stakeholders, however, have expressed frustration with the length 
of time the update has taken. In response, one senior WHD official we 
spoke to explained that, in some cases, directory changes could have 
significant cost implications for both wages and fringe benefits at the 
local level and that careful consideration is necessary to make proper 
adjustments. Stakeholders, the official contended, may not realize the 
implications of the changes or additions that have been proposed. For 
example, an issue was raised of whether it was more appropriate to 
classify the occupation "truck dispatcher" as an administrative, 
clerical, technical, or professional position, when each category 
brings with it a different level of wages and benefits.

Throughout the update process, several job categories and occupational 
classes have been added to, or deleted from, the directory. WHD 
analysts responded to stakeholder needs for job classifications that 
were not available in the directory. For example, WHD added a job 
classification in response to a DOD need for an "unexploded ordnance 
technician." WHD worked with DOD to develop an accurate description for 
placement in the directory. Similarly, the job category of "detention 
officer" was added at the request of U.S. Citizenship and Immigration 
Services because of the volume of hiring and the uniqueness of the 
duties performed. In these cases, WHD did not involve additional 
agencies in the process of changing the directory. Ultimately, WHD has 
the authority to decide which jobs are included in the directory.

Despite recent efforts to update the directory, some common service 
occupations are still missing. Specifically, the directory does not 
contain the occupations "customer service representative" or 
"telemarketer." Contracting agencies that need such services performed 
cannot acquire the wage rate from DOL's online wage determination 
system and must request a separate wage determination from a WHD 
analyst. In addition, WHD officials told us that analysts sometimes 
receive multiple wage determination requests for the same unlisted 
occupations, thereby increasing their workload. The directory also does 
not list an occupational title for "call center representative." A 
contractor told us that as a result, wage determinations for call 
center contracts with federal agencies generally listed these 
occupations as "general clerk I, II, and III." According to this 
contractor, the wage determination for a general clerk is usually lower 
than the market rate for a call center representative. The contractor 
pointed out that federal agencies will likely have an increased need 
for call center representatives in the years ahead. Some contractors 
told us that, while they often must pay additional amounts to meet the 
market rate to be able to recruit qualified workers, they cannot submit 
the higher rates in their bid without risking the loss of the contract 
to a competitor. Contractors warned that, in cases like these where 
they lose a contract to a lower bidder, federal agencies may be at risk 
of contracting with employers who will provide a lower quality of 
services. According to these contractors, the difference in wage rates 
paid to workers on SCA-covered contracts and those not working on SCA- 
covered contracts can lead to some workers feeling demoralized. WHD 
officials told us that after the current update is issued, which is 
expected to occur in October 2005, no plans are underway for the next 
update.

Process for Determining Wages:

WHD analysts rely on professional judgment when calculating wage rates. 
WHD provides analysts with methodology worksheets that assist them in 
determining a wage. These worksheets provide an outline of how an 
analyst should proceed when certain conditions exist (such as, when 
survey data are not available for a specific occupation). The 
worksheets are intended to guide analysts without dictating the exact 
determination process.

More specifically, to determine a wage rate, analysts review the 
available wage data sources as well as previously issued wage 
determinations. Analysts base most wage determinations on nationwide 
survey data collected by BLS under the National Compensation Survey 
(NCS)[Footnote 19] and the Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) 
survey,[Footnote 20] or other data showing the rates that prevail in a 
specific locality.[Footnote 21] Analysts also take into account 
previously issued wage determinations when setting a new or revised 
wage rate. For example, to maintain general consistency from year to 
year, WHD instructs its analysts to not issue a rate lower than or more 
than 10 percent above the previously issued wage rate. In addition, 
when wages have been set by a collective bargaining agreement, analysts 
are required by SCA to carry over those negotiated wages to contractors 
who take over ongoing contracts. Finally, analysts use the union 
dominant rate, when applicable.[Footnote 22]

After selecting a data source, analysts review the wage information for 
different classes of the same occupation (e.g., the different classes, 
I, II, and III, of the occupation "secretary" require successively more 
advanced skills) and the pay relationships that exist between these job 
classes (i.e., the different classes of secretary are paid successively 
more for their advanced skills), and make adjustments as needed to 
address data abnormalities or inconsistencies. For example, an analyst 
would make an adjustment if the data showed lower wages for a secretary 
III than for a secretary I or II. Analysts also review occupations in 
the same broad job category (e.g., administrative support and clerical 
occupations) to ensure that different occupations performing 
commensurate duties receive similar pay.

When data for an occupation are not included in existing wage surveys, 
analysts can establish a prevailing wage rate through a procedure 
called "slotting," which involves comparing equivalent or similar job 
duties and skills between surveyed classifications and other 
classifications for which no survey data are available. For example, 
analysts may adopt the rate for a "computer operator" and use it for a 
"peripheral equipment operator" (whose duties include taking corrective 
actions to return equipment that directly supports computer operations, 
such as printers, to proper working order) because the job duties and 
skills required for both classifications are rated at the same level 
under the grading system for federal employees.[Footnote 23] Further, 
when the survey lists varying wage rates for several similar 
occupations, such as the "general maintenance trades," analysts will 
determine the average wage and use that rate as the prevailing wage for 
the entire group of occupations. See figure 2 for a graphic 
illustration of some of the factors an analyst may consider when 
determining a wage rate.

Figure 2: Factors Considered in SCA Wage Determination Process:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

An additional reason why analysts must rely on professional judgment 
when determining wage rates is that BLS's wage surveys were not 
designed for the purpose of determining wages and fringe benefit rates. 
While the BLS surveys may provide the most comprehensive wage data 
available, WHD analysts must perform some manipulation of BLS's data 
when calculating wage rates. As a result, WHD's reliance upon these 
data may not ensure that the wage rates it sets reflect labor market 
conditions. For example, because the survey responses may include the 
wage rates for some SCA service contract workers whose rates are set by 
a wage determination, analysts may not be using data that fully reflect 
the local labor market conditions. In other words, WHD, in trying to 
determine the market rate for certain occupations, may be referencing 
survey responses of its own derived rates. However, we did not attempt 
to determine the extent to which BLS data includes such information. In 
addition, one BLS survey used by WHD excludes smaller employers with 
fewer than 50 employees from its sample population. As a result, the 
survey results could inflate or deflate actual wages for the types of 
occupations typically employed by smaller employers. Another reason 
that BLS survey data may affect WHD's ability to set rates that reflect 
market conditions is that the occupational classifications in DOL's SCA 
directory of occupations do not always match OES occupational 
classifications, making it difficult for WHD analysts to match the OES 
wage data to the SCA occupation without significant analysis. Because 
OES does not collect data for each classification for every locality 
surveyed, WHD must sometimes use the "slotting" procedure to derive a 
wage determination.[Footnote 24]

Process for Determining Fringe Benefit Rates:

In addition to a wage rate, each SCA wage determination also includes 
the fringe benefit rate for the specific locality. Analysts generally 
set a universal fringe benefit rate that employers must pay to all 
workers in a specific geographic area regardless of their occupational 
class. The fringe benefit amount typically includes health and life 
insurance coverage, sick leave, retirement plans--items that are 
typically referred to as health and welfare (H&W) benefits[Footnote 
25]--as well as vacations and holidays. WHD analysts arrive at the H&W 
rate used in wage determinations by consulting nationwide data from 
BLS's Employer Cost for Employee Compensation (ECEC) survey. In 
contracts awarded since new regulations became effective in June 1997, 
the fringe benefit rate has most often been calculated on a "fixed cost 
per employee" basis, where each employee receives the same benefit 
amount.[Footnote 26] Employers may meet their fringe benefit 
obligations by paying the employee the cash equivalent of the specified 
fringe benefits. In June 2005, the "fixed cost per employee" SCA health 
and welfare benefit rate was increased to $2.87 per hour, which equates 
to about $497 per month.

Lack of Transparency Leaves Wage Determinations Prone to Criticism:

The wage determination process requires analysts to apply professional 
judgment in selecting both the appropriate source and method for 
calculating the prevailing wage rate. Contractors and other 
stakeholders contend that the process that analysts follow when 
determining a wage is not transparent and that determinations do not 
necessarily reflect local wage conditions. In fact, WHD does not 
include a description of the methodology used to derive the wage rates 
in its wage determinations, such as the wage data source used or the 
procedures analysts' follow. As a result, analysts spend considerable 
time responding to inquiries from contractors, employees, union 
representatives, and others regarding how they determine wages. 
According to WHD officials, analysts received about 23,000 telephone 
inquiries in a recent 12-month period, mostly from service contract 
employees who want to know how their wage rate was calculated or why 
their rate differed from a similar rate in a neighboring 
locality.[Footnote 27] Congress, unions, and others also contact WHD 
staff to inquire on behalf of their constituents or members. WHD 
assigns these inquiries to analysts as they are received. WHD officials 
told us that the specific methodology of calculating a wage rate for a 
certain occupation in a certain geographic location can change from 
year to year based on a series of elements, such as the availability of 
survey data or an analysts professional judgment. While analysts do 
provide details to those who inquire, WHD does not provide individual 
methodology worksheets in writing, stating that doing so would result 
in additional inquiries as to why rates are not calculated by the same 
method as in the previous year and take analysts away from their 
primary task of issuing new and revised wage determinations. 
Stakeholders with concerns told us, however, that it would be helpful 
to them if more information about the process was made available.

WHD receives criticism that its wage determination rates do not reflect 
market conditions. Some contractors say that private-sector wage data 
provide a more accurate measure of local labor market conditions than 
BLS survey data that were not designed for the purpose of determining 
wages and fringe benefit rates.[Footnote 28] However, WHD officials 
told us that to the extent its wage rates are perceived as not 
reflective of the market rate, one possible reason could be that WHD 
sets internal parameters for wage determinations (e.g., not issuing a 
wage rate lower than or more than 10 percent above the previously 
issued rate) to ensure consistency from year to year. As a result, 
while BLS survey data may be lower or higher than the resulting wage 
determination, analysts manipulate wage rates to ensure a consistent 
wage structure.

DOL Enforces SCA by Conducting Investigations, Ensuring Contractor 
Payments, and Providing Compliance Assistance, but WHD Could Make 
Better Use of Violation Data:

WHD enforces SCA by conducting contractor investigations, ensuring 
contractor payments to employees, and providing compliance assistance 
to stakeholders. WHD investigates complaints from service contract 
employees, contractors, federal agencies, unions, and others who allege 
that contractors have failed to pay either the wages or fringe 
benefits, or both, specified in service contracts. WHD collects 
violation data, but it does not fully use these data to plan compliance 
assistance, target specific service industries or geographic locations 
for SCA investigation, or set strategic enforcement goals. When 
investigations find that contractors have failed to pay in accordance 
with contract wages or benefits, WHD acts to ensure that contractor 
payments are made to employees. WHD also provides compliance assistance 
to contractors, federal agencies, unions, and others to help them 
comply with SCA requirements and avoid SCA violations.

WHD Conducts Complaint-Driven Investigations:

SCA investigations originate when contract employees, federal agencies, 
competitor contractors, or employee representatives complain to WHD 
that a contractor has failed to comply with the wage or benefit 
requirements in a contract.[Footnote 29] WHD investigators then consult 
and interview contractor officials, inspect the contract and contractor 
payroll records, and interview service contract employees. WHD records 
investigation data, such as the name of the contractor, geographic 
location, industry, and the type of violation, in its WHISARD database.

When responding to complaints, WHD investigators review WHISARD data 
for prior contractor violations. WHD uses violation data on a case-by- 
case basis to determine whether an individual complaint warrants 
expansion to a more comprehensive "directed" investigation. For 
example, WHD may decide to expand the scope of an initial complaint to 
encompass other employees under the same contract, additional 
contractor locations, or other service contracts involving the same 
contractor. WHD records all alleged SCA violations in its WHISARD 
database and classifies investigations as either complaint or directed. 
WHD generates violation reports from WHISARD that summarize 
investigation findings.

SCA violation reports for fiscal years 2003 and 2004 show that about 87 
percent of all investigations during this period were classified as 
complaint and about 14 percent were classified as directed. Table 1 
shows the number and percentage of complaint investigations and 
directed investigations for fiscal years 2003 and 2004.

Table 1: Number and Percentage of SCA Investigations by Category, 
Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004:

Complaint;
Number of investigations: FY 2003: 597; Number of investigations: FY 
2004: 570; Percentage of investigations: FY 2003: 86; Percentage of 
investigations: FY 2004: 87; Average: 86.

WHD directed;
Number of investigations: FY 2003: 101; Number of investigations: FY 
2004: 84; Percentage of investigations: FY 2003: 14; Percentage of 
investigations: FY 2004: 13; Average: 14.

Total;
Number of investigations: FY 2003: 698; Number of investigations: FY 
2004: 654; Percentage of investigations: FY 2003: 100; Percentage of 
investigations: FY 2004: 100; Average: 100.

Source: GAO analysis of WHD data.

[End of table]

WHD headquarters and regional enforcement officials told us that a 
complaint-based enforcement strategy offers an efficient approach to 
enforcing multiple labor laws. Consequently, WHD does not analyze or 
use violations data from WHISARD to (a) examine the extent to which 
specific service industries or geographic locations may warrant 
increased compliance assistance or directed investigations under SCA or 
(b) develop SCA-specific strategic goals. Concerning the latter, while 
ESA's 1999-2004 strategic plan contains specific outcome or performance 
goals for some labor acts, such as the Davis-Bacon Act and the Fair 
Labor Standards Act (FLSA), there are none for SCA. WHD has overall 
strategic enforcement goals that cut across all labor laws it enforces, 
such as improving timeliness in response to complaints and reducing the 
number of violators who have repeat or recurring violations. Moreover, 
ESA's strategic plan uses violation data in WHISARD to focus 
enforcement efforts on low-wage industries reflective of employers that 
have previously violated labor laws, such as FLSA, minimum wage and 
child labor laws, and others.[Footnote 30] While the focus on low-wage 
industries may detect violations in some service contract industries, 
it does not assure that all service contract industries with serious or 
frequent SCA violations are identified.

WHD Enforcement Efforts Result in Payment of Back Wages and Fringe 
Benefits and Debarment of Some Violators from Future Contract Work:

When a WHD investigation determines that a contractor has failed to pay 
wages or fringe benefits to contract employees, WHD attempts to reach 
agreement with the contractor regarding the amount of back wages and 
fringe benefits owed employees. WHD also monitors contractor activity 
to ensure that the amounts owed to employees are eventually paid to 
them.[Footnote 31] In fiscal year 2004, WHD initially investigated 654 
reportable cases--cases with possible SCA violations--and ultimately 
found 493 cases with SCA violations that began as an SCA investigation. 
In addition, 44 other cases, registered by WHD under other labor acts 
it enforces, had SCA violations.[Footnote 32] These 537 cases, more 
than 80 percent of the total number of SCA investigations, uncovered 
$18.7 million in contractor back wages and fringe benefits that were 
owed to employees. WHD obtained contractor agreements to pay $16.4 
million to employees.[Footnote 33] Once a contractor has reached 
agreement with WHD on the amount of wages and benefits owed, WHD 
monitors contractor payments and does not conclude the case until the 
contractor has made full payment.

WHD treats each instance of failure to pay a contract employee the 
proper wage to be a separate violation of the act. Likewise, WHD 
considers the failure to pay that same employee the proper fringe 
benefit as a separate violation. Thus, a contractor who fails to pay 
the proper wage and the proper fringe benefit would be cited for two 
separate SCA violations. Figure 3 shows the total number of cases found 
to have SCA violations in fiscal years 2003 and 2004, differentiating 
those cases that were registered under other WHD acts from those that 
were initiated as an SCA investigation.

Figure 3: Cases with SCA Violations, Including Those Registered under 
Other Acts:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

WHD's SCA investigations have a generally high success rate when judged 
by one key measure of enforcement success--the percentage of back wages 
and benefits that contractors agreed to pay--compared to the wages and 
benefits that contractors owed. WHD's overall rate of back wages 
recouped has also been high. Figure 4 shows the number of employees 
with back wages owed them, and the number of employees whom contractors 
agreed to pay for fiscal years 2003 and 2004. For these two periods, 
contractors agreed to pay about 89 percent of unpaid wages that they 
were found to owe for SCA violations.

Figure 4: Employees with Back Wages Due, and Employees Whom Contractors 
Agreed to Pay, Fiscal Years 2003 and 2004:

[See PDF for image]

[End of figure]

WHD may debar contractors who refuse to pay back wages and fringe 
benefits owed to service contract employees or otherwise meet SCA and 
WHD conditions for debarment.[Footnote 34] WHD may also arrange with 
federal agencies to permit debarred contractors to complete the 
contract under which violations occurred, but debarred contractors may 
not bid on or be awarded any other federal contracts during the 
standard 3-year debarment period. WHD debarred 17 contractors in fiscal 
year 2004, in contrast with approximately 450 contractors that it 
investigated. Table 2 shows the number of debarments for fiscal years 
2000 through 2004 by region.

Table 2: Number of SCA Debarments, Fiscal Years 2000 through 2004:

Region: Northeast;
FY 2000: 3;
FY 2001: 4;
FY 2002: 4;
FY 2003: 5;
FY 2004: 4;
Total: 20.

Region: Southeast;
FY 2000: 2;
FY 2001: 4;
FY 2002: 0;
FY 2003: 1;
FY 2004: 2;
Total: 9.

Region: Midwest;
FY 2000: 2;
FY 2001: 0;
FY 2002: 5;
FY 2003: 3;
FY 2004: 5;
Total: 15.

Region: Southwest;
FY 2000: 4;
FY 2001: 2;
FY 2002: 5;
FY 2003: 6;
FY 2004: 4;
Total: 21.

Region: West;
FY 2000: 2;
FY 2001: 8;
FY 2002: 1;
FY 2003: 4;
FY 2004: 2;
Total: 17.

Region: Total;
FY 2000: 13;
FY 2001: 18;
FY 2002: 15;
FY 2003: 19;
FY 2004: 17;
Total: 82.

Source: WHD.

[End of table]

Training and Outreach Efforts Aim to Improve SCA Compliance:

WHD provides compliance assistance to federal contracting agencies and 
contractors to help improve SCA compliance. One of WHD's basic missions 
is to provide employers and workers with clear and easy-to-access 
information on how to comply with federal employment laws--information 
and guidance that are often referred to as compliance assistance. 
Compliance assistance includes brochures and pamphlets, workplace 
posters, telephone consultations, on-site consultations, training 
sessions or seminars for individuals or groups, and Web-based 
information. WHD's Web site, for example, contains an Employment Law 
Guide with details about SCA coverage, requirements, employee rights, 
penalties, and sanctions.

In fiscal year 2004, WHD provided SCA compliance assistance at 
national, regional, and local levels to federal agencies, contractors, 
and service contract employee groups. National-level training and 
outreach efforts included presentations, speeches and seminars for the 
National Industries for the Blind and the U.S. Patent and Trademark 
Office, and panel discussions with the National Star Route Mail 
Contractors' Association. Regional offices provided similar outreach 
and training to officials from such federal agencies as the Office of 
Federal Contract Compliance Programs, Small Business Administration, 
Social Security Administration, and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. 
Local-level training and outreach included presentations to the 
Directorate of Contracting at Fort Riley, Kansas, and to employers that 
have SCA low-wage industry contracts under a Small Business 
Administration program. In fiscal year 2004, WHD provided training to 
federal agency contracting officials in the Department of Defense 
through an arrangement with the Contract Services Association of 
America, an organization that promotes the use of private contractors 
for all federal government services.

One of the most universal forms of day-to-day compliance assistance 
that WHD provides is its workplace poster. SCA requires contractors to 
post the poster at work sites unless the contractor has notified 
individual employees of their wages and benefits.[Footnote 35] WHD 
regulations issued to implement SCA state that the WHD poster 
(Publication WH 1313), when applicable, shall be posted in a prominent 
and accessible place at the worksite, and failure to comply with this 
requirement is a violation of the act and of the contract.[Footnote 36]

WHD's SCA workplace poster serves a dual purpose of both assistance and 
enforcement. As an assistance tool, the poster informs service contract 
employees of their wages, benefits, and other entitlements (overtime 
and safety and health conditions) under the contract with the federal 
government. As an enforcement tool, the poster provides evidence that 
the contractor is subject to SCA and DOL regulations governing service 
contracts as they relate to employee notification. WHD has designed the 
poster to be used for both SCA and the Walsh-Healey Act. WHD's Web site 
makes this Service Contract Act/Walsh-Healey Poster readily available 
to the public.

While WHD relies heavily on complaints from employees and others to 
enforce SCA, WHD's worksite poster does not provide a telephone number 
for employees or others to call to register complaints. Instead, the 
poster directs inquiries for information to the Wage and Hour Division 
offices located in "principal cities." The poster also directs 
potential complainants to check their telephone directory under U.S. 
Government, Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division. WHD last 
revised the poster in 1996.

A workplace poster that does not provide service contract employees and 
others with a clear and easy-to-access method of filing a complaint may 
hamper their reporting of such complaints. In the absence of a 
telephone point of contact at WHD, service contract employees may not 
have the opportunity to report possible or suspected violations of the 
act and therefore may not receive the full benefit of protection 
authorized under the act.

We reported in 2004 that DOL's Occupational Safety and Health 
Administration (OSHA) relies heavily on complaints to enforce the 
Occupational Safety and Health Act.[Footnote 37] OSHA, in general, 
responds to complaints according to the seriousness of alleged hazards, 
a policy that OSHA credits with conserving agency resources. Like WHD, 
OSHA uses workplace posters as part of its overall compliance 
assistance enforcement efforts.[Footnote 38] OSHA's workplace posters 
display a universal national telephone number, telephone numbers for 
each of OSHA's 10 regional offices, a national number accessible to the 
hearing impaired, and instructions on how to file a complaint online 
through OSHA's Web site.

Conclusions:

Determining locally prevailing wages for service employees working in 
hundreds of occupations throughout the nation is a tremendous 
undertaking and one that WHD is committed to performing with diligence. 
It is the only organization producing such a vast number of locally 
prevailing wage rates on a national scale. For their part, WHD analysts 
have the support of their agency in applying their professional 
judgment when setting the wage and benefit rates. However, WHD could 
benefit from greater transparency of its wage determination process. 
WHD provides limited information on the methodology used to determine 
SCA wage rates, resulting in analysts receiving numerous inquiries 
about how they determined wages. Responding to individual requests for 
explanation diverts analysts from their primary duties of revising and 
issuing new wage determinations. WHD expressed concerns that providing 
additional information on its methodology may trigger additional 
inquiries. However, we believe that additional information could inform 
some stakeholders, especially those that represent contractors and 
employees, who could in turn educate their members. As a result, some 
individuals who otherwise would contact WHD for an explanation on how 
wages are determined might not see the need to contact WHD. A general 
description of the methods used in the wage determination process could 
give SCA stakeholders greater confidence in the determined wage rates 
and possibly improve the quality of service that WHD provides to those 
who do inquire.

WHD strives to update its list of consolidated wage determinations on 
an annual basis and provides this information online for the 
convenience of the contracting agencies. However, the job titles and 
descriptions included in its SCA directory of occupations have not been 
regularly updated to include emerging service occupations. WHD has been 
working closely with various stakeholders over the past 3 years to make 
changes to the directory, although its ad hoc process of updating the 
directory calls into question the ongoing currency of the occupations 
listed in the directory used for wage determinations.

WHD's reliance on complaints as the primary means to identify potential 
SCA violations is a reasonable strategy to pursue, given WHD's multiple 
enforcement responsibilities under numerous federal labor laws. 
However, that strategy currently does not examine the extent to which 
other information could be used to improve enforcement nationwide. 
Without further analysis of prior SCA violation data, WHD cannot ensure 
that it is using the most effective mix of compliance assistance, 
complaint-driven investigations, and directed investigations. WHD has 
readily available data on repeat SCA violators, the analysis of which 
we believe could be performed with minimal investment of additional 
resources. Furthermore, by taking extra steps to review prior SCA 
violation data, WHD may find that its existing complaint-driven 
approach to SCA enforcement is sound.

Finally, because the SCA workplace poster does not provide an easy 
method for employees to report complaints, WHD may be missing 
opportunities to get the most use from its complaint process. Improving 
the workplace poster would reinforce WHD's complaint-based strategy and 
would help further protect the wages and benefits of service contract 
workers.

Recommendations for Executive Action:

In an effort to provide stakeholders with a general understanding of 
how WHD determines wage rates, we recommend that the Secretary of Labor:

* direct WHD to make publicly available the basic methodology WHD uses 
to issue wage determinations.

To better support WHD and federal contracting agencies in their 
implementation of SCA, we recommend that the Secretary of Labor:

* direct WHD to develop a procedure for updating the SCA directory of 
occupations at regular intervals and include criteria for listing and 
removing occupations as the need emerges.

To further WHD's efforts to obtain better information concerning the 
presence of and potential for violations involving SCA contracts, we 
recommend that the Secretary of Labor:

* direct WHD to analyze its historical SCA contractor violation data in 
WHISARD, as well as debarment information not included in WHISARD, and 
to the extent appropriate, use this information to help plan its 
compliance assistance and investigative efforts, and to identify 
additional industries, if any, that WHD should establish enforcement 
goals similar to those it currently has for repeat violators and 
industries with chronic violations.

To facilitate the reporting of SCA complaints, we recommend that the 
Secretary of Labor:

* direct WHD to update and revise the 1996 Service Contract Act/Walsh- 
Healey worksite poster, to include national and regional office 
telephone numbers and a Web site address that complainants may use to 
report alleged SCA violations.

Agency Comments:

DOL's ESA provided us with written comments on a draft of this report, 
which are reproduced in appendix III. The agency agreed with all of the 
report's recommendations. ESA noted that WHD will provide a general 
description of the methods used in the wage determination process on 
its Web site and through other avenues. The agency also commented that 
WHD will develop a plan for implementing our recommendation concerning 
its SCA directory of occupations. However, the agency cautioned that 
any plan to do so must take into account the potential for creating 
confusion when multiple versions of the directory are applicable to 
various contracts. ESA acknowledged that this problem already exists 
but believes it would be exacerbated if the directory were updated more 
frequently.

ESA further noted that WHD's leadership will include an analysis of its 
SCA enforcement data in establishing its annual priorities at the 
national level and to specific local and regional initiatives. Finally, 
ESA noted that WHD will develop and implement a plan to revise the SCA 
worksite poster by adding WHD's toll-free telephone number and the 
agency's Web site address.

ESA noted several technical corrections to the report, as did BLS, 
which we incorporated as appropriate.

As arranged with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents 
earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report until 30 days 
after the date of this report. At that time, we will send copies of 
this report to the Secretary of Labor and the Assistant Secretary of 
Labor for Employment Standards. We will also make copies available to 
others upon request. In addition, the report will be available at no 
charge on GAO's Web site at http://www.gao.gov.

If you or your staff have any questions about this report, please 
contact me at (202) 512-7215 or robertsonr@gao.gov. Contact points for 
our Offices of Congressional Relations and Public Affairs may be found 
on the last page of this report. GAO staff who have made major 
contributions to this report are listed in appendix IV.

Signed by:

Robert E. Robertson: 
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:

[End of section]

Appendix I: Objectives, Scope, and Methodology:

For this report, we described how the Department of Labor (DOL):

(1) establishes locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits and (2) 
enforces the Service Contract Act (SCA). We also identified potential 
areas of improvement found in the course of our work. To address these 
objectives, we:

* reviewed literature on SCA and its corresponding regulations, and 
analyzed DOL documents and data;

* interviewed officials in the Wage and Hour Division's (WHD) 
headquarters and field offices, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), 
and the two federal contracting agencies with the largest proportion of 
service contract activity--the Department of Defense (DOD) and the 
General Services Administration. At DOD, we interviewed the agency 
labor advisors and officials from each of the four branches of service 
that oversee the military's SCA activities. In addition, we interviewed 
representatives from several service industry unions and key trade 
associations;

* analyzed data obtained from DOL, including data on WHD investigations 
from DOL's Wage Hour Investigator Support and Reporting Database 
(WHISARD) database; national, regional and district office training and 
outreach efforts; file data on debarments; and data from the Federal 
Procurement Data System (FPDS), including information on the number and 
total dollar amount of SCA contract actions for fiscal years 2000 
through 2003; and:

* interviewed state officials and representatives from private-sector 
groups who also produce wage and benefit rates in an effort to better 
understand the relative merits of DOL's wage determination process.

Reliability of WHD's Data on Investigations and Debarments:

We obtained current and background data from DOL's WHISARD database for 
fiscal years 2003 and 2004. Data included the number of SCA 
investigations, the number of investigations that led to one or more 
SCA violations, the number of act violations, amounts of back wages and 
fringe benefits due from contractors, amounts of unpaid wages and 
benefits that contractors agreed to pay service contract employees, and 
the number of employees with unpaid wages and benefits. We also 
obtained file data from WHD on debarred contractors, including the 
number of debarred contractors, by year and region.

We assessed the reliability of the WHISARD data by (1) interviewing 
agency and contractor officials knowledgeable about the data, and:

(2) reviewing existing information about the data and the system that 
produced them, such as the WHISARD User Guide and Procedure Manual; 
WHISARD data dictionary of tables; and the DOL Inspector General's 
fiscal year 2004 Performance and Accountability Review of WHD, which 
includes WHISARD. We assessed the reliability of the debarment data by 
interviewing agency officials about the debarment process and the 
methods used to produce the debarment summary report provided to us. We 
determined that the required WHISARD data elements and debarment 
summary data were sufficiently reliable for the purposes of this report.

Reliability of FPDS Data:

FPDS has been the federal government's central database of information 
on federal procurement actions since 1978. It contains detailed 
information on contract actions over $25,000 and summary data on 
procurements of less than $25,000. We found in December 2003 that FPDS 
data were inaccurate and incomplete, and that sufficient problems 
existed with the system to warrant concern about the reliability of 
FPDS information.[Footnote 39] However, in this report, we are using 
the FPDS data only to provide aggregate information about SCA and to 
provide context for the report. Although we have determined that the 
data may be incomplete and certain data elements unreliable, for this 
report we found that it was sufficiently reliable for estimating a 
minimum number of federal contracts and federal SCA dollars expended. A 
newer system, the FPDS-NG (Next Generation), became operational on 
October 1, 2003. In December 2003, we stated that the reliability of 
FPDS data was expected to improve with the implementation of the new 
system. We recently issued a correspondence to the Office of Management 
and Budget regarding the upgraded system.[Footnote 40]

[End of section]

Appendix II: Examples of Standard and Non-standard Wage Determinations:

[See PDF for Image]

[End of Figure]

[End of section]

Appendix III: Comments from the Department of Labor:

U.S. Department of Labor:
Assistant Secretary for Employment Standards: Washington, D.C. 20210:

Mr. Robert E, Robertson:
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security issues: United 
States Government Accountability Office: Washington, D.C. 20548:

Dear Mr, Robertson:

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft report entitled ' 
"Service Contract Act: Wage Determination Process Could Benefit From 
Greater Transparency, and Better Use of Violation Data Could Improve 
Enforcement " (GAO-06-27).

The report contains four recommendations to make the wage determination 
process more transparent and to better plan compliance assistance and 
enforcement initiatives, These recommendations, which are in bold 
print, request the Secretary of Labor to direct the Wage and Hour 
Division (WHD) lo:

1. "make publicly available the basic methodology WHD uses to issue 
wage determinations"

WHD supports the recommendation for greater transparency by showing the 
underlying basis for how wage determinations are issued, WHD will 
provide "a general description of the methods used in the wage 
determination process" on its Web site and through other compliance 
assistance avenues.

2. "develop procedures for updating the SCA directory of occupations at 
regular intervals and include criteria for listing and removing 
occupations as the need emerges."

WHD also supports the recommendation for more regular updates to the 
Service Contract Act "Directory of Occupations" (Directory) and it will 
develop a plan for implementing the recommendation. Any plan for 
updating the Directory, including the frequency of updates, must, 
however, take into account the potential for creating confusion among 
the Federal contracting community, contractors, and employees when 
multiple versions of the Directory are applicable to various contracts. 
For example, if the Directory is revised annually, a contractor might 
be faced with several different contracts operating under multiple 
versions of the Directory. Although this problem exists every time the 
Directory is changed, the problem is exacerbated if the Directory is 
frequently updated,

3. "analyze its historical SCA contractor violation data is WHISARD, as 
well as debarment information not Included in WHISARD, and to the 
extent appropriate, use this information to help plan Its compliance 
assistance and investigative efforts, and to identify additional 
industries, if any, that WHD should establish enforcement goals similar 
to those it currently has for repeat violators and industries with 
chronic violations."

WHD concurs with this recommendation. WHD has established enforcement 
priorities in three key areas: greater compliance in low-wage 
industries that employ vulnerable workers (including young and 
immigrant workers); reducing the number of employers with repeat 
violations; and the strategic use of complaint investigations as a way 
of increasing labor standards outcomes for the greatest number of 
workers. As the report notes, WHD has overall strategic enforcement 
goals that "cut across all labor laws it enforces " Consistent with the 
President's Management Agenda, these goals arc integrated within the 
agency's budget, To achieve these objectives, WHD develops an annual 
performance plan that establishes outcomes, targets and measures. In 
turn, each year, the agency's regional and district offices develop 
local initiatives and strategies to meet annual targets and to further 
the broader strategic goals and mission of the agency. The annual 
performance plan is developed by WHD's Executive Leadership Team 
pursuant to a nine-step strategic planning model, one step of which is 
to review and consider data related to its past performance in 
developing future objectives, As suggested by GAO, WHD leadership will 
include an analysis of its SCA enforcement data in establishing its 
annual priorities at the national levels and specific to local and 
regional initiatives.

4. "update and revise the 1996 Service Contract Act/Walsh Healey 
worksite poster, to include national and regional office telephone 
numbers and a Web site address that complainants may use to report 
alleged SCA violations."

WHD concurs with this recommendation and will develop and implement n 
plan to revise the worksite poster to add the WHD's toll-free number, 1-
866-4US-WAGE (1-866-487-9243), This number is widely disseminated 
through a variety of compliance assistance materials, The toll-free 
help line provides compliance information to employers and employers, 
Calls to the number are handled by call center staff who can screen 
information, provide general guidance to employees, and refer 
complainants to the appropriate WHD office, The call center currently 
has 15 Spanish-speaking customer service representatives (CSR) and an 
interpreter service that supports 150 languages, WHD will also add the 
agency's Web site address, which has an email notification system that 
also provides the public with assistance.

This concludes our review and comments, We appreciate the opportunity 
to provide comments in advance of the publication of the final report. 
If you should have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.


Sincerely, 

Signed by:

Victoria A, Lipnic:

[End of section]

Appendix IV: GAO Contact and Staff Acknowledgments:

GAO Contact:

Robert E. Robertson (202) 512-7215 or robertsonr@gao.gov:

Staff Acknowledgments:

In addition to the contact named above, Brett S. Fallavollita, 
Assistant Director, Monika R. Gomez, and Dennis M. Gehley made 
significant contributions to this report in all aspects of the work 
throughout the review. In addition, Linda L. Siegel helped to develop 
our overall design and methodology; Margaret L. Armen and Richard P. 
Burkard provided legal support; Avrum I. Ashery and Jeremy D. Sebest 
designed our graphics; Shana B. Wallace provided technical assistance; 
and Jonathan S. McMurray assisted in report and message development.

[End of section]

Related GAO Products:

Department of Labor, Wage and Hour Division, Employment Standards 
Administration: Service Contract Act; Labor Standards for Federal 
Service Contracts. OGC-97-14. Washington, D.C.: January 16, 1997.

Navy Contracting: Military Sealift Command's Contract for Operating 
Oceanographic Ships. NSIAD-90-151. Washington, D.C.: April 18, 1990.

Department of Labor: Assessment of the Accuracy of Wage Rates Under the 
Service Contract Act. HRD-87-87BR. Washington, D.C.: May 28, 1987.

Decision of the Comptroller General of the United States, B-218427.2, 
May 15, 1985, Crowley Towing & Transportation Company.

Congress Should Consider Repeal of the Service Contract Act. HRD-83- 4. 
Washington, D.C.: January 31, 1983.

Assessment of Federal Agency Compliance with the Service Contract Act. 
HRD-82-59. Washington, D.C.: July 21, 1982.

Service Contract Act Should Not Apply to Service Employees of ADP and 
High-Technology Companies--A Supplement. HRD-80-102 (A). Washington, 
D.C.: March 25, 1981.

Service Contract Act Should Not Apply to Service Employees of ADP and 
High-Technology Companies. HRD-80-102. Washington, D.C.: September 16, 
1980.

GAO's Mission:

The Government Accountability Office, the audit, evaluation and 
investigative arm of Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting 
its constitutional responsibilities and to help improve the performance 
and accountability of the federal government for the American people. 
GAO examines the use of public funds; evaluates federal programs and 
policies; and provides analyses, recommendations, and other assistance 
to help Congress make informed oversight, policy, and funding 
decisions. GAO's commitment to good government is reflected in its core 
values of accountability, integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through GAO's Web site (www.gao.gov). Each weekday, GAO posts 
newly released reports, testimony, and correspondence on its Web site. 
To have GAO e-mail you a list of newly posted products every afternoon, 
go to www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to Updates."

Order by Mail or Phone:

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office 441 G Street NW, Room LM 
Washington, D.C. 20548:

To order by Phone: Voice: (202) 512-6000 TDD: (202) 512-2537 Fax: (202) 
512-6061:

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov 
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

Congressional Relations:

Gloria Jarmon, Managing Director, JarmonG@gao.gov (202) 512-4400 U.S. 
Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7125 
Washington, D.C. 20548:

Public Affairs:

Paul Anderson, Managing Director, AndersonP1@gao.gov (202) 512-4800 
U.S. Government Accountability Office, 441 G Street NW, Room 7149 
Washington, D.C. 20548:

FOOTNOTES

[1] This information comes from agency data submitted to the Federal 
Procurement Data System (FPDS), the federal repository for contracting 
data. 

[2] A wage determination sets forth the minimum monetary wage rates to 
be paid and the minimum fringe benefits to be furnished for the various 
classes of service employees to be employed in furnishing services 
during the periods when they are engaged in the performance of such 
contracts. Each wage determination is locality specific, i.e., the wage 
and fringe benefit information therein would pertain to the specific 
occupations listed only in the geographic location specified, and 
should reflect local labor market conditions.

[3] Consolidated wage determinations are those that are most frequently 
used for SCA-covered contracts, for which job descriptions are provided 
by the SCA directory of occupations. There are wage rates for 298 
occupations listed in each consolidated wage determination. Non- 
standard wage determinations are issued for unique occupations. 
Contracting agencies attach job descriptions for these occupations to 
the specific request for a wage determination that is sent directly to 
WHD. WHD equates these job descriptions with similar occupations 
surveyed by BLS through use of the comparable federal grade level 
associated with each. WHD analysts annually update only those non- 
standard wage determinations that have widespread application, i.e., 
non-standard occupations very common to a specific area or common to 
only a few areas across the country.

[4] WHD issues two wage determinations for each locality, reflecting 
identical wages and rates for health and welfare fringe benefits. 
However, the requirements for contractor compliance are different. One 
determination reflects health and welfare benefits that are required to 
be furnished on a fixed payment per hour on behalf of each service 
employee; the other requires employer contributions to cost an average 
of the amount specified on the basis of all hours worked by service 
employees employed on the contract. The average cost method is used 
only for those SCA covered contracts where this method of calculating 
health and welfare fringe benefits has been used in the past. No new 
SCA contract requiring a prevailing wage determination is allowed to 
have the average cost health and welfare fringe benefit.

[5] In addition to contracting agencies requesting formal wage 
determinations, contractors may obtain specific occupational wage 
determinations, through the SCA conformance process. When wage 
determinations do not include an occupation in which covered workers 
will be employed, the conformance process allows contractors to propose 
the use of workers in an occupation at a wage rate that is reasonable 
when compared with other occupational wage rates in the applicable wage 
determination (i.e., appropriate level of skill comparison) between 
such unlisted classifications and the classifications listed in the 
wage determination. To prevent the possibility of any workers 
performing work and not receiving the proper wages, the contractor 
initiates the conforming procedure before the unlisted class of 
employee performs any work. The contractor submits the conformance 
request to the contracting officer, who reviews and forwards it to WHD. 
The final determination of the conformance action by WHD is transmitted 
to the contracting officer who notifies the contractor of the action 
taken. Each affected employee is provided with a written copy of the 
determination or it is posted as part of the wage determination.

[6] If a federal agency is unsure as to whether or not SCA should apply 
to a particular contract, WHD will make the final determination of 
coverage.

[7] The Davis-Bacon Act requires payment of prevailing wages and 
benefits to employees of contractors engaged in federal government 
construction projects in excess of $2,000, and the Walsh-Healey Public 
Contracts Act requires payment of minimum wages and other labor 
standards by contractors providing materials and supplies to the 
federal government under contracts valued in excess of $10,000. 

[8] When the location of work under a contract is unknown at the time 
of solicitation, the contracting agency is supposed to contact WHD for 
guidance. The contracting agency will issue an initial solicitation 
with no wage determination, from which it identifies potentially 
interested bidders and the possible performance locations and then 
transmits this information to WHD. WHD will issue separate wage 
determinations for the various localities identified in the first step 
that are incorporated in the solicitation prior to the submission of 
final bids. The appropriate wage determination applicable to the 
geographic location of the successful bidder must be incorporated in 
the resultant contract and must be observed, regardless of whether the 
contractor subsequently changes the place(s) of contract performances.

[9] For certain contracts, when a union collective bargaining agreement 
covers service employees, SCA requires that these wage and fringe 
benefit rates in the agreement supplant any that may otherwise prevail 
in the locality for other employees. The SCA also requires that, except 
in rare circumstances, successor contractors honor earlier contractors' 
wage and fringe benefits arrived at through collective bargaining 
agreements. 

[10] FGE rates are divided into the following three classifications for 
purposes of SCA administration: (1) GS (general schedule) refers to 
grade rates utilized for non-supervisory appropriated fund "white- 
collar" positions; (2) WG (wage grade) refers to grade rates utilized 
for non-supervisory appropriated fund "blue-collar" positions; and (3) 
NAF (Non-Appropriated Fund schedule) refers to rates utilized for non- 
supervisory non-appropriated fund positions. 

[11] "Due consideration" must be given to federal wage rates when 
issuing SCA wage determinations, i.e., the rates applicable to service 
employees if directly hired by the federal government.

[12] In addition to SCA, WHD also enforces the Davis-Bacon Act, the 
Employee Polygraph Protection Act, the Family and Medical Leave Act of 
1993, the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act, the Copeland Act, the 
Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, the Migrant and Seasonal 
Agricultural Workers Protection Act, the Fair Labor Standards Act, 
certain employment standards and worker protections under the 
Immigration and Nationality Act, and the wage garnishment provisions of 
the Consumer Credit Protection Act.

[13] For more information about federal debarment processes, see GAO, 
Federal Procurement: Additional Data Reporting Could Improve the 
Suspension and Debarment Process, GAO-05-479 (Washington, D.C.: July 
29, 2005).

[14] Complaints are a key component of DOL enforcement activities. DOL 
enforcement efforts under many federal labor laws and programs 
generally rely on two types of information to identify potential 
violations: (1) complaints from individuals who believe they may have 
suffered a violation and (2) analysis of data to specifically target 
problematic industries or worksites. Complaints and targeting occur, 
for example, as part of DOL workforce and worksite protection 
activities under the Occupational Safety and Health Act, child labor, 
day laborer, and wage protection activities under the Fair Labor 
Standards Act, and prevailing wage enforcement under the Davis-Bacon 
Act. 

[15] WHD enforces five federal laws that are generally referred to as 
contract labor standards statutes: the Davis-Bacon Act (construction), 
the Walsh-Healey Public Contracts Act (goods), the SCA (services), the 
Copeland Act (Davis-Bacon payroll compliance), and the Contract Work 
Hours and Safety Standards Act (overtime provisions for certain workers 
employed on Davis-Bacon and SCA covered contracts).

[16] FPDS does not report the number of service contract workers and 
WHD does not have or maintain such numbers. We found an estimate of 
700,000 as the number of service contract employees working on covered 
contracts in 1986. In 1995, WHD's Administrator testified before 
Congress that SCA protected "roughly a million workers a year." In 
addition, a February 2001 Congressional Budget Office document stated 
that the SCA in 2000 covered approximately 27,000 contracts valued at 
$33 billion, but did not comment on the number of service contract 
employees.

[17] If an occupation is not listed in the directory, it is considered 
a non-standard job and an analyst would proceed in a different manner 
to calculate a wage determination for that occupation.

[18] These supplements were issued on December 15, 1993; August 1, 
1995; and March 10, 1997.

[19] The National Compensation Survey (NCS) provides comprehensive 
measures of occupational earnings, compensation cost trends, benefits 
incidence, and detailed plan provisions. Detailed occupational earnings 
are available for metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas, broad 
geographic regions, and on a national basis. The July 2004 NCS sample 
consisted of 152 metropolitan areas and nonmetropolitan areas that 
represent the nation's 326 metropolitan statistical areas (as defined 
by the Office of Management and Budget) and the remaining portions of 
the 50 states. It included establishments representing nearly 81 
million workers within the scope of the survey.

[20] The Occupational Employment Statistics (OES) survey produces 
employment and wage estimates for about 800 occupations. These are 
estimates of the number of people employed in certain occupations, and 
estimates of the wages paid to them. Self-employed persons are not 
included in the estimates. These estimates are available for the nation 
as a whole, for individual states, and for metropolitan areas. BLS 
produces occupational employment and wage estimates for about 350 
industry classifications at the national level. The OES program surveys 
approximately 200,000 establishments every 6 months, taking 3 years to 
fully collect the sample of 1.2 million establishments.

[21] In addition, some occupational rates on the wage determination may 
be taken directly from the Non-Appropriated Fund schedule, Federal Wage 
System schedule, or the General Schedule "white collar" pay scales. 

[22] A union dominant rate is considered to prevail when the rate is 
paid to a majority (more than 50 percent) of the union workers engaged 
in similar work in a particular locality. 

[23] Analysts using NCS can also use "leveling" data to determine a 
rate for an occupation for which no survey data are available. For 
example, if no data were available for the occupational classification 
of "secretary," analysts could use data from the next broader category 
of "administrative support and clerical," or use data from the even 
broader category of "white collar, excluding sales," to calculate a 
wage rate.

[24] According to BLS officials, OES allows respondents to report 
occupational information for every detailed non-military occupational 
title in the Standard Occupation Classification. If survey respondents 
do not provide any data on a particular occupation, then BLS is unable 
to publish wage data for that occupation. In addition, BLS will not 
publish some estimates for some occupations in some areas to protect 
confidential responses.

[25] The term "health and welfare" fringe benefits refers to all 
benefits provided to workers that are not otherwise required by law 
except vacation and holiday benefits, which are determined separately 
under SCA. The SCA H&W rate is based on employer costs per hour worked 
for all benefits. However, holidays, vacations, and benefits otherwise 
required by law, such as social security, unemployment insurance, and 
workers' compensation payments are excluded from these determinations. 
Holidays and vacations are determined separately and benefits otherwise 
required by law are reported annually by the BLS Employment Cost Index 
study of employer costs for employee compensation in the private sector 
(i.e., all workers, all industries, all establishment sizes, and all 
occupations).

[26] Previously, contracts could contain a fringe benefit rate based on 
the contractor's average fringe benefit cost for all service employees 
working on the contract. Under the "average cost method," providing 
benefits must, at a minimum, cost the employer an average of $2.87 per 
hour computed on the basis of all hours worked by service employees 
employed on the contract. Under this method, workers receive varying 
levels of benefits, i.e., a worker with no dependents may receive less 
in benefits than one with dependents, but the average cost to the 
employer must be at least the specified rate. 

[27] In addition, between October 2004 and August 2005, WHD received 
301 pieces of correspondence with this nature of inquiry.

[28] We did not attempt to verify current labor market conditions 
through a survey of our own.

[29] DOL's fiscal year 2004 Performance and Accountability Report noted 
that approximately 75 percent of WHD's resources are devoted to 
complaint investigations and resolution for all program acts it 
enforces. Some investigations are performed in response to allegations 
that a federal agency should have, but did not classify the work being 
performed under a federal contract as subject to SCA.

[30] Strategic planning includes developing strategic goals, outcome 
goals, performance goals, and baseline measures for certain problem 
industries. WHD develops outcome and performance goals for those 
industries and develops baseline measures as criteria against which to 
measure its performance in accomplishing those goals only after 
selecting specific industries that warrant attention. ESA's strategic 
plan and annual performance plan are incorporated into DOL's overall 
plans. DOL's 2004 Performance and Accountability Report stated that WHD 
had reached its performance goals for increasing compliance with FLSA, 
in what WHD refers to as "industries with chronic violations," such as 
the garment manufacturing, long-term health care, and agricultural 
commodities industries, but had not reached its target to reduce the 
number of employers who had prior violations of the act.

[31] WHD maintains a system--the Back Wage Collection and Disbursement 
System--to monitor the collection process, amounts, payments to 
employees, etc.

[32] In addition to complaints of alleged SCA violations, WHD may 
initially register a complaint as a possible violation of other acts 
such as the Contract Work Hours and Safety Standards Act, the Davis- 
Bacon Act, or FLSA, and then later determine that the act violated was 
the Service Contract Act. WHD's WHISARD database contains information 
on cases with SCA violations and the registration act under which the 
case was initiated. As shown in figure 3, most cases with SCA 
violations are registered under SCA.

[33] WHD may allow some contractors to pay less than what WHD initially 
determines is owed if the contractor negotiates with WHD and provides 
adequate justification for a lesser amount.

[34] Conditions include a history of monetary and recordkeeping 
violations; willfulness of past violations as determined by their 
nature, extent, and seriousness; falsification or concealment of 
records; intentional employee misclassification; or large amounts of 
back wages due where there exists no reasonable excuse for the 
violations. According to WHD officials, a firm's past compliance 
history, which is maintained in WHISARD, is used to refute claims from 
contractors facing debarment who say that they did not repeatedly or 
seriously violate the act. The WHISARD database, however, does not 
provide a comprehensive source of debarred contractors. WHD 
headquarters officials told us that they maintain manual files with 
information on debarred contractors and produce internal WHD reports on 
debarments. There are lists of debarred contractors, however, that are 
maintained by the General Services Administration, called the Lists of 
Parties Excluded from Federal Procurement and Non-procurement Programs, 
that identify those parties excluded throughout the federal government 
from, among other things, receiving federal contracts. Contracting 
agencies are required to check this list before awarding a contract. 

[35] 41 U.S.C. 351(a)(4) requires that every service contract contain a 
provision that the contractor either (1) deliver to the contract 
employee a notice of wage and fringe benefit compensation under the 
contract or (2) post a notice of the required compensation in a 
prominent place at the worksite.

[36] 29 C.F.R. 4.6(e).

[37] GAO, OSHA's Complaint Response Policies: OSHA Credits Its 
Complaint System with Conserving Agency Resources, but the System Still 
Warrants Improvement, GAO-04-658 (Washington, D.C.: June 18, 2004).

[38] See OSHA Publication 3165, Job Safety & Health Protection Poster 
(English) and OSHA Publication 3167, Job Safety & Health Protection 
Poster (Spanish). OSHA's poster Web site notes that all covered 
employers are required to display and keep displayed a poster prepared 
by WHD informing employees of OSHA protections.

[39] GAO, Reliability of Federal Procurement Data, GAO-04-295R 
(Washington, D.C.: Dec. 30, 2003).

[40] GAO, Improvements Needed to the Federal Procurement Data System- 
Next Generation, GAO-05-960R (Washington, D.C.: Sept. 27, 2005).

GAO's Mission:

The Government Accountability Office, the investigative arm of 
Congress, exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional 
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability 
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use 
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides 
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make 
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO's commitment to 
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability, 
integrity, and reliability.

Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:

The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no 
cost is through the Internet. GAO's Web site ( www.gao.gov ) contains 
abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and an 
expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search 
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You 
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other 
graphics.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and 
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as "Today's Reports," on its 
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document 
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to 
www.gao.gov and select "Subscribe to e-mail alerts" under the "Order 
GAO Products" heading.

Order by Mail or Phone:

The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2 
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent 
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or 
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent. 
Orders should be sent to:

U.S. Government Accountability Office

441 G Street NW, Room LM

Washington, D.C. 20548:

To order by Phone:

        

Voice: (202) 512-6000:

TDD: (202) 512-2537:

Fax: (202) 512-6061:

To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:

Contact:

Web site: www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm

E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov

Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:

Public Affairs:

Jeff Nelligan, managing director,

NelliganJ@gao.gov

(202) 512-4800

U.S. Government Accountability Office,

441 G Street NW, Room 7149

Washington, D.C. 20548: