Third Time’s Not a Charm; Disparate Compensation Evaluation Leaves Navy Stranded
Client Alert | 1 min read | 12.07.17
On November 20, 2017, the Government Accountability Office released its decision in Fluor Federal Solutions, LLC, B-410486.9, sustaining a protest challenging the Navy’s third award decision for an 8-year contract to provide base operations support services on the island of Guam. Following a sustained protest challenging the Navy’s discussions and proposal evaluations (CFS-KBR Marianas Support Services, LLC; Flour Federal Solutions LLC, B-410486, et al., Jan. 2, 2015 (Round 1)), and an outcome prediction ADR in which GAO advised that it would sustain the protester’s second protest challenging the Navy’s evaluation of the awardee’s exempt employee compensation plan (Round 2), the Navy again selected the same awardee. In this protest (Round 3), GAO found that the Navy engaged in disparate treatment when it downgraded the protester for proposing reduced compensation of exempt employees while overlooking similar risk in the awardee’s proposed plan, which involved replacing exempt employees with new hires at reduced compensation through multiple hiring cycles.
Contacts
Insights
Client Alert | 3 min read | 06.03.26
Important EU Court Judgment Clarifies Rules on Interest Due in Cartel Damages Cases
In a judgment that will have direct and immediate consequences, the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) has clarified that for all competition damages actions brought after 26 December 2014, interest runs from the date on which the harm occurred. The ruling addressed two important questions: (1) whether national provisions implementing Article 3(2) of the EU Damages Directive — which requires interest to run from the date harm occurred —apply to cases in which the harm preceded the adoption of those provisions; and (2) how the date of harm should be determined in cartel cases involving the purchase of goods at inflated prices.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 06.02.26
SBA OHA Confirms That the Submission Date for a Proposal with Pricing Controls Size Determination
Client Alert | 5 min read | 06.01.26
California Court Upholds Insurer’s Duty to Defend After Covered Claim Is Dismissed
Client Alert | 2 min read | 05.29.26
California Assembly Passes AB 1776, Sending Major Antitrust Bill to the Senate
