Employee Unions And Elected Representatives Lack Standing For GAO Protests Of Private Sector Awards In A-76 Competitions
Client Alert | 1 min read | 04.28.04
In Dan Duefrene; Kelley Dull; Brenda Neuerburg; Gabrielle Martin, B-293590.2, .3: B-293883; B-293887: B-293908 (April 19, 2004), the GAO ruled definitively that union officials and other elected representatives of government employees who lose to a private sector offeror in competitions conducted under Revised OMB Circular A-76 (May 29, 2003) do not have standing under the Competition In Contracting Act (CICA) to protest at the GAO. Stating that its jurisdiction is constrained by CICA's definition of an "interested party," which limits protest rights to actual offerors eligible to be awarded a "contract" -- and despite the Revised Circular's attempt to implement the recommendation of the Commercial Activities Panel and recast the government side of an A-76 competition in terms intended to confer standing for government employee representatives -- GAO reasoned that the government's tender offer, even if successful, would not result in the award of a "contract" under CICA and, hence, employee representatives of the government could not be interested parties with standing to protest.
Insights
Client Alert | 5 min read | 08.21.26
FTC Proposes Enforcement Policy Statement on Personalized Pricing: What Businesses Need to Know
On August 19, 2026, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) announced a proposed Enforcement Policy Statement on personalized pricing — the practice of companies using consumers’ personal data to set individualized prices, discounts, coupons, or other incentives. The proposed statement, which is open for public comment for 30 days following publication in the Federal Register, marks a major step up in the FTC’s focus on data-driven pricing strategies and puts businesses across industries on notice that undisclosed or inadequately disclosed personalized pricing will not be tolerated. Importantly, while the proposed statement is not a binding legal requirement and does not create new legal obligations, it serves as an enforcement warning that the FTC is prepared to use its existing enforcement authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act (Section 5) and is also a potential harbinger of rulemaking. Businesses that engage in — or are considering — personalized pricing should carefully assess their disclosure practices and data collection procedures against the standards articulated in this statement.
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.19.26
CMS’s Final Rule Bans Federal Medicaid Funding for Youth Gender-Affirming Care
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.19.26
