Major Issues in Employment and Labor Laws - Essay Example

Final exam Question First, Mr. Johnny should be aware of the legal environment surrounding contracts. In America, the Miller At of 1938 and Small Business Act (SBA) section 8(d) guarantee the protection of the subcontractors. The Miller Act of 1938 confers legal support to the subcontractors, to bring a civil lawsuit against the prime contractors. Evidently, this provision is binding in case of payment default. On the same note, the contract to which The Johnny Jones Flooring and Construction Company is subcontracted lie within the limits of the Miller Act protection. The contract value is $2,000,000. Therefore, the company can use the Miller Act as a legal entry point (Cihon, Patrick and Castagnera 110). Mr. Johnny should be aware that the Miller Act primarily minimizes the difficulties that subcontractors encounter in claiming payments from the prime contractors. Furthermore, the Contract Disputes Act waivers government indebtedness only to lawsuits involving contracts to which government is part, not subcontractors. The Johnny Johns flooring company has the option of seeking payment under the Miller Act and section 8(d) or the Small Business Protection Act. It is also worthwhile that the Prompt Payment Act provides immunity to subcontractor’s payments on government contracts. The Act obliges the federal agencies to include a clause in the contract that imposes the prime contractor to remit payments to the subcontractors for “satisfactory” performance in the contract within seven days of their receiving payments from the contract owner. In the event, that the flooring company fails to verify the provision of the commitment clause, they have no legal provision to sue the government or the contractor under the Prompt Payment Act. Question 2 Intellectual property rights are creations including inventions, literary and arts, designs, symbols as well as images used in commerce. The Property rights are regulated to enable the owners obtain recognition and financial benefits from their creations. The rights balance between the interest of the innovators and that of the wider public to ensure an environment in which innovation flourishes. Under the United States Copyright law, the designer of any file retains the ownership of the property rights, but the client acquires the ownership of the end product. In this case, United States Air Force is the customer and the ITI Inc. the designer . Therefore, the United States Air Force owns the new command and control system developed by ITI Inc. However, the Corporation retains ownership of the technology used in the development of the control system (Cihon,Patrick and Castagnera 158). The copyright can only be temporarily transferred to the United States Air Force at some negotiated fee, but the innovation solely remains under the patency of the developer. Such an innovation is referred to as “Work for Hire.” Therefore, all electronic files established during the process of assembly within the premises remain the property of the Corporation. The client can display this work for portfolio or self-promotional purposes only with the express written approval of the Corporation. Unless the Army filed the application for the command and control system first, the developer retains the copyright and can use it without the consent of the Air Force as provided by the Patent Reform; America Invents Act (Cihon, Patrick and Castagnera 98). Question 3: Contracts are regulated by the terms of engagement between the contractor and the employer. In the contract engagement, termination provisions are stipulated as at the time of signing the contract. The termination clause provides a “cause” to be prevailing preceding termination of a contract. In the case of Ronald J. Sparrow, he committed to complete the contract within a schedule of six months though at a lower payment bid. In essence, this formed the binding agreement between him and the Department of the Interior. Failure to accomplish contract within schedule could attract the termination, due to default. Default Termination of American contracts by American state agencies are motivated by failure, actual or anticipatory, that the contractor could fail to satisfy the obligations as stipulated in the contract. On the other hand, termination for convenience of a state agency is due to varied reasons such as the obsoleteness of the goods and services. Termination clauses stipulate the obligations of each party involved in a contract. Ronald J. Sparrow had the duty to finish the contract within schedule while the Department of the Interior had the obligation to pay as agreed. The termination of the contract between his company and the Department of Interior is conceivably Termination due to default. This form of termination implies contract termination due to various breaches of the contract on the side of the contractor (Cihon, Patrick and Castagnera 163). The contractor is liable for loss of unpaid dues and must repay any advanced payments made to him. In the case of Ronald, the termination of the contract occurred before the lapse of the agreed contract lifespan; nonetheless the existing conditions pointed to a possible delay in contract completion. Certainly, this implies that there was a “cause” to qualify it as termination due to default. Termination for default must be based on an identifiable “cause.” In order for the government to prevail in defending a termination for default, it must establish that the termination of the contract due to default prior to the contract completion date was proper and correct. In the case of Ronald, it was preemptive yet justifiable that his company could not complete the work on time. On cases of arbitrary terminations, the contractor is eligible to appeal as provided by the Disputes clause in the contract. If Ronal wins the appeal, he can get the contract upheld but if he loses the case, he can apply for a cost reimbursement claim commensurate with the part of the job completed. Question 4 Allocation of contracts in America is done on a competitive basis. The Federal Trade Commission provides for the fair distribution of contracts based on merit. Some of the important considerations for the allocation of contracts in America constitutes franchise disclosure, notice and regulations, business prospect, nonrenewal, and a large number of special industry laws. In addition, it is the obligation of the state agency to allocate contracts based on a competitive process. The American supreme law protects the single sourcing of strategic goods and services such as military equipment. However, the Small Business Protection Act, on the other hand, provides for the fair treatment of competing businesses in a free market (Cihon, Patrick and Castagnera 117). With sufficient evidence, Wayne Reliford, of Reliford food services have the discretion to challenge the contract allocation in the federal courts. The United States Department of Agriculture is in charge of the distribution of food in America. The termination of the allegedly irregular contract is based on a proper assessment of the Franchise Rule, which is any continuing commercial affiliation or arrangement. Question 5 The disciplined forces in America are regulated by the military Acts that obliges the officers to consider the interests of the people they serve supreme to individual interests. Lieutenant Commander Ace Ventura reserve the civil right to engage in various employments, but the oath of military discipline limits the expression of will to abandon the Navy any time. Even though he is contracted from retirement, he owes allegiance to the employer that is the Navy. On the other hand, Ace enjoys the security of the state in which he holds the position of a commander from retirement (Cihon, Patrick and Castagnera 127). Shifting to a new job in the Navy implies forfeiting the privileges accruing from his current employment. It is only conceivable that in standard practice that shifting to new jobs be motivated by the better terms of employment guaranteed by the new employer. In this case, Lieutenant Commander Ace Ventura is interested in shifting to the new work by virtue of self-interest that is unethical in the military profession (Cihon, Patrick and Castagnera 161). However, he reserves the right to ask for a voluntary termination of the contract with the. However, he must apply for the cessation of the agreement using the due process as stipulated in the terms. Work Cited Cihon, Patrick and Castagnera, James Ottavio, Employment and Labor Law. South-Western Pub, 2008. Print Read More