Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”) Section 3610 — Billing and Contractual Relief for Government Contractors When Employees Cannot Work due to the COVID-19 Pandemic
Client Alert | 1 min read | 03.27.20
The Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (“CARES Act”), passed by Congress today, offers relief specifically targeted to federal contractors whose employees (1) cannot perform work on a “site that has been approved by the Federal Government ” during the COVID-19 public health emergency due to facility closures or other restrictions and (2) cannot telework because their job duties cannot be performed remotely. Section 3610 of the CARES Act authorizes agencies to use any available funds to modify affected contracts – without consideration – to reimburse paid leave, including sick leave, that a contractor provides to keep its employees or subcontractors in a ready state. The authorized reimbursements may cover an average of 40 hours per week, “at the minimum applicable contract billing rates.” The maximum reimbursement must be reduced, however, by the amount of any credit the contractor is allowed pursuant to Division G (“Tax Credits for Paid Sick and Paid Family and Medical Leave”) of the recently enacted Families First Coronavirus Response Act, and by any other applicable credits that the contractor is allowed under the CARES Act.
The authorization of this relief is congressional acknowledgement of the critical role that contractors play in supporting the federal government and the need to ensure the availability of that support going forward. However, the CARES Act grants authority rather than mandating relief, which could lead to inconsistent application among various agencies. Affected contractors should watch for any forthcoming agency guidance and be prepared to educate government customers about this Congressional authorization.
Please Join Us for a Government Contracts Webinar
Contacts
Partner
She/Her/Hers
Insights
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.16.24
Over the past several years, federal courts have increasingly questioned the authority of administrative law judges (ALJs) to adjudicate alleged violations of certain labor and employment statutes. In the last several weeks, two U.S. district courts in Texas issued decisions halting unfair labor practice proceedings before the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) on the grounds that NLRB ALJs lack the constitutional authority to preside over such actions due to unconstitutional protections against their removal.[1] Similarly, the last year has seen several decisions by courts in the Fifth and Eleventh Circuits finding that ALJs, whose decisions are not reviewable by a Presidential appointee, lack constitutional authority under the Appointments Clause to adjudicate claims.[2] The trend illustrated by these decisions, combined with the Supreme Court’s decision in June to abandon the Chevron doctrine of extending deference to federal agency rule-making proceedings, portend significant changes in the way employers interact with federal agencies that enforce labor and employment law.
Client Alert | 2 min read | 08.15.24
Department of Defense Plans Increased Investment in Clean Energy
Client Alert | 7 min read | 08.15.24
