Ethics Advisory Opinions 3
Procurement Integrity 3
Advisory by a Government Employee 3
Kickbacks to Government Employees 4
Issuing Out an Opinion 4
Possible or Actual Violation of the Subsection 5
Making Appearances and Communication 6
EthicsAdvisory Opinions Procurement Integrity
Stateofficers and employees are supposed to comply with provisionsregarding resuming their participation in procurement matters. TheGovernment officers and staff might not be restored for involvementin procurement issue that affects the economic interests of peoplewho are seeking employment. Similarly, a government contractor issupposed to exercise caution when engaging in discussions withregards to employment in the government. This is because thenegotiations are referred to any discussions which are mutuallyconducted with a goal of reaching an agreement. The deal underconsideration is that of possible employment. The discussions do notnecessarily require a formality of the offer. Besides, governmentofficials and employees of certain entities are not allowed toparticipate in a personal capacity in matters in which the governmentemployee, spouse, their children or the organization which they serveand are having a financial interest. The exception is only underlimited circumstances [ CITATION Cor161 l 1033 ].
Advisoryby a Government Employee
Anyformer or current official of any State agency who is not aware ofthe regulations governing their actions whether they are precluded ornot is advised to stay away from taking any payment from a serviceprovider who requests any advice from an ethics agency official. Anyrequest for advisory opinions needs to be in writing. This includesgiving the relevant information which is available. The views shouldbe made in writing by the governmental officials or former staffmember and further needs to be signed and dated [ CITATION Mar11 l 1033 ].
Ifno complete knowledge can be given in the request, the agency’sexecutive needs to ask the person seeking information to give more ofit. He/she can go and find more information from another individualor organization. This includes the source authority with mandates toprovide the information or from an immediate supervisor of the persontasked with giving it [ CITATION And14 l 1033 ].
Kickbacks to GovernmentEmployees
Contractorswho are recruiting any employee of the government need to consider asto whether the worker’s role has a limitation on his ability tohave a discussion on the employment opportunity the contractor iswilling to offer. The current government employees are not allowed toparticipate at an individual level in the procurement of contractswhich exceed the sum of $100,000. A contractor who is engaginghimself with a government employee while knowing that he/she is notin a legal position to comply with the regulations would be heldliable and can face the severe penalties as stipulated [ CITATION Cor161 l 1033 ].
IssuingOut an Opinion
Whenissuing out an opinion, the involved agency official needs to rely onthe accurate information which is only given by a requester.Information provided by an applicant is deemed to be reliable unlessthe person who is in need of it believes it has been altered and thusmisleading, incorrect or even fraudulent. Whereby the requester hasbeen advised in writing by an official of the agency that notes thathe/she is allowed to accept compensation originating from aparticular contractor the payment should be accepted in good faith independence on the consultative view. The written document eliminatesany liability from both the contractor and the government employeeand will not be viewed to have violated the Act [ CITATION Cor161 l 1033 ].
Possibleor Actual Violation of the Subsection
Ifa contractor or requester is knowledgeable of reasons to considerthat the written judgement is based on fraudulent, misleading, andinappropriate information from which the dependence of the opinionwill be considered that it was not done in good faith. A contractorwho obtains or receives information on possible or definitedefilement of the subsection is required to determine if possible oractual violation has an influence towards the pending selection orawarding to the service provider. If a contractor determines thatthere is no impact by the possible or actual defilement with regardsto the procurement process, he or she is further obliged to forwardany sensitive information together with the available and necessarydocumentation which supports the willpower that there is no effect onthe procurement. Such information should be forwarded to theindividual designated to receive the same in accordance with theagency`s procedures [ CITATION Cor161 l 1033 ].
Allgovernment contractors are often known to have acquired prized humancapital since they hire former federal agencies and governmentemployees who are highly skilled, trained and experienced. However,as per stipulated rules and regulations, a private contractor beforestarting any discussion on employment while targeting an employee ofthe federal government, such contractors are expected to understandall regulatory and statutory restrictions. They ought to be wellinformed of the possible penalties they may incur as a result ofviolating any of those regulatory and legislative restrictions [ CITATION And14 l 1033 ].
Forgovernment or federal agencies employees who get engaged inparticular procurement activities are not supposed to accept any formof compensation from any contractor interested in any part of theacquisition process where he had dealt with the contractor in lessthan a year. Whether the employee was serving as a selection officer,procurement officer, a member of the source evaluation and selectionboard or even as the head of the assessment team.
Thisis observed whereby the contractor had received a tender award worthover $10 million. Secondly, where the government employee was servingas an administrative officer, program manager or deputy programmanager on a selection committee where the contractor received anaward worth more than 10 million the employee should not accept anycompensation from the contractor. The same is also applicable tothose employees who made decisions to award the contractor underconsideration it may be worth $10 and above. These restrictions,however, do not preclude the compensation made to former employees ofaffiliates or divisions owned by the contractor. This is irrespectiveof whether they produce similar or different goods or service asthose of the contractor [ CITATION Mar11 l 1033 ].
MakingAppearances and Communication
Withregards to some senior former government employees, they are mostlikely to face more restrictions, unlike their low rankingcounterparts. Mostly, the senior governmental employees who includepolitical appointees and the uninformed general officers are oftenrestricted from intentionally making appearances and communicationwith their former agencies. They are not required to get into contactwith the intent of influencing the body for more than one year afterofficially leaving their respective duties. At times, the more seniorones are not expected to make contact for periods of up to two years.However, former employees of the government are allowed to giveadvice and guidance to their counterparts and can provide classifiedand confidential information to them, but they are limited from usingtheir contacts and power to influence any government action [ CITATION Mar11 l 1033 ].
ThoseContractors who are aiming at employing staff can minimize the riskinherent from hiring current or former employees of the federalgovernment by actively advising the potential employees to obtainadvice from the agency counsel. They can also depend on Good faithresulting from the opinions of the advisory ethics that shieldcontractors from any liability that may arise from violating therequirement of the statutory regulations [ CITATION Mar11 l 1033 ].
Cornell University Law School. (2016). Ethics advisory opinions regarding prohibitions on a former official`s acceptance of compensation from a contractor. Retrieved from https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/48/3.104-6
Cuomo, A. M. (2014). 2013 Annual Report. New York.
Twain, M. (2011). Post-Government service employment restrictions.