Recent OFCCP Activity Signals Greater Transparency and Collaboration for Federal Contractors

01 October 2018 Labor & Employment Law Perspectives Blog
Authors: Carmen N. Decot (Couden)

In response to town hall meetings held late last year, the OFCCP has taken a number of actions geared toward addressing some of the contractor concerns discussed during those meetings. In particular, several of the directives and other publications issued by the OFCCP in recent months signal the OFCCP’s intent to provide greater transparency with respect to its auditing and enforcement efforts and reflect a more collaborative mindset than contractors have seen during the past decade.

For instance, on September 19, 2018, following the release of its latest round of Corporate Scheduling Audit Letters (CSALs) (courtesy notifications to establishments selected for a compliance evaluation), the OFCCP for the first time publicly published lists containing the names and addresses of contractors selected to receive CSALs in 2017 and 2018. Although CSAL lists have previously been available only via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, the OFCCP has indicated it will now publish the lists because they are “frequently requested” and are “not covered under any of the FOIA exemptions.” The CSAL lists for FY 2017 and FY 2018, as well as the FY 2018 CSAL Supplement, can all be found in the OFCCP’s online FOIA library.

Additionally, on September 20, 2018, the OFCCP issued Directive 2018-08, Transparency in OFCCP Compliance Activities. According to the OFCCP, Directive 2018-08 is designed to “to ensure transparency in all stages of OFCCP compliance activities to help contractors comply with their obligations and know what to expect during a compliance evaluation, and to protect workers from discrimination through consistent enforcement of OFCCP legal authorities.” Directive 2018-08 highlights the various steps taken by the OFCCP so far this year to improve “transparency, cooperation, and communication” with federal contractors, including:

  • Implementation of a 45-day scheduling delay following issuance of Corporate Scheduling Announcement Letters to provide contractors more time to prepare for an audit and participate in regional compliance assistance events, if desired;
  • Publication of the OFCCP’s scheduling methodology for supply and service contractors on the agency’s website;
  • Release of Directive 2018-01, Use of Predetermination Notices, which requires the OFCCP to issue predetermination notices and provide contractors an opportunity to respond to potential violation findings before issuing a formal Notice of Violation; and
  • Release of “What Federal Contractors Can Expect,” which sets forth the OFCCP’s commitment to “clear, accurate, and professional interactions” in carrying out compliance assistance, compliance evaluations, and complaint investigations.

Directive 2018-08 also sets forth the procedures that will be used by the OFCCP during the scheduling, pre-desk audit, desk audit, pre-onsite, offsite, and conciliation phases of a compliance evaluation. Among other things, these procedures provide for a one-time 30-day extension to provide supporting data (not AAPs) to the OFCCP, regular contact from the OFCCP (at least once every 30 days) during the review, completion of “typical” desk audits (where there are no indicators of discrimination or evidence of other violations) within 45 days of receiving complete and acceptable AAPs and supporting data, and collaborative conciliation discussions focused on innovative remedies.

In addition to Directive 2018-08, the OFCCP has released a number of other directives, as well as a memorandum of understanding, focused on transparency, collaboration, and greater clarity for contractors regarding the OFCCP’s auditing and enforcement procedures. These include:

  • Directive 2018-04, Focused Reviews of Contractor Compliance with Executive Order 11246, Section 503, and VEVRAA, which states that a portion of future scheduling lists will include “focused reviews” in which the OFCCP will go onsite and conduct a review of the particular authority (i.e., E.O. 11246, VEVRAA, or Section 503) at issue and directs OFCCP staff to develop a standard protocol for conducting such reviews, along with a neutral system to select contractors for review;
  • Directive 2018-05, Analysis of Contractor Compensation Practices During a Compliance Evaluation, which rescinds the OFCCP’s prior compensation directive (commonly referred to as Directive 307), details the specific method the OFCCP will use to conduct compensation analyses, and allows contractors to provide information regarding their “compensation hierarchy and job structure” for consideration in connection with the OFCCP’s analyses;
  • Directive 2018-06, Contractor Recognition Program, which establishes a program to “recognize contractors with high-quality and high-performing compliance programs and initiatives” and reward contractors who are “innovative thought leaders among their peers for achieving diverse and inclusive workplaces;”
  • Directive 2018-09, OFCCP Ombud Service, which describes the OFCCP’s planned national Ombud Service and sets forth the anticipated role ombudsmen will play in future interactions between the OFCCP and contractors; and
  • Memorandum of Understanding Between OFCCP and the National Industry Liaison Group (NILG), pursuant to which the OFCCP and NILG have committed to meet regularly and partner on improving contractor education and training, helping contractors comply with the OFCCP’s regulations, and minimizing the cost of compliance for contractors.

Together, these actions emphasize a kinder, gentler approach from the OFCCP. However, this does not mean that contractors can become lax with respect to their compliance obligations; to the contrary, with the new information and insight provided by the OFCCP, contractors should take steps now to make any necessary changes and ensure a smooth path going forward.

This blog is made available by Foley & Lardner LLP (“Foley” or “the Firm”) for informational purposes only. It is not meant to convey the Firm’s legal position on behalf of any client, nor is it intended to convey specific legal advice. Any opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily reflect the views of Foley & Lardner LLP, its partners, or its clients. Accordingly, do not act upon this information without seeking counsel from a licensed attorney. This blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. Communicating with Foley through this website by email, blog post, or otherwise, does not create an attorney-client relationship for any legal matter. Therefore, any communication or material you transmit to Foley through this blog, whether by email, blog post or any other manner, will not be treated as confidential or proprietary. The information on this blog is published “AS IS” and is not guaranteed to be complete, accurate, and or up-to-date. Foley makes no representations or warranties of any kind, express or implied, as to the operation or content of the site. Foley expressly disclaims all other guarantees, warranties, conditions and representations of any kind, either express or implied, whether arising under any statute, law, commercial use or otherwise, including implied warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, title and non-infringement. In no event shall Foley or any of its partners, officers, employees, agents or affiliates be liable, directly or indirectly, under any theory of law (contract, tort, negligence or otherwise), to you or anyone else, for any claims, losses or damages, direct, indirect special, incidental, punitive or consequential, resulting from or occasioned by the creation, use of or reliance on this site (including information and other content) or any third party websites or the information, resources or material accessed through any such websites. In some jurisdictions, the contents of this blog may be considered Attorney Advertising. If applicable, please note that prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Photographs are for dramatization purposes only and may include models. Likenesses do not necessarily imply current client, partnership or employee status.

Related Services

Insights

RCE PTA Carve-Out Resumes After Interference
18 September 2019
PharmaPatents
The Ninth Circuit Expected to Rule that Doctors Can Be Wrong in the Winter v. Gardens False Claims Act Case
18 September 2019
Legal News: Government Enforcement Defense & Investigations
Upcoming Webinar: Maximizing Solar Tax Credits - Navigating the Start of Construction Rules (Part 1)
17 September 2019
Renewable Energy Outlook
When Birds Finally Find a Nest
17 September 2019
Dashboard Insights
Lacktman, Ferrante Cited in mHealth Intelligence About Ryan Haight Act
19 September 2019
mHealth Intelligence
Tinnen Discusses How Viewpoint Diversity Helps Businesses Thrive
18 September 2019
InsideTrack
Vernaglia Comments on AHA v Azar Decision
18 September 2019
MedPage Today
Lach Comments on Launch of New Group
16 September 2019
BizTimes Milwaukee
MedTech Impact Expo & Conference
13-15 December 2019
Las Vegas, NV
Review of 2020 Medicare Changes for Telehealth
11 December 2019
Member Call
BRG Healthcare Leadership Conference
06 December 2019
Washington, D.C.
CTeL Telehealth Fall Summit 2019
04-06 December 2019
Washington, D.C.