Query regarding Section 3 of Circular No. 01-2008

View previous topic View next topic Go down

Query regarding Section 3 of Circular No. 01-2008

Post by advocacy on Tue Mar 20, 2012 5:27 pm

I have a query regarding Section 3 of Circular No. 01-2008 of the Government Procurement Policy Board (GPPB) dated March 7, 2008. In particular, I seek clarification regarding the following:

“As a general policy, imposition of additional eligibility or technical documents is discouraged because it increases transaction cost and reduces competition. Thus, the additional requirements for bidders to submit clearances from DOLE, SSS, PhilHealth, or Pag-IBIG as part of their eligibility or technical should be restrained.

XXX

In lieu of the above requirements, however, and in keeping with the policy of ensuring compliance with labor laws and other social legislation, the procuring entity may, during post-qualification, verify, validate and ascertain the statements made by a bidder in its certificate under oath that it complies with existing labor laws and standards. Specifically, the procuring entity may verify whether the bidder –

3.1.1. Complies with the minimum wage mandated by law;
3.1.2. Regularly remits mandated premiums to SSS, PhilHealth, and Pag-IBIG; or
3.1.3. Has been finally adjudged by a court of competent jurisdication to have violated any labor law or social legislation.

Non-compliance with any one of the above shall be a ground to declare the bidder as ‘post-disqualified.’”

It is on this final part of the circular which I wish to discuss:

1. Does this mean that if a security agency is found guilty by the Supreme Court of a labor case, they are automatically disqualified, and may never join a bidding again? In essence, does this mean that the agency should just fold up and dissolve, since it can no longer acquire new clients because they will be automatically post-disqualified, as per memorandum?

2. If after being found guilty, and the security agency settles the case, will the agency still always be post-disqualified?

3. Since the effectivity of this law is 2008 (the date that the GPPB memorandum was promulgated) does this also apply to cases before 2008? For example, if the case occurred in 2007 or earlier, is that still just cause to have the agency automatically post-disqualified? On this matter, we would like to argue that laws are prospective, and not retroactive in nature, thus it should not apply to cases before 2008. However, we seek clarification regarding this matter from your end.

4. What remedy can agencies seek if they have been finally adjudged by the Supreme Court of violation labor laws?

Thank you.

advocacy
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 13
Company/Agency : PAENCOR
Occupation/Designation : Editor
Registration date : 2012-03-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Query regarding Section 3 of Circular No. 01-2008

Post by alpha1 on Mon Mar 26, 2012 12:41 pm

Good Day!

In my humble understanding, a company who have been found guilty by the Supreme Court or any court of competent jurisdiction for violation of labor laws could still join any government procurement activity provided that it has already complied with the ruling of the court (whatever it is) and have been in compliance with the minimum wage law from there onward, including payments of their PhilHEALTH, SSS and Pag-IBIG contributions.

I hope others will also share their thoughts about this since this is quite an interesting issue to discuss with.


avatar
alpha1
Active Poster
Active Poster

Male Number of posts : 145
Age : 54
Company/Agency : LGU
Occupation/Designation : Department Head
Registration date : 2010-03-12

Back to top Go down

Re: Query regarding Section 3 of Circular No. 01-2008

Post by advocacy on Thu Apr 12, 2012 4:47 pm

I agree with alpha1, as long as the matter has been settled there should no longer be any cause to disqualify the bidder.

advocacy
New Member
New Member

Male Number of posts : 13
Company/Agency : PAENCOR
Occupation/Designation : Editor
Registration date : 2012-03-20

Back to top Go down

Re: Query regarding Section 3 of Circular No. 01-2008

Post by Sponsored content


Sponsored content


Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

 
Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum