by: Kathleen M. Williams

A long-awaited decision on the jurisdiction of Department of Labor’s Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs (“OFCCP”) over health care providers was released this week.  The decision, UPMC Braddock v. Seth Harris(Acting Secretary of Labor), by Judge Paul Friedman of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, upholds broad and deep OFCCP jurisdiction – meaning that hospitals and other health care providers will be required to write affirmative action plans, track and report the race and sex of applicants, and be subjected to OFCCP compliance reviews with regard to the three affirmative action laws it enforces: Executive Order 11246; Section 503 the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; and the Vietnam Era Veterans Readjustment Assistance Act.

For years, a significant area of controversy with regard to OFCCP’s jurisdiction over health care providers has centered around the definition of a government “subcontractor.”  The issue in UPMC was whether three hospitals which did not directly contract with the federal government are nonetheless covered subcontractors.  The District Court has now held that those hospitals are covered subcontractors by virtue of their having entered into a contract with UPMC, the insurance carrier for UPMC Health Plan, to provide medical services to FEHBP insureds.

In so holding, the Court:

  • invalidated FEHBP regulations that expressly state that a subcontract to provide medical services is not  a government “subcontract,” holding that FEHBP lacks the authority to define “subcontract” in a way that it at odds with DOL regulations;
  • interpreted “non-personal services” to include medical services;
  • held that contracts with hospitals are “necessary to the performance” of the insurance company’s contract with the federal government, and thus covered government “subcontracts,” (and holding that an HMO, unlike a traditional insurer, contracts with the federal government to provide insurance as well as medical services);
  • held that the consent of the hospitals to become government contractors was not required (a decision in accord with longstanding OFCCP decisions).

This decision is expected to empower the OFCCP to be ever more aggressive in its assertion of jurisdiction over those who provide medical services to government employees and beneficiaries.  Although UPMC deals with hospital agreements with an HMO as opposed to a traditional insurer, the decision is broadly written and may well be held to be more broadly applicable.

For a detailed analysis of the history of OFCCP and the health care industry, see AHLA Connections, Vol. 15, Issue 5, May 2011 (“New Assertions of Jurisdiction by the OFCCP”) and a HEAL Blog post, “More on the Continuing Saga of OFCCP Jurisdiction in the Health Care Field,” posted June 1, 2012.

Back to Health Law Advisor Blog

Search This Blog

Blog Editors

Related Services



Jump to Page


Sign up to receive an email notification when new Health Law Advisor posts are published:

Privacy Preference Center

When you visit any website, it may store or retrieve information on your browser, mostly in the form of cookies. This information might be about you, your preferences or your device and is mostly used to make the site work as you expect it to. The information does not usually directly identify you, but it can give you a more personalized web experience. Because we respect your right to privacy, you can choose not to allow some types of cookies. Click on the different category headings to find out more and change our default settings. However, blocking some types of cookies may impact your experience of the site and the services we are able to offer.

Strictly Necessary Cookies

These cookies are necessary for the website to function and cannot be switched off in our systems. They are usually only set in response to actions made by you which amount to a request for services, such as setting your privacy preferences, logging in or filling in forms. You can set your browser to block or alert you about these cookies, but some parts of the site will not then work. These cookies do not store any personally identifiable information.

Performance Cookies

These cookies allow us to count visits and traffic sources so we can measure and improve the performance of our site. They help us to know which pages are the most and least popular and see how visitors move around the site. All information these cookies collect is aggregated and therefore anonymous. If you do not allow these cookies we will not know when you have visited our site, and will not be able to monitor its performance.