(a) ``Principal purpose'' as criterion. Under its terms, the Act
applies to a ``contract * * * the principal purpose of which is to
furnish services * * *.'' If the principal purpose is to provide
something other than services of the character contemplated by the Act
and any such services which may be performed are only incidental to the
performance of a contract for another purpose, the Act does not apply.
However, as will be seen by examining the illustrative examples of
covered contracts in Secs. 4.130 et seq., no hard and fast rule can be
laid down as to the precise meaning of the term principal purpose. This
remedial Act is intended to be applied to a wide variety of contracts,
and the Act does not define or limit the types of services which may be
contracted for under a contract the principal purpose of which is to
furnish services. Further, the nomenclature, type, or particular form of
contract used by procurement agencies is not determinative of coverage.
Whether the principal purpose of a particular contract is the furnishing
of services through the use of service employees is largely a question
to be determined on the basis of all the facts in each particular case.
Even where tangible items of substantial value are important elements of
the subject matter of the contract, the facts may show that they are of
secondary import to the furnishing of services in the particular case.
This principle is illustrated by the examples set forth in Sec. 4.131.
(b) Determining whether a contract is for ``services'', generally.
Except indirectly through the definition of service employee the Act
does not define, or limit, the types of services which may be contracted
for under a contract ``the principal purpose of which is to furnish
services''. As stated in the congressional committee reports on the
legislation, the types of service contracts covered by its provisions
are varied. Among the examples cited are contracts for laundry and dry
cleaning, for transportation of the mail, for custodial, janitorial, or
guard service, for packing and crating, for food service, and for
miscellaneous housekeeping services. Covered contracts for services
would also include those for other types of services which may be
performed through the use of the various classes of service employees
included in the definition in section 8(b) of the Act (see Sec. 4.113).
Examples of some such contracts are set forth in Secs. 4.130 et seq. In
determining questions of contract coverage, due regard must be given to
the apparent legislative intent to include generally as contracts for
services those contracts which have as their principal purpose the
procurement of something other than the construction activity described
in the Davis-Bacon Act or the materials, supplies, articles, and
equipment described in the Walsh-Healey Act. The Committee reports in
both the House and Senate, and statements made on the floor of the
House, took note of the labor standards protections afforded by these
two Acts to employees engaged in the performance of construction and
supply contracts and observed: ``The service contract is now the only
remaining category of Federal contracts to which no labor standards
protections apply'' (H. Rept. 948, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 1; see also
S. Rept. 798, 89th Cong., 1st Sess., p. 1; daily Congressional Record,
Sept. 20, 1965, p. 23497). A similar understanding of contracts
principally for services as embracing contracts other than those for
construction or supplies is reflected in the statement of President
Johnson upon signing the Act (1 Weekly Compilation of Presidential
Documents, p. 428).
