b'Help Wanted: APlaying Field for All Level Continued from page 3 expenses andthe2%ofthat"These requirementsmanufactureradefendants, theOCF-JMfights judgments in event litigation arises regard company\'smonthtowere as politea are not intended toasSunday School ing application ortotalrootingattempttofur picnic. performance ofroofing system.product saleslimit competition.nishIdoc Thecommandmentsthat thealthe C)Aof insurance torin any of theumen tationappearcontrol the aggressive, certificateThe intent of theseto product liability with minimumlastfive(5)necessary to bidbut restrictive, marketing tactics of limits in accordance with theyears.requirements is totheproject. Inthe Troika may be summarized as following formula:F) Ifsupplierthereal world,follows: the 1.Liability Insuranceisasub establish the qualityo entimesO Thoushall write proprietary Productftequal to orthan onesidiaryofthere are only aspecs and create an appeargreaterofsubstitute any halfthe last three (3) fis another cor fewdaysance of fairness to ensure no of cal yearsaverageannualporation,aproduct or methodbetweenthecompetition"breaks"these sales.chartdia noticeoftherighteously closed with the standardspecs. 2. For purposes ofcalcula gramming theproject bidding@Verily Iif aitor thissay,compet has tion,wouldsuminter-com product/methodand the pre-bid.theaudacity tobreak those salesbe the of the sales for all entitiespany But ofrse,"closed specs" or to begin a relation couships back tospecified.for those of uscompetingbusiness,thou coveredbytheinsurance" policy or.theparentwhothinkthisshall surelytheir shorts off policies sue 3.dollarcoverage(nocompany.Ifmass of paper isand/or institute as much legal First self-insuredretentionorthe supplier isDon\'t know aboutgeared to elimi harassmentaspossibleto deductibles).independent,natecompeti bullyy competing manufacyou, but Ian4. Coverage provided by anastatementcertainlytion, thereis aturer,roofing contractor,ex-admitted company licensedthat the sup feel comforted.clarificationon to do business (State) withplier is not apage six of the an A. B. Best rating of11say,a subsidiary ofabove documentVerily Iif A, or better.another companybe sub to assure us that thissimply not mustiscompetitor has the D)Anaffidavit signed bycorpo mitted.the case. a rate officer stating that they areG)Consideration will be given"These requirements are notaudacity to break not currently,nor have beenonly to those materials and/orintended to limit competition.those "closed specs" within the last five (5) years,systemsthathavebeenTheintent of these requireinvolved in litigation regardingapproved prior toor on thements is to establish the qual orto begin a theiranyproduct asbestos content ofmate scheduled pre-bid date.ity ofsubstituteor rials.If all required items are notmethodwiththestandardcompeting business, E)An affidavit signed bycorpo present in submittal envelope, theproduct/methodspecified.thou shall surely sue a rate officerthe cost ofbid will be marked non-respon Also,itwill giveanequal thatwarranty claims has not exceededsive and quotation envelope willopportunity to all contractorstheir shorts off notopened and read into theto bidapproved substitute beanand/institute as or product/method ifsubstiany I,\\record.Ging.tute is approved."much legal 1Itemis rather interest"Ir7Inadditiontothe six-typed ~harassment as ___ ~ ( / pagesofrequirements,Don\'t know about you,but I .__ s.,,there is also (item G) acertainlylpossible to bully any ~fee comforted. .-=1~l:s-_?lfl~::,lt~~=itime constraint obsta- It appears that in at least onecompeting __. cle. Itother area, these three companies would ::probably take aare three peas from the same pod.manufacturer, F-;.:::::=2;;-::::.___,.competingThis is thelegalarena. At one weroofing contractor, ~~~d~timebelieved that old OCF-JMex-employee, or a ,(/\'w,/ ~~competitive warsin the 1970\'s -G:11were rough, but compared to the ){:~\\ ~Ilegaleoth compa school district intor 1-,e,T nieswarfar these threeothermeek submission. wage on eacher, their exemployees,andvarious 4'