1. The subject of the contract is: Organization and conduct of a course entitled "Basics of programming and operation of CNC machine tools - lathe and milling machine" for students from the Electrical School Complex in Opole - as part of the project entitled "Opole vocational education for the labor market - 2" (sub-measure 9.2.1 RPO WO for the years 2014 - 2020), co-financed by the European Union under the European Social Fund.
2. A detailed description and manner of execution of the order shall be provided with the Description of the Subject of the Order, annex 1A to SWZ.
1. A detailed description and method of performance of the contract is contained in the description of the subject of the contract constituting Annex 1A to the SWZ.
2. The aim of the course is to master the basics of operation and programming of two-axis and three-axis cutting machines (turning + milling) and to learn the principle of correct interpretation of technical drawings, use and selection of measuring tools, to the extent that allows independent work in this area.
3. The cycle of classes within the course should include at least 66 lesson hours (45 minutes each) in the theoretical and practical part.
4. Course completion date: within 150 days from the date of signing the contract.
5. Number of participants directed to the course
- Minimum 30 students
- Maximum 42 students.
6. Employment requirements on the basis of an employment relationship, in the circumstances referred to in Article 95 of the PPL Act:
The Ordering Party does not require employment by the Contractor or Subcontractor on the basis of the employment relationship of persons performing activities in the scope of contract performance because the implementation of the subject of the contract does not consist in performing work in the manner specified in Article 22 § 1 of the Act of 26 June 1974 - Labor Code (Journal of Laws of 2022, item 1510, as amended), hereinafter referred to as the Labor Code. According to Article 22 § 1 of the Labour Code, "By entering into an employment relationship, an employee undertakes to perform work of a certain type for and under the direction of the employer and at a place and time designated by the employer, and the employer - to employ the employee for remuneration".
Pursuant to Article 95 of the PPL Act, the Contracting Authority specifies in the contract notice or service procurement documents the requirements related to the performance of the contract in the scope of employment by the Contractor or Subcontractor on the basis of the employment relationship of persons performing the activities indicated by the Ordering Party in the scope of contract performance, if the performance of these activities consists in performing work in the manner specified in Article 22 § 1 of the Labour Code.
Due to the specificity of the subject of the contract, the Ordering Party is not able to clearly indicate the type of activities whose performance would have the characteristics of work within the meaning of Article 22 § 1. Labour Code; thus, the Ordering Party does not specify: the method of verifying the employment of these persons and the ordering party's rights to control the Contractor's compliance with the requirements related to the employment of these persons and sanctions for failure to meet these requirements.
The Contracting Authority will not apply the requirements set out in Article 95(1) of the PPL Act in conjunction with Article 22§ 1 of the Labour Code (in the scope of employment by the Contractor or Subcontractor on the basis of the employment relationship of persons performing the activities indicated by the Ordering Party in the scope of the contract), because the planned scope of services provided under the contract does not require the employment of persons under the employment relationship.
7. The Ordering Party does not allow the possibility of submitting partial offers.
8. Reasons for not dividing the contract into lots in accordance with Article 91(2) of the PPL:
- The subject of the contract is a functional and inseparable whole. Dividing the contract into lots would risk excessive technical difficulties and excessive costs of performing the contract. In addition, the lack of division of the contract into lots is justified by organisational reasons. A possible division of the contract could seriously jeopardise the proper performance of the contract and the need to coordinate the activities of the different contractors performing the different parts of the contract could jeopardise the correct and timely performance of the contract. The failure to divide the contract in question into lots does not distort competition and does not restrict the possibility of smaller entities, in particular small and medium-sized enterprises, to apply for the contract.