No! As a former employee of ACC responsible for making key project decisions, Joan cannot immediately go to work for an ACC contractor working on the same project she was directly and personally involved with as an ACC employee.

Two factors disqualify her. (1) Working on a matter in which she was directly concerned with and personally participated in as an employee. And (2), working on a matter in which, as an employee, she was responsible for making decisions that were material and substantial--that is, important to the project. (A.R.S. Section 38-504-A)

It does not matter whether Joan was a full-time, part-time, or contract employee. The prohibition applies across the board.

NOTE: Another prohibition may arise out of this situation.The law says that during employment--and for two years after it--Joan may not disclose or use for personal profit, without authorization, information acquired during her ACC employment that is designated as confidential or is declared confidential by law. In other words, Joan can't take information that is designated as "confidential" by ACC or by law, and use it to her benefit. (ARS Section 38-504-B)

So, the law doesn't stop Joan from taking a job with IBM. She just can't take one working on the same project that she did for ACC and she can't reveal confidential information for certain periods of time.

No, Penny may not approve the requisition. Because her half-brother owns an interest in a company whose name is on the requisition, she cannot approve it. By law, Penny's interest in the contract with PowerBuilders is a "substantial interest," as defined by law.

Penny must completely remove herself from making any decision relating to the requisition or the contract that results. She must also declare her interest in the "official record" of ACC before the contract for the services is signed. That basically means disclosing the interest in writing and placing it in a central file maintained as a repository for conflict-of-interest disclosures. Penny must refer the requisition to someone else to approve. (ARS Section 38-503-A and B)

Click here for a "Disclosure of Substantial Interest" form.

No. Despite the fact that the dollar amount of the expenditures is small, Ron's sister-in-law and brother are "relatives" within the law's definition. Any commitment to pay those relatives results in Ron having a "substantial interest" in the matter due to his relationship to the people.

Ron must let someone else make the decision to hire either of those people for student activities. He must also disclose his conflict of interest and that dislosure must be placed in a central file and retained. (ARS Section 38-503-A and B)

No. Since Marla has a financial interest in that decision, she must complete the Disclosure of Substantial Interest form and let someone else (like the department chair or a dean) make that decision. (ARS Section 38-503-B) Additionally, with MCCCD, the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs should approve instances in which a faculty member uses his or her own text.

No. Payment of the fee to Henry would create a conflict of interest prohibited by law. Any ACC employee may not receive compensation, either directly of indirectly, from someone other than ACC for any services that he or she is personally responsible for providing as an employee. Here, Henry is responsible for selecting texts for his students as part of his job as a faculty member. He may not accept any outside compensation connected to those decisions or activities. (ARS Section 38-505)

No. Alice may not use her position to gain a valuable benefit that isn't normally available to her in her job, particularly where the benefit would improperly influence her in selecting hotels for her programs. (A.R.S. Section 38-504-C)

Yes. By law, ACC can cancel the contract without any penalty or further obligation. That's because Joe was significantly involved in negotiating the contract on behalf of ACC, but turned around during the contract and became an employee of the other party to it--DBA. Basically, the law authorizes ACC to cancel the contract when an ACC employee switches employers like Joe did. It applies to any employee who was materially involved in initiating, negotiating, securing, drafting or creating the contract on ACC's behalf. (ARS Section 38-511-A)

If Joe became a consultant for DBA--not an employee--the result would be different. The law does not apply if the former ACC employee--one who was materially involved as described above--becomes a consultant of the ACC contractor on some matter other than the contract between that contractor and ACC.