From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_05,FREEMAIL_FROM,
	FROM_STARTS_WITH_NUMS,INVALID_DATE autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
	version=3.4.4
Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!linac!att!ucbvax!CompuServe.COM!71660.412
From: 71660.412@CompuServe.COM (Eric C Aker)
Newsgroups: comp.lang.ada
Subject: A morals question?
Message-ID: <"910520033903.71660.412.CHE77-1"@CompuServe.COM>
Date: 20 May 91 03:39:03 GMT
Sender: daemon@ucbvax.BERKELEY.EDU
Organization: The Internet
List-Id: <comp.lang.ada>

If I worked for a DoD contractor (which I don't) and that contractor
had a DoD contract (which it doesn't) to do software development (which
it doesn't)... enough disclaimers.....

If the hypothetical contractor got a waiver to do the development work
in C and not Ada, even though there is a validated compiler available, 
and the waiver was gotten on honest but not totally honest terms then
what can I do.

The evidence for the hypothetical waiver was honest and correct but
ever so slightly skewed. What are the repercussions possible to the
company, i.e. could the government review the waiver and changed its
mind if the original evidence had a minor (or major) defect? 

Is there a government office where the hypothetical company could be
reported to for examination of violation of the Ada mandate?

Disclaimer.
Only a hypothetical case as there is no DoD contractor that I know of
that would even for one minute think of trying to avoid the Ada mandate
by getting a waiver for anything other than a very valid reason.

How does a person not get fired after making a claim against such a
hypothetical company doing such a hypothetical thing?