How Should a PM Handle New Contractor Legislation Over Budget?

A project is running over budget, and due to new legislation in the country, the company needs to release all its contractors on the project or hire them as full-time employees. Which of the following should the PM do NEXT to comply with the new legislation?

Use only full-time employees even if the project is delayed. Source Reference Answer
Hire all team members to avoid any delay in the project.
Close the contract and pay the contractors cash for the remainder of the project.
Look for an overseas vendor to finalize the project work.

Community Votes

60%

20%

60% of anonymous learners picked answer A. Votes are pick records left by other test-takers — they are not the verified answer.

Community Insight

Tests regulatory compliance prioritization over schedule or budget optimization, with the common trap being the temptation to choose options that maintain timeline or cost at the expense of legal adherence.

This question tests how project managers must adapt to regulatory changes while managing budget constraints. The community consensus strongly supports transitioning contractors to full-time roles to ensure legal compliance, even at the cost of schedule delays.

Option C is frequently chosen because it appears to honor existing financial agreements, but closing contracts early without proper procurement procedures violates compliance protocols and may trigger legal penalties rather than resolve them.

Community Discussion (4 comments)

044f354 👍 1 Selected: A

Which of the following should the PM do NEXT to comply with the new legislation? A. Use only full-time employees even if the project is delayed. [CORRECT] PM should simply incorporate the legislation into day-to-day practices. B. Hire all team members to avoid any delay in the project. Hiring is a company/HR decision, not the PM. C. Close the contract and pay the contractors cash for the remainder of the project. Paying cash appears to be unethical and an attempt to circumvent the new legislation. D. Look for an overseas vendor to finalize the project work. Appears to circumvent the intent of the legislation, and would likely cause compliance issues.

Jorgee214 👍 2 Selected: A

Another CompTIA question that gets you with its wording.. I chose A with this reasoning. "Project is over budget... Country's las requires release or hire on full-time" Answer B & D requires more budget which will goes against the already over budget. B being a possibility, however I am thinking if you contract out work its temporary and cheaper in the short run (long run includes payroll, medical, etc..) C: implies paying the contractors "under the table" to complete the project which will never be an option. A is the only option in my opinion that complies with legislation, and the already over budget constraint. Note: it does not state whether the CCB will approve more funding to hire more individuals nor allow it to extend the timeline so just based off the information provided in the question A was the only conclusion I was able to come up with.

gorilla2001 👍 1 Selected: C

This option ensures compliance with the new legislation while also honoring the existing contracts with the contractors. Paying out the remainder of the contract allows the project to proceed in a legal and ethical manner, avoiding any complications that could arise from non-compliance.

MACC357 👍 1 Selected: B

In order to avoind delays and obey the laws it would be in the best interest of the PM to hire all team member and keep the project party going without delay.

Comments & Corrections

No comments yet — spotted an error or have a note? Share it below.

Expert Analysis

Why the Answer Is Correct

Option A correctly prioritizes statutory compliance over secondary project constraints like budget or schedule. When new legislation mandates a change in employment status, the project manager must immediately align resources with the law, even if it means accepting schedule slippage. As noted in the community discussions, incorporating regulatory requirements into daily operations takes precedence over short-term financial metrics [2]. This approach ensures the organization avoids fines, audits, or forced project termination.

Why the Other Options Are Wrong

Option B shifts the decision to human resources rather than addressing the immediate procurement compliance requirement, making it an incorrect next step for the PM. Option C suggests prematurely terminating contracts and issuing direct payments, which bypasses formal procurement processes and may violate labor laws regarding contractor classification. Option D attempts to circumvent domestic regulations by outsourcing overseas, which does not address the core compliance issue and introduces additional supply chain risks.

Community Comment Notes

Several candidates initially hesitated between A and C due to the budget constraint mentioned in the scenario [1]. Comment [2] clarifies that hiring decisions are typically handled by HR, leaving contract compliance as the PM’s immediate responsibility. Others incorrectly favored option B to protect the timeline, overlooking that regulatory mandates override schedule optimization goals [4]. The voting distribution reflects a strong understanding that compliance cannot be traded for cost or speed savings.

Exam Strategy

Always prioritize legal and regulatory compliance over schedule or budget constraints in project management scenarios. When faced with conflicting priorities, identify whether the question specifies a mandatory external requirement, as statutory obligations typically supersede internal performance targets.

Related Analysis

Practice All PK0-005 Questions

Access 102 questions with complete answers and detailed explanations.

View Full PK0-005 Practice Test →

← Back to PK0-005 Study Guide