The invention of talking
ICE attribute E3 (I am sure E&Ms will have something similar) requires us to “Demonstrate sound judgement on statutory, contractual and commercial issues in relation to your area of responsibility.”
On completion of AER 1 I was naïve enough to believe I understood enough and could crack on with “doing stuff”. It turns out I was wrong (Neil – one for you).
There is loads of other, seemingly small, stuff that you need to understand to really appreciate the commercial implications of what happens on site.
On my site we’re just 6 weeks in and our sub-contractor (PCH) is over 2 weeks behind schedule. According to their recovery schedule they should be pouring the first section of the basement raft slab on Monday. That won’t happen. Primarily because they still haven’t ordered the top rebar, let alone had it delivered or fixed it. PCH is staring down the barrel of a non-conformance report which looks very bad for the company. So naturally they’re looking everywhere to find someone else to blame. Therefore we (the main contractor) must ensure we’re whiter than white. We cannot be made to look responsible for their lateness. Therefore there is a huge push to ensure that all the RFIs are answered, designs approved, drainage and water-proofing inspected and tested, etc…
This has come to the fore thanks to a problem with the lightning protection. The installer struggled to reach the required resistivity (one for the E&Ms) and as a result had to come back and redo some work. This isn’t the end of the world; they can do the remedial work around the steel that has been laid. The problem that was highlighted is that the lightning protection package manager hadn’t told anyone there was a problem. So the construction manager asked the question “what else don’t I know?!”
The problem is communication. We all sit in an open plan office in a large porta-cabin (like TFH HQ for anyone that ever saw it) and no one talks to each other (like TFH HQ). But this lack of communication could have led to a “get out of jail free” card being given to PCH. So we’ve implemented a severe measure: each day at 1700 the engineers and the site supervisors get together and talk about what happened that day, what should happen the next day and thrash out any problems. It’s not new, it’s not clever, it’s not quite an O Group but it’s not far off.
In summary: There is nothing discrete, everything that happens on site carries a commercial implication. Therefore it’s key that I keep in mind how all the parts are interconnected as any delay could cost someone loads of money!
Slightly early this week and a bit dry, so here is a gratuitous digger shot:
![WP_20150317_13_18_20_Pro[1]](https://pewpetblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/wp_20150317_13_18_20_pro1.jpg)
AIRBORNE!
UPDATE: It turns out PCH (the sub-contractor) were having some cash-flow problems. So McAlpine (the main contractor) have bought the steel direct on their behalf and will deduct the sale amount from their payment. This should speed up the process and we’ve managed to secure a better rate! It’ll start to arrive on Wednesday. Guess which lucky individual gets to count it all when it arrives…!
Holdfast Training Services Trial Blog 
This reminds me of some issues I’ve seen
One was to do with what I thought were called ‘Prior work clauses’
Problems occur on iterfaces- they might be physical interfaces ( this fitting with that) or contractual intefaces.
Prior works clauses are meant to isolate one subcontractor from another. On the one hand the PM knows that the state of what was handed to the next sub contractor was fit for purpose ( including that the next sub contractor could work effectively on the handed over part-finished project)
On the other hand the PM is wise to ensure of the starting state ( I had an issue wherein the air tightness tests of a structure were found to be useless). The wall cassette sub contractor said it was OK when they handed it over to the electricians. The electricians said it wasn’t their fault. Lesson learned….pay for air testing at the interface of sub contracts.
When P.managing it is oftne difficult to predict interface problems – just assume every handover needs to be controlled
Loads of stuff for TMR -I’d have thought
Guz – I completely agree with your AER 1 statement, and almost by the medium of sympathy pains from South to North London, I have had a fairly major contractual issue arise. Apparently tower cranes that, if able to topple over and hit a network rail line, must undergo a Design Check Category III in order to gain a Certificate of Design and Check prior to construction. Despite having been aware of this, it has now been realised one of the tower crane bases actually connects to a pile raft of the office block ground bearing piles. Therefore crane load acts not just on its piles, but those of most of the office block – so what – these have to be checked too. When was the plan to install the piles, err, Monday… We are hoping a quick bit of re-design will solve the problem but in effect a contractual obligation could very nearly have catastrophic consequences on the schedule. It seems despite a Design and Build contract generally being a good idea for a client and contractor through savings for both parties, there is significant risks placed on the contractor…
Ah yes, the tower crane network rail saga, we have one of those too. And with two cranes up, three to go, I fear its not the last time i’ll be wearing orange hi-viz!
Guz
It is no good I cannot see a parachute!
Keep records of incidences – all might prove good for CPR and attributes – oh joy
Regards
I had my first Network Rail meeting the other day, they are very special indeed.
Access to our site is over an old single lane bridge which has a weight limit attached to it. We have to monitor it daily to ensure it is not moving due to the increase traffic load we are placing on it, we must notify them when we exceed 2mm however when a large train whizzes past the whole thing shakes and we’ve recorded 4mm…apparently that’s fine!
Good sensible tolerances there! Our big issue with network rail is that we have 5 tower cranes that all have a collapse radius that would provide a very bad day for anyone at Brompton station. These things are mega over designed and safe, but still Network Rail are proving a pain in the bum!