Today we have a guest post from the folks at McCree General Contractors and Architects, located in Orlando. The McCree folks, naturally enough, think Design-Build has many features that make it advantageous over the traditional Design-Bid-Build method. Here are their thoughts:
Many construction projects are designed by an architect, and once the client is happy with the design a contractor is then hired to build it. While the client may have been told one estimate by the architect, once the contractor gets the plans the costs may change. There may be aspects of the design execution the architect didn’t think about, or parts that won’t work with the landscape of the construction site. This can result in changes to the original design, higher costs, and delaying of the project. Not to mention the frustration this can create for everyone involved.
Because of these obstacles that often arise between architecture firm and contractor firm, many people are now turning to a Design-Build Construction Firm. At these firms, the architects, designers, and contractors work together from the beginning. The firm takes responsibility for the project in its entirety, from design to execution. If the architect makes and adjustment to a design, the contractor will be right there to let him know if this may violate a regulation or if it won’t work with the topography of the site. Adjustments can be made without ever involving the client. The price quoted is more likely to be accurate, because a contractor and project manager will have also agreed that this design can be executed in the space allotted. There is no finger pointing and blaming the other firm, leaving the client in the middle, frustrated and spending more money than he originally thought. A Design-Build firm is also easier on the client because he only needs to contact one project manager. This streamlined process leads to a more efficiently run project, and efficiently run projects typically cost less and are finished quicker.
A Design-Build firm is advantageous for the client also because these firms typically allow the client to be as involved as he wants. As the design is developed and changed according to the client’s specifications, the contractor will be on hand to let the client and architect know if these changes are possible. There is no need for ordering design changes, which an architect working on his own would charge the client for. Because the contractor works for the firm, and not for himself, he is not looking to protect his own self-interest once building starts. Since the contractor has been involved from the beginning, there should be no surprises or setbacks once ground is broken. If there are, the Design-Build firm should take responsibility, instead of the contractor telling the client to go back to the architect.
All the decisions regarding the design and building of a project will be taken into account from the very beginning with a Design-Build firm. When using separate design and contractor firms, an architect will simply tell the client what will be the most cost effective design, and then a contractor will decide the most cost effective way to build this design. The schedule of the contractor’s team is not on the architect’s mind, and the contractor may not know the most cost effective materials needed to execute the design. These problems are also eliminated with a Design-Build firm. The experience of the team, quality and availability of materials and schedule of the contractor and construction crews are also taken into consideration from the very beginning of the project. This further streamlines the process, making it quicker and more painless for everyone involved.
Melissa again: Design-Build projects definitely present unique opportunities, and unique challenges. If you are considering entering into a design-build contract, considering a joint venture with a contractor on a project, or otherwise undertaking a corporate organizational change, make sure you have a good lawyer (or three) on board for the myriad issues that such ventures present.
Now it’s your turn: What do you think? Is Design-Build the next best thing since sliced bread? Have you had issues, problems, or good results as part of a Design-Build team? Share your thoughts below.
Copyright Info for Shutterstock Photo: Image ID: 61778761 Copyright: sam100
Today’s guest post is by David Morrison. David has worked on both sides of the construction site during his time in renovation. Having stepped from the gravel pit into the office a few years ago, David currently now works with UK Tool Centre, liaising with the industry on their behalf.
Working as a site engineer or lead architect has many challenges and is undoubtedly one of the toughest roles, interwoven around effective communication skills with the clients as well as the site contractors, subcontractors and suppliers.
Since maintaining discipline and accountability is at the core of any successful venture, the same is true for a construction site also. The site engineer plays the “unwanted” role of implementing carrot and stick policy, awarding the effective contractor and dealing with the laggard.
For those beginning their engineering and architectural careers, or for those who still struggle to maintain a tight ship when dealing with contractors, there are a number of things to keep in mind.
a.) Organizing Self - The way a site engineer organizes his work plays a very important role in meeting the final objective and let the workplace run as a team. The first and most important thing is to set an example by doing things in the same manner as you are requiring and expecting from the contractors.
b.) Be Clear - A site engineer must ensure that the contractors have clear instructions, drawings and specifications related to their work. Otherwise the “garbage in; garbage out” rule shall be applicable to the final outcome.
c.) Work Milestones - A site engineer should coordinate with the general contractor, who in turn should use professional project management tools, define work milestones and interact with the subcontractors to keep an eye on their timely completion. If any issues arise, they must be addressed quickly, so that the contractor or subcontractor’s work is not delayed.
d.) Performance Appraisal - Informing a contractor of his performance quality is only half the job; informing him in a timely manner is the remaining half. The site engineer should develop methods of regular assessment of work of each prime contractor, and should include this information in regular project meetings. This allows the site contractor to timely identify the gaps (both related to man and machine) in his work and to take action to complete the work successfully.
e.) Teamwork, Motivation and Inspiration - To foster teamwork among various site contractors, a site engineer should know how to dig into his own experience of similar works. He should always work to motivate them by giving good and bad examples out of his experience. A well experienced site engineer always have lots of good advice from his earlier encounters to inspire the contractors and give them potential solutions to difficult tasks and situations.
f.) Prompt Payments - A site engineer must always ensure that as per contractual terms with contractors the payment for the various milestones must be promptly processed and done without any delay. This is of utmost importance in getting the work done from contractors on a construction site.
g.) Safety - A site engineer must always ensure that contractors shall never compromise on safety and security rules to expedite the work. A bad accident can be devastating, to the individuals involved and also to the project schedule.
h.) Friendship, Philosophy and Guidance - A site engineer should know how to work as a friend-philosopher and guide to the contractors and must not always act as bully. After all, the contractor may have some genuine issues with the design team’s performance as well.
Advice for construction is ten to the dozen and there are a lot of potential misguiding mantras out there. One of the most useful to take into account has always been: “It may take a lifetime to learn the ways to deal with contractors on-site, and still a lot will be left to learn.”
Thanks David. Now it’s your turn. Thoughts, comments, questions? Share in the comment section below.
Photo courtesy Teaching Underground.
Today, a guest post from Kristie Lewis, freelance writer for Construction Management Degree. Kristie has written numerous articles on both construction training and education as well as industry news and trends. In her spare time, Kristie enjoys cooking in her newly remodeled kitchen and reading science fiction novels. You can reach out to her at Kristie.Lewis81@gmail.com. Thanks for sharing, Kristie.
In an effort to protect the rights of employers in all industries, the federal government has enacted several labor laws. Some of the laws apply to all business sectors, and some apply to specific industries, such as construction.
Although those who earn a degree from an accredited construction management program will be required to learn about a variety of laws that apply to the construction industry, it is never a bad idea to review the details of them. Here are four labor laws that every construction manager should know like the back of their hand.
The Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA)
This act sets the standards for wages and overtime pay. In general, it requires employers to pay covered employees who are not otherwise exempt at least the federal minimum wage and pay 1.5 times the regular rate for overtime hours. The Fair Labor Standards Act is administered by the Wage and Hour Division. More information on this law can be found at the division’s official website.
Davis-Bacon and Related Acts
These policies apply to contractors and subcontractors that are working on public buildings or public works projects that are federally funded and will cost more than $2,000 to construct, alter or repair. According to the act, contractors and subcontractors must pay their laborers and mechanics employed under the contract no less than the locally prevailing wages and fringe benefits for corresponding work on similar projects in the area. There are additional details that can also be found on the Wage and Hour Division’s official website.
The Occupational Safety and Health Act (OSHA)
This act is administered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration and includes an array of industry-specific regulations that are enforced through regular workplace inspections and investigations. Compliance assistance and other cooperative programs are available for employers who request help. Although there seems to be an endless amount of rules to comply with, most of them are common sense rules that smart construction managers already abide by. Still, it is wise to make sure your project is congruent with the federal law, because any infractions can be found through inspection or reported by a worker.
The Labor-Management Reporting and Disclosure Act (LMRDA) of 1959
This law deals with the relationship between a union and its members. Also known as the Landrum-Griffin Act, it protects union funds and promotes union democracy by requiring labor organizations to file annual financial reports. Employers are also required to file reports regarding certain labor practices. It is administered by the Office of Labor-Management Standards. You can read the details of the law here.
Knowing the details of the above laws will not only keep your construction business safe from legal trouble, it will also allow you to provide your employers with the best working environment possible.
Questions on these laws, or comments? Drop Kristie and me a note in the comment section, below.
Photo: (c) Anna Strumillo.
Today’s guest post is from Christopher G. Hill, lawyer, Virginia Supreme Court certified General District Court mediator and owner of the Richmond, VA firm, The Law Office of Christopher G. Hill, PC, a LEED AP. Chris authors the Construction Law Musings blog where he discusses legal and policy issues relevant to construction professionals. Additionally, Chris is active in the Associated General Contractors of Virginia and a member of the Board of Governors for the Construction Law and Public Contracts Section of the Virginia State Bar.
First off, thanks to Melissa for this opportunity to post here at Construction Law in North Carolina. Having co-presented with her and discussed construction contracting from all perspectives, I can safely say she’s good at what she does and shares great insight here at her blog.
Now that the formalities are out of the way, I thought I’d share my thoughts as one who represents many subcontractors and general contractors on the topic of good relationships meaning good business. I am always a bit surprised at the failure of either side of the GC/Sub dynamic to act in a businesslike manner.
Remember, the General Contractor and the subs are in the boat together in many ways. They both have a job to do and, ultimately, an owner at the top of the payment food chain that is looking to get a project done on time. Ultimately, they both have an architect/engineer representing the owner that may or may not be up on the job (sorry Melissa) and may not be trained in project management. If the general and its subs aren’t “playing well in the sandbox” together, the relationships up and down the project chain get all out of whack and cause delays in completion and importantly in payment.
Another phenomenon that happens more frequently than I would like is the general contractor “burning” good subcontractors in an area through making payment (particularly final payment) difficult to receive. While this type of activity occurs on what I am sure is the minority of projects (and fully acknowledging that my practice makes me think that Murphy was an optimist) I am always flabbergasted by this sort of treatment given to a subcontractor that should be helping pull the boat.
While it is obvious that subs need to play nice with GC’s because they have the money, it may seem less obvious how the above can hurt a general contractor. The short answer (and don’t worry I won’t be going into the long one) is that burning good subs eventually means that good subs won’t work with you. Subs talk to each other. Your reputation will precede you. Eventually the economy will improve and you won’t be the only game in town. Not to mention that such actions are the stuff of which claims are made.
In short, getting along costs your local construction lawyer money because he or she doesn’t get to go to court for you. It is almost always less expensive to get along, finish the job and work out payment than to get we attorneys involved in the construction claims process.
To make a long story somewhat less long, GC’s work with the subs and subs, play nice with the GC’s. It’s the best way to a lower stress project and a higher monetary payoff.
Thanks, Chris, for your insights from the contractor’s side of things. Even if you did (politely) slam the hard-working design professionals. Reader, now it’s your turn. Share your thoughts, comments, or questions with Chris or me in the comment section, below.
Architects & Engineers – Are you committing a Class 2 misdemeanor without realizing it? (Tue Tip; law note)
Buried within the general contractor provisions of the North Carolina General Statutes is a little-known provision that can get architects and engineers in hot water. If you recommend to a project owner anyone who is not properly licensed under the general contractor statute, you have committed a Class 2 misdemeanor. Really! Here is the pertinent language:
§ 87-13. Unauthorized practice of contracting; impersonating contractor; false certificate; giving false evidence to Board; penalties
Any person, firm, or corporation not being duly authorized who shall contract for or bid upon the construction of any of the projects or works enumerated in G.S. 87-1, without having first complied with the provisions hereof, or who shall attempt to practice general contracting in the State, except as provided for in this Article, and any person, firm, or corporation presenting or attempting to file as his own the licensed certificate of another or who shall give false or forged evidence of any kind to the Board or to any member thereof in maintaining a certificate of license or who falsely shall impersonate another or who shall use an expired or revoked certificate of license, and any architect or engineer who recommends to any project owner the award of a contract to anyone not properly licensed under this Article, shall be deemed guilty of a Class 2 misdemeanor. And the Board may, in its discretion, use its funds to defray the expense, legal or otherwise, in the prosecution of any violations of this Article.
However, there is also some relief in the same statute, which provides that:
No architect or engineer shall be guilty of a violation of this section if his recommendation to award a contract is made in reliance upon current written information received by him from the appropriate Contractor Licensing Board of this State which information erroneously indicates that the contractor being recommended for contract award is properly licensed.
Has this issue ever really been litigated? Yes, it has. While I cannot point to reported cases, I will tell you that I have had this become an issue – more than once – in my practice. Each time, the design professional knew that the entity involved had been a licensed general contractor, but the entity had lost its contractor’s license before the particular project at issue.
Take-away: Even if the general contractor is the largest and most well-known in the state, always, always, always check with the Licensing Board to confirm that a general contractor is in good standing before making any recommendation to a project owner. Just in case. Since Consider it two minutes well spent.
Questions, comments, experiences with this statute? Share in the comments section of the blog.
Photo (c) Riki Maltese via CC