Contributed by Sheldon Wolfe
Although it didn't seem like it at the time, one of the best parts of my CSI chapter's certification classes was reading the A201 - not selectively, but the whole thing, beginning to end. Being the heart of the construction contract, anyone who works on a project should know what's in it. I can't quote every part of it, but it's familiar enough that I can find what I'm looking for fairly quickly. I don't deal with much of it, e.g., claims and time requirements, but there are a few parts that I find of particular interest.
We'll start with what I call the complementary clause.
§ 1.2 CORRELATION AND INTENT OF THE CONTRACT DOCUMENTS
Most architects are aware of this requirement, which is quite useful when something is on the drawings but didn't make it into the specifications. Clearly, when that happens there has been a communication failure. The specifier might not have seen something on the drawings, or it might have been added unbeknownst to the specifier. Regardless of the reason, this clause has saved many an architect when something was missed.
It's obviously a useful fallback requirement, but it shouldn't be relied on to cover mistakes that should have been avoided. It is quite powerful, but it also is limited. Let's look at a couple of examples.
The bidding documents show a bathroom on the drawings, and in the bathroom, floor tile is indicated. Unfortunately, there is no specification for tile. No problem, right? The complementary clause requires the contractor to provide floor tile! Of course, there is that pesky provision that requires to contractor to ask the architect about obvious conflicts, but it's pretty much impossible to prove the contractor saw this error and failed to call the architect.
Now we're in construction, and the contractor discovers the error. Because the tile should have been included in the bid, and because of the complementary clause, the contractor is on the hook; the tile must be provided. That is true, but without specifications, the contractor is free to choose any type of tile. The contractor can claim the bid was based on plastic tile on sale at the dollar store, instead of the really cool stuff the architect wanted, priced at $20 per square foot. Furthermore, without installation instructions, the contractor could argue that simply laying the tile on the floor is all that's required.
A silly example, to be sure, yet it emphasizes the importance of specifications as a way to ensure you get what you want.
Contributed by Tom J. Moverman, Esq
There was a time, not too long ago, that future innovation was of no interest to the majority of the companies in the construction industry. Most companies were happy with the way things had been done for decades, and they were not interested in changing that. However, as construction companies start to realize the money and time that can be saved with innovations such as wearable technology, that old school attitude is changing.
Travelers Insurance estimates that the wearable industry shipped $20 billion in products in 2015, and that number is increasing rapidly. The U.S. Department of Labor estimates that there are nearly seven million construction field workers who could benefit from the use of wearable technology, that is technology that can monitor health and other worker elements instantly and deliver reliable data, and the push is to get wearable technology on every one of those workers.
The Benefits of Wearable Technology
The two primary areas that benefit from wearable technology are worker health and job site safety. For example, a hard hat that has sensors on it can monitor the health of a worker, while simultaneously broadcasting real-time images of the job site to safety personnel. In some cases, safety personnel can see problems coming before the workers even know what is going on, and that is technology that can save lives.
Wearable technology can collect job site condition data and relay that to project managers and site supervisors. Companies can collect video and data from wearable technology that can be used to better train future workers, and develop more effective ways of using construction equipment. Many of the conditions that workers and site supervisors could not see in the past involving dangerous materials or high-risk working situations would now be studied in detail to create more effective safety measures.
Construction companies can use wearable technology to increase worker productivity and get real data about what happened leading up to an accident. Companies can also tell exactly what workers are doing on job sites, and track the location of each worker in real time. If a worker is somewhere they are not supposed to be, the site supervisor can act immediately and accordingly.
The Problems with Wearable Technology
Wearable technology can improve worker health, make a job site safer, and even help a company to create more efficient methods that save money. But despite all that it can do, there are still issues with using future innovations in an old school environment such as construction. For one thing, workers may not want to wear the technology because they won't like the feeling that "Big Brother" is watching them. Reliable workers have nothing to fear with technology that reports their every movement, but some workers may find this technology too intrusive.
Another big issue with this new technology is the idea that workers will be more interested in the technology than the job at hand. If a worker knows their hard hat is collecting environmental data for a job, then that worker might be more tempted to try and see what the data looks like as opposed to doing their job. New technology is not only useful, but it can also be distracting as well.
Hard hats that can read environmental conditions and safety vests that report worker vital signs are just the beginning of wearable technology in the construction industry. Newer technology that is either in development or already in the field include specially designed glasses that help skilled workers to be more precise in their measurements, exoskeletons that protect workers and make lifting heavy objects much easier, and hard hats that can do 3D mapping of any part of a construction website.
The future of the construction industry includes wearable technology that can save money, save lives, and speed up the construction process. Instead of shying away from all of these technological advances, the construction industry has proven that it is looking forward to these future innovations.
Tom Moverman established the Lipsig Brooklyn Law Firm with Harry Lipsig and his partners in 1989; The firm’s focus is in products liability, personal injury, construction accidents, car accidents and medical malpractice.
Contributed by Cory Robbins
I work for a multi-disciplined exterior envelope contractor. We have run into the same problem over and over for the past decade and are looking to address it sooner rather than later. We are talking about the huge gap/loophole that exists when installing a multi-layered dry-joint rainscreen system. Rainscreens are here to stay, and architects are designing buildings across the country to include them and show off some beautiful looking exterior facades that make everyone stop and stare when walking past.
The issue that we have run into is quite simple, but tricky to fix. At the end of a project, if there happens to be a leak in the elevation including a rainscreen, the owner is in a heap of trouble. There is usually an Air & Vapor Barrier installer, and an Exterior Façade installer on the project and they both will complain and blame the other contractor for the leak. The worst part is they both have valid arguments. The AVB installer has an easy out in that “My work was watertight before the exterior façade installer drilled 50,000 holes through it, you can’t blame me!” The exterior façade installer says “My system is dry-seal, and is designed to let water through, how can you possibly blame me?”
And so…… The Blame Game ensues!
To make things worse, every AVB material warranty is void the moment it is pierced by any fastener. They specifically do not warrant workmanship and the best they will do is warrant their material failing. Manufacturers of AVB will replace the material (which costs next to nothing) and sometimes pay for the labor to remove their material, NOT INCLUDING the overburden/exterior façade. The owner of the building has two options at this point.
Both of these options are TERRIBLE! In both situations, the owner loses and the only winner is the lawyers who are making $400/hr. We have come up with a solution that can be incorporated into the specifications by the architect designing the project. The concept is simple, place the AVB installer/subcontractor underneath the exterior façade installer/subcontractor and make them one entity that provides a 10-year workmanship warranty for the wall system. This way, there is only one company to call when a leak is found in the elevation, the exterior façade installer. That subcontractor is in charge of the wall system, and they vouch for the AVB installer and their work. This does not mean one sole-source company, and it can be two separate companies, with one united goal, a leak-free rainscreen wall system.
The precedent for this has already been set in curtainwall when the curtainwall installer includes the storefront and glazier and caulker under one umbrella. Or, when a roofer brings along their favorite plumber for the storm drains that need to be installed. The 10-year workmanship warranty language also forces a more detailed coordination effort by the two installers, simply because they know they will be coming back if there are any leaks after project completion.
Contributed by Eric D. Lussier
To many, the definition of wealth is money. Being part of the 99%, I know that I most likely will never attain the financial wealth that places me in the 1%. I’m OK with that, as I have other levels of wealth that I place higher than the financial side.
I have wealth in my work life. I have a steady job with a consistent paycheck. I have met incredible people over the last ten years and I deeply enjoy establishing new relationships and educating people on flooring and the systems that they interface with.
I have wealth at home that includes a loving family. I have a roof over my head, drive a safe and reliable vehicle and have a garage to park it at night. I couldn’t be more thankful for all of these things.
I also have access to a wealth of information. I have always considered myself to be a fairly informed individual. I like to stay privy of cutting edge technology, trends and more. I have always felt that one of the tremendous strengths of social media and especially Twitter, is the ability to acquire information instantly. No longer do we wait for the morning paper, the 6PM news or breaking stories on CNN. Now it is possible to pull out a device not much bigger than your palm and FOR FREE you have access to NOW. Sure, hundreds of thousands of news outlets are sharing on Twitter, but more so millions of individuals are sharing their knowledge and their now. It is certainly not all ‘I’m having a burger for lunch!’ or ‘I’m out walking the dog and it’s cold!’ so, how come you haven’t given Twitter a whirl? I find no better platform to accumulate and disseminate information and I really don’t envision a better medium coming along anytime soon, if ever.
What are you doing with your wealth of information? I like to share mine, whether through Twitter (http://twitter.com/ericdlussier), LinkedIn (Connect with me! www.linkedin.com/in/ericdlussier/) or any of my other social media accounts (http://about.me/ericdlussier) and email. Sometimes, I even use the phone. The latest way I share my wealth is with this blog, Let's Fix Construction. I have used LFC to gather a stable of friends and allies in the construction industry who choose to share their wealth.
Personally, I really enjoy adding to my wealth of information through CSI. The Construction Specifications Institute is an organization that is 9,000+ volunteers strong that understands it is in no one’s best interest to hoard information. Free sharing of wealth is abundant within CSI. Whether you are acquiring it a local level through a Chapter or seeing a CSI Speaker in person, at a National Conference like CONSTRUCT or through Twitter itself, you have direct (and most likely free!) access to building owners, construction specifiers, engineers, architects, interior designers, manufacturers and product representatives who share their wealth. You don’t even have to be a CSI member to acquire knowledge from these outlets, but it certainly helps!
Today the Construction Specifications Institute rolls out CSI-Connect, an online community for CSI members. The vision is that CSI-Connect will become the first place CSI members think of when they need assistance from their peers. A place to share knowledge, get help, find solutions, and impact the future of the AEC industry
I do feel that the World is in a better place when you share your wealth. I wish I could share more monetarily, especially come Holiday season, but for the time being, I share what is valuable to me: knowledge and information. Have a question on indoor sports flooring or concrete moisture? Ask away. Want to know my thoughts on craft beer or music? I like those too! And with baseball season here, I'm always willing to talk Yankees. My sharing of knowledge is always free.
Want to share your wealth with Let's Fix Construction readers? Learn how to do so here.
Contributed by Sheldon Wolfe
Many products offer not only a selection of standard finishes at a standard price, but offer more options at additional cost. Some will offer those options in price groups, such as Standard, Group 1, and Group 2, where each group is more expensive than the last. Finally, some manufacturers offer to match any color.
Unfortunately, the requirements for getting a custom color often are vague, and a minimum quantity may be required or other limitations may apply.
The result? I may tell a project architect that a custom color will cost more, but because I often don’t know how much, the response usually is, “It doesn’t matter; we want custom.”
The problem, of course, is that bidders, who are trying to get the job, are forced to either comply with the specifications and risk losing the job, or bid a standard color in hopes of getting away with it - which too often is the case. I recall a project that required all exterior metal finishes and all concrete coatings to be bid as custom, to match a specific color. Had that color been something unusual or exotic, that might have made sense, but the chosen color was essentially off-white. Trying to get all those colors to match was a nice theory, but in practice, there was as much difference in appearance between adjacent panels, one in shade and the other in full sun, as there was between the colors submitted. And then there are the effects of dirt and UV exposure… Colors change, and some change more than others, so the carefully selected finishes may no longer match after only a short time. For that project, the owner probably paid the price of custom color and got a standard color for some of the finishes.
A couple of years ago we had two projects going, which just happened to have the same custom color for the metal roofing. An astute supplier was able to combine materials for both in a single order. Individually, neither project had enough material to meet the minimum for a custom color, but together they almost did, so the supplier was able to cover most of the added cost. It's always possible for the architect to insist on a custom color regardless of quantity, but that can be more than a bit embarrassing when the contractor tells the owner that the cost can be reduced by a large amount simply by changing to a slightly different color.
Some joint sealants can be produced in virtually any color, and architects are accustomed to always asking for custom colors. It’s usually not a problem for a large project, but the architect should know that the contractor might have to buy fifty gallons of sealant for a joint that's only ten feet long.
Specifying acoustic properties presents similar challenges. Many assemblies will meet a given STC or NRC rating: brick, CMU, CMU with filled cores, multiple layers of gypboard, high density gypboard and similar products, resilient channels, clips, resilient adhesives for multi-layer assemblies, etc. What do they really cost? How do they really perform? Without knowing the relative costs and properties, detailing a particular assembly may result in performance that is lower than expected, or it may cost more than another assembly that would perform just as well.
And what about dimensions? It's easy to draw a large panel in elevation, but can it be produced? Do the length or width force the fabricator to alter the orientation of panels, which can affect appearance of some finishes? Do the dimensions require greater thickness of material, thereby increasing the cost beyond what the designer expected?
These are all very real issues that big-D Designers don't think about, yet it's essential to evaluate such information early in design - before the client has been sold on the design.
Let's Fix Construction is a collective group of construction professionals who want to better the industry by sharing our knowledge, openly communicating and encouraging collaboration.
Get NEW post notifications here