construction in the city, maybe just got better

http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/breakingnews/city-pays-bonus-for-speedy-work-44702177.html

city pays bonuses for completeing work faster, penalties for taking longer.

DUH!!!.... about time this got going, good job for pushing it Councillor Fielding

Does this just exaggerate the poor workmanship that is evident in the work that has been done? Do it fast and to hell with how long the work will last.

Case in point...my street.

Re-done two years ago and there are pot holes already.

What about penalties for not completing on time?

"Finishing the work after Aug. 29 will trigger a $2,000-a-day penalty, with an extra $1,000-a-day charge for each day the work continues beyond Oct. 31."

JTF wrote:Does this just exaggerate the poor workmanship that is evident in the work that has been done? Do it fast and to hell with how long the work will last.

Case in point...my street.

Re-done two years ago and there are pot holes already.

Most jobs with the city now carry clauses about workmanship and repair if job was sub standard. not sure if a simple residential street paving project would, but it dont hurt to bring it up to the city and your councillor.

Personally I have mixed feelings about this.

First, we already hand out contracts to the construction company who has the lowest bid. Not the best record, but the LOWEST bid. Which means...they are cutting corners somewhere that other companies aren't.

Second, they are encouraging companies to find NEW ways of cutting corners. Whether it's using different (possibly substandard) materials, forcing workers to work unpaid overtime, or rushing timetables (ie. drying times on concrete) in order to meet a "schedule".

Third, where's the standard AFTER the project is completed? If a company rushes a job to meet a bonus deadline...whatever corners they cut will come to fruition YEARS down the road...is there a program in place that gets the money back should the construction not meet the minimum warranty period?

Fourth, VERY RARELY do construction jobs come in UNDER budget. Typically there are price changes throughout the project, increasing the costs. So are these bonuses in addition to the price changes?

What SHOULD be done, is a budget put in place to get the job done RIGHT. CLOSE the roads...screw the whiners who drive that way. If that bridge/road didn't exist...THEN what would they do? Close the road...fix it right...designed for long-term/low maintenance.

Dean. I did.

The city sent out a crew that "repaired" the holes....but in fact, missed an entire section...belive it or not...

I've got another call in about it.

JTF
No no I mean you should be talking to someone in the city to check into the contract for whomever redid your street two years ago, of course if it was a city crew that did it two years ago you are out of luck.


AGes
"is there a program in place that gets the money back should the construction not meet the minimum warranty period?"

yes there is... and its not money back, its repair the poor workmanship at their expense.

Dean. That was the point of my initial call. I wanted someone to talk to me about the "warranty"... if any. Still haven't got a call back. Called the second time and nothings been done yet. as well, in terms of repairing the repair.

Deank wrote:AGes
"is there a program in place that gets the money back should the construction not meet the minimum warranty period?"

yes there is... and its not money back, its repair the poor workmanship at their expense.

No...that's the warranty...I mean the bonus.

If a company receives a bonus for coming in under a deadline, but their work is substandard due to the time limit...why should they get the bonus?

Of course they should be doing repairs on their dime...but it's not really...it's still on our dime, cause the bonus is covering the warranty.

I doubt very much that jobs are inspected during the process or afterward. IMO, that's problematic.

JTF wrote:I doubt very much that jobs are inspected during the process or afterward. IMO, that's problematic.

Actually, it's not.

I know in our construction business, we have inspectors on our sites weekly.

Whether it's our own management, or an architect/engineer, or client (ie. city/provincial)...someone is on the site every week to do a "walkthrough".

The problem I see though, is there's ways to cut costs which can be covered. Like reducing the amount of rebar put down before a concrete pour. The concrete will still set...but the strength will be decreased.

oh I see you mean that not only do they fix the work.. they must give back the bonus? hmm well I have not seen the contracts but I would certainly hope that the city has been smart enough to build that in.

Agreed. The city must be responsible to have all construction sites inspected at certain stages of construction. If "X" rebar is required an inspector should be on site to sign off ensuring standards are met.

I would also assume the contract must be worded in such a fashion that should standards not be met no bonus is payable AND site repaired to meet standards.

Then there is the pre-qualification of contractors. One would assume a contractor must be able to prove to the city they are capable of building that road to their standards.

As for bonuses, if a contractor bids on a job with early finish bonuses you'd assume they will use more equipment and manpower to meet deadlines earning that bonus. If they cannot make reasonable return they ought not bid the job.

grumpy old man wrote:Then there is the pre-qualification of contractors. One would assume a contractor must be able to prove to the city they are capable of building that road to their standards.

For city bids (or government in general) there are standards in place and applications required to prove you're qualified. It's not like Joe the Plumber can go bid on highway repair because plumbing jobs are slow.

grumpy old man wrote:As for bonuses, if a contractor bids on a job with early finish bonuses you'd assume they will use more equipment and manpower to meet deadlines earning that bonus. If they cannot make reasonable return they ought not bid the job.

But that raises another question. Would the companies be bidding on a job expecting the bonus to cover costs?
If I knew going into a job that I could receive an extra $100k for completing early...would I adjust my bid to compensate for time/manpower expecting that bonus to cover my costs...ie. if I don't get the bonus I would lose money?

Also keeping in mind that others are bidding as well...so it's like an "auction"...and keeping mindful of what others may be bidding with.


Again though...I could understand it being a bonus based on the size of the contract...but if the city is so desperate to throw money around...why aren't they throwing that money at fixing the residential streets & back lanes instead?

$100k (one of the bonuses listed) could redo my whole neighborhood.

Other cities do this all the time. This is not rocket surgery... We demand that roads not take so long to repair. City responds. Now it is up to a contractor to determine a) can they first meet the deadline and 2) can they beat the deadline and make the bonus.

man you could certainly use your backlane being redone Ages... christ I think I almost needed to buy a new vehicle after driving down that nightmare

Deank wrote:man you could certainly use your backlane being redone Ages... christ I think I almost needed to buy a new vehicle after driving down that nightmare

Yeah...although since you swung by, one of our neighbours (lives behind us) went down and filled all the big holes with 1/4 down gravel.

It's made a HUGE difference since he did that. He was out this weekend and I made a point of thanking him personally for saving my suspension.

heh just thinking about this, it might not have been in the construction companies best interest for the city to announce the exact bonus amounts eh?

worker bee says wait a minute.. if I work harder on this job boss is going to give me maybe an extra $200, but he will make an extra 100 grand!???

The fact that work is contracted out and bonuses and pealties can apply, it does not absolve the city from doing their job to ensure that work is completed to a standard. If a contractors work does not measure up to standards are used in these situations, whether during or at the end of the work, or within a defined warranty period, then the solution is simple. Sue the bastard, if they have been paid, or withhold payment until its done to specs.

The bonus for early completion and the penalties for late completion are a separate issue than the quality of the work being done.

Unless there is a person representing the city during the process of construction, inspecting the job afterwards is useless. In the case of a road, what do you see when completed? Dick.

JTF wrote:Unless there is a person representing the city during the process of construction, inspecting the job afterwards is useless. In the case of a road, what do you see when completed? Dick.

I know during our construction processes for the city and province, there is someone doing ongoing inspections. Generally there are weekly (or at minimum bi-weekly) onsite meetings where everyone gets together and does a walkthrough of the site.

They make note of changes, suggestions, issues and plan for the next week or two.

For a company to hide things...it would have to be deliberate...and controlled by upper management...as they are the ones who schedule the walkthroughs and know when/who's going to be on site.

I'm just referring to roadwork.

yeah a simple residential street road replacement/ repair is done and over with very quickly usually, not much time for the inspections.

Not that quickly. If the city cannot conduct thorough inspections then someone needs their ass kicked.